comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 15 minutes ago
It’s lazy.

The debate is about VAR not about tech.

Those making out this is a bunch of old people who don’t want to move with the times are just desperately trying to point score because their argument is inadequate.

Perhaps that’s not what you were saying if so, then my apologies. Others have been, for sure.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is an element of this however. That doesn't mean it's the reason everyone that some want to remove VAR but it's certainly an opinion that is more heavily weighted towards older people.

comment by There'sOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 15 minutes ago
It’s lazy.

The debate is about VAR not about tech.

Those making out this is a bunch of old people who don’t want to move with the times are just desperately trying to point score because their argument is inadequate.

Perhaps that’s not what you were saying if so, then my apologies. Others have been, for sure.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is an element of this however. That doesn't mean it's the reason everyone that some want to remove VAR but it's certainly an opinion that is more heavily weighted towards older people.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

That’s pure conjecture.

Even if you were correct, it’s understandable, given that older people are in a position to actually compare different eras.

You said the same thing about my view on VR headsets about five years ago. You were talking crap then, as is being proven.

Hi Winston, if the Henry v Ireland handball happened tomorrow would you be happy with no intervention to correct the decision? And replace Ireland with whoever you support? That is exactly what you are advocating, no intervention whatsoever.

comment by Frank van Eijs (U1734)
posted 29 seconds ago
Hi Winston, if the Henry v Ireland handball happened tomorrow would you be happy with no intervention to correct the decision? And replace Ireland with whoever you support? That is exactly what you are advocating, no intervention whatsoever.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I’m not advocating anything.

Maybe try reading what I’ve actually said, and you can work it out for yourself.

Let me know if you need any help.

comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Frank van Eijs (U1734)
posted 29 seconds ago
Hi Winston, if the Henry v Ireland handball happened tomorrow would you be happy with no intervention to correct the decision? And replace Ireland with whoever you support? That is exactly what you are advocating, no intervention whatsoever.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I’m not advocating anything.

Maybe try reading what I’ve actually said, and you can work it out for yourself.

Let me know if you need any help.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you want rid of var?

comment by Frank van Eijs (U1734)
posted 45 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Frank van Eijs (U1734)
posted 29 seconds ago
Hi Winston, if the Henry v Ireland handball happened tomorrow would you be happy with no intervention to correct the decision? And replace Ireland with whoever you support? That is exactly what you are advocating, no intervention whatsoever.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I’m not advocating anything.

Maybe try reading what I’ve actually said, and you can work it out for yourself.

Let me know if you need any help.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you want rid of var?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Believing VAR is flawed and needs to be scrapped is not the same as believing that there is no place technology to resolve issues like the one you describe.

Stop making assumptions and reply to what I’ve actually said.

comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Frank van Eijs (U1734)
posted 45 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Frank van Eijs (U1734)
posted 29 seconds ago
Hi Winston, if the Henry v Ireland handball happened tomorrow would you be happy with no intervention to correct the decision? And replace Ireland with whoever you support? That is exactly what you are advocating, no intervention whatsoever.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I’m not advocating anything.

Maybe try reading what I’ve actually said, and you can work it out for yourself.

Let me know if you need any help.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you want rid of var?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Believing VAR is flawed and needs to be scrapped is not the same as believing that there is no place technology to resolve issues like the one you describe.

Stop making assumptions and reply to what I’ve actually said.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You just said there that you want var to be scrapped. That is saying you want rid of var. It literally means video assistance. Do you want no video assistance at all? That's literally what VAR means.

Jesus wept.

Yes, because VAR in its current form is the only way tech can be used in football, right?

I think perhaps this is beyond you, and it’s deflecting away from my actual point, which tells its own story.

comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
Jesus wept.

Yes, because VAR in its current form is the only way tech can be used in football, right?

I think perhaps this is beyond you, and it’s deflecting away from my actual point, which tells its own story.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you want video assistance to be used at all in aiding the decision making process on any way? Yes or no?

Utter B0LLOCKS. And thoughtless, inaccurate "B0LLOCKS"at that.

The game WITHOUT the presence and use of VAR is unquestioningly (at least by reasonable and responsible people) a lot more poorly impacted on by human perceptual weaknesses than is the game WITH the availability of VAR.

It's not remotely close, especially when it becomes more technically accurate and easier to read - and it inevitably will.

One only has to look at some of the more moronic comments on these forums to see how subjectively stupid humans can be - even more so when observations about their lacking of both hindsight & foresight are incorporated.

The only negative issue surrounding VAR is that it is currently economically unviable to be present for all levels of the game.

comment by IAmMe (U18491)
posted 7 minutes ago
Utter B0LLOCKS. And thoughtless, inaccurate "B0LLOCKS"at that.

The game WITHOUT the presence and use of VAR is unquestioningly (at least by reasonable and responsible people) a lot more poorly impacted on by human perceptual weaknesses than is the game WITH the availability of VAR.

It's not remotely close, especially when it becomes more technically accurate and easier to read - and it inevitably will.

One only has to look at some of the more moronic comments on these forums to see how subjectively stupid humans can be - even more so when observations about their lacking of both hindsight & foresight are incorporated.

The only negative issue surrounding VAR is that it is currently economically unviable to be present for all levels of the game.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you're saying one guy on a pitch seeing things from wherever he is, with obstructed view isn't the best way for making massive decisions worth billions of pounds? Crazy

comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 35 minutes ago
comment by There'sOne7-0Reds (U1721)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 15 minutes ago
It’s lazy.

The debate is about VAR not about tech.

Those making out this is a bunch of old people who don’t want to move with the times are just desperately trying to point score because their argument is inadequate.

Perhaps that’s not what you were saying if so, then my apologies. Others have been, for sure.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is an element of this however. That doesn't mean it's the reason everyone that some want to remove VAR but it's certainly an opinion that is more heavily weighted towards older people.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

That’s pure conjecture.

Even if you were correct, it’s understandable, given that older people are in a position to actually compare different eras.

You said the same thing about my view on VR headsets about five years ago. You were talking crap then, as is being proven.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes and you have been proven wrong about that and will be about this also, with the VR market at around $8b in 2022 and projected to be at $120b by 2032 according to market research. Not sure how you can claim you were right here when the actual sales alone so far show you to be completely wrong.

On that note I'm getting out of here as somehow you've managed to suck me into a debate from years ago

https://omdia.tech.informa.com/pr/2023/dec/vr-industry-braces-for-setback-omdia-forecasts-declining-sales-until-2026#:~:text=LONDON%2C%20December%2020%2C%202023%20–,from%2010.1%20million%20in%202022

In the least surprising news of the day, TOOR can’t admit he’s wrong.

I said to you that VR won’t be one mainstream. It hasn’t, and it never will. The market has declined. I was proven correct.

In my world, prats like you claim that every shiny new tool is the next big thing in marketing and as sure as night follows day, they’re wrong.

The point is that criticising certain types of tech doesn’t make me a dinosaur, it just means I know what I’m talking about.

You wouldn’t know anything about that, of course.

comment by IAmMe (U18491)
posted 7 hours, 46 minutes ago
Utter B0LLOCKS. And thoughtless, inaccurate "B0LLOCKS"at that.

The game WITHOUT the presence and use of VAR is unquestioningly (at least by reasonable and responsible people) a lot more poorly impacted on by human perceptual weaknesses than is the game WITH the availability of VAR.

It's not remotely close, especially when it becomes more technically accurate and easier to read - and it inevitably will.

One only has to look at some of the more moronic comments on these forums to see how subjectively stupid humans can be - even more so when observations about their lacking of both hindsight & foresight are incorporated.

The only negative issue surrounding VAR is that it is currently economically unviable to be present for all levels of the game.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

That’s the only negative issue with it?

😂😂😂😂😂

The levels of delusion on this forum are staggering.

One only has to look at some of the more moronic comments on these forums to see how subjectively stupid humans can be - even more so when observations about their lacking of both hindsight & foresight are incorporated.

The only negative issue surrounding VAR is that it is currently economically unviable to be present for all levels of the game.


Christ on a fackin bike....talk about one end of the opinion poll to the other...do people actually read what they write

I'm an advocate of VAR if used properly,...but the negativity levels are very high due to human incompetence

comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 11 hours, 40 minutes ago
It’s lazy.

The debate is about VAR not about tech.

Those making out this is a bunch of old people who don’t want to move with the times are just desperately trying to point score because their argument is inadequate.

Perhaps that’s not what you were saying if so, then my apologies. Others have been, for sure.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think if you read my comments, I'm not interested in point scoring, but just putting across a point and giving some ideas.

And although this is not my point, the current latest tech is called VAR, which I am all for.

Regardless of age, there are some fans who just don't like VAR at all.

I guess my point is whatever you call it, as every other sport can use 'tech' and enhance that sport, football can also. It's about implementation and how one uses it

comment by kinsang (U3346)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 11 hours, 40 minutes ago
It’s lazy.

The debate is about VAR not about tech.

Those making out this is a bunch of old people who don’t want to move with the times are just desperately trying to point score because their argument is inadequate.

Perhaps that’s not what you were saying if so, then my apologies. Others have been, for sure.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think if you read my comments, I'm not interested in point scoring, but just putting across a point and giving some ideas.

And although this is not my point, the current latest tech is called VAR, which I am all for.

Regardless of age, there are some fans who just don't like VAR at all.

I guess my point is whatever you call it, as every other sport can use 'tech' and enhance that sport, football can also. It's about implementation and how one uses it
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I think that’s wrong.

The criticism is about VAR in its current form, not tech in general.

"The point is that criticising certain types of tech doesn’t make me a dinosaur, it just means I know what I’m talking about."

comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by kinsang (U3346)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 11 hours, 40 minutes ago
It’s lazy.

The debate is about VAR not about tech.

Those making out this is a bunch of old people who don’t want to move with the times are just desperately trying to point score because their argument is inadequate.

Perhaps that’s not what you were saying if so, then my apologies. Others have been, for sure.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think if you read my comments, I'm not interested in point scoring, but just putting across a point and giving some ideas.

And although this is not my point, the current latest tech is called VAR, which I am all for.

Regardless of age, there are some fans who just don't like VAR at all.

I guess my point is whatever you call it, as every other sport can use 'tech' and enhance that sport, football can also. It's about implementation and how one uses it
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I think that’s wrong.

The criticism is about VAR in its current form, not tech in general.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So what would you suggest? You said you'd be for scrapping VAR, not adjusting it.

So scrapping VAR now means you’re against all forms of tech in football?

Jesus wept.

Well, what I’d do first is remove the system they have and implement the semi auto offside system to run alongside goal line technology.

I’d change the ruling around offsides to require less precision and speed that up.

I’d remove tech related to subjective decisions and implement a testing programme to phase in a completely different model, as agreed with clubs. Possibly the one or two appeals per game per club rule.

If you look back at my first post, my comments weren’t about scrapping it. They were about how those who think it’s simply a problem with humans and not the tech itself are idiots.

It’d be nice if people actually debated what you’d said, instead of something that they made up but suits their narrative.

This turned out to be quite a heated debate, didn't it?

First of all, I can't see VAR disappearing. The idea of momentous, easily identifiable human errors deciding outcomes of important matches after getting rid of a process that would have rectified them is pretty unthinkable. The noise around refereeing mistakes would be many decibels higher than today's grumbling about VAR. So I think it's more practical to focus on improving the efficacy of the technology and streamlining its application by human decision makers.

Some initial thoughts on that:
- Part of that has to be about accountability. We need to get rid of the dynamic where remote referees are worrying about undermining their on-field colleague, and we need to know (ideally hear in real time) their decision making process. Then even if we disagree, it doesn't come across as arbitrary.
- We need to have a good think about what the rules are actually for. E.g. with handballs leading to penalties, was the intention of the rule ever to punish any innocuous brush of the hand somewhere in the box with the 80% probability of goal conceded? A huge amount of the unhappiness around VAR could be neutralised by making the interpretations of the laws of the game more intelligent and less pedantic - meaning remote referees don't have as many instances to intervene.
- Finally, AI should be used to improve the quality and speed of decision making. I thought the AI offsides at the Qatar World Cup worked really well - basically real-time decision making meaning it cut out many of those lengthy reviews.

comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 6 minutes ago
So scrapping VAR now means you’re against all forms of tech in football?

Jesus wept.

Well, what I’d do first is remove the system they have and implement the semi auto offside system to run alongside goal line technology.

I’d change the ruling around offsides to require less precision and speed that up.

I’d remove tech related to subjective decisions and implement a testing programme to phase in a completely different model, as agreed with clubs. Possibly the one or two appeals per game per club rule.

If you look back at my first post, my comments weren’t about scrapping it. They were about how those who think it’s simply a problem with humans and not the tech itself are idiots.

It’d be nice if people actually debated what you’d said, instead of something that they made up but suits their narrative.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The tech is simply reviewing video footage, what exactly would you change about that tech? What you are saying is rule changes, and bringing in automated offsides which we are all for. But using my example of the Henry handball v Ireland, what would you change about the technology which is simply looking at a video replay and simply clearing it up? You are saying that if Ireland had already used their two appeals, then there's nothing them or the ref could do? You are suggesting that's a better system than just easily making the correct decision?

"Well, what I’d do first is remove the system they have and implement the semi auto offside system to run alongside goal line technology.

I’d change the ruling around offsides to require less precision and speed that up."

These two suggestions contradict each other. An automated offside system would be automated so takes no time. It would also require more precise rules on offside in order to be calibrated and make clear cut decisions. You are not making any sense.

Automated offside decision up on the big screen:

"Maybe. It looks offside but Winston wanted less precise rules on offside to speed things up so we have blurred the images to make it less clear and now we are unsure but we need to be quick so let's just go with maybe. Hope that helps. Hi Linda how are the grandkids"

That's Winston's idea for clearing up offsides.

comment by Frank van Eijs (U1734)
posted 15 minutes ago
Automated offside decision up on the big screen:

"Maybe. It looks offside but Winston wanted less precise rules on offside to speed things up so we have blurred the images to make it less clear and now we are unsure but we need to be quick so let's just go with maybe. Hope that helps. Hi Linda how are the grandkids"

That's Winston's idea for clearing up offsides.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
but dont forget that he was being critical of it which in turn means he is an expert and means he knows what he is talking about......???!