VAR thread

[Kenneth]

Used only for clear & obvious errors
The on-field ref can ask for opinion from VAR ref,

Bit of an issue there. If the ref feels his decision is an obvious error then he would make a difference decision. If he doesn't think he's made an error but has, the VAR couldn't intervene. IMO, the VAR should overrule the referee in cases of errors, whether the ref likes it or not. Ref should get a message to say something is being reviewed and then get the outcome. This should only happen in exceptional circumstances, ideally where there is no scope for interpretation. There will always be some grey areas and scope for disagreement, but the line needs moving significantly away from the level of intervention than is being used at the moment.

[Fosterbloke]

As a minimum requirement, they must adopt the Rugby system:

• Ref micked* up
• Used only for clear & obvious errors
• The on-field ref can ask for opinion from VAR ref,
• The VAR ref cannot influence the on-field ref until opinion is asked for
• Reviews shown on stadium screens
• Review in real-time from various angles
• Slow-mo only used when in real-time repeats have been shown

*mic'd or mic'ed.

[Norbs]

*mic'd or mic'ed.

Maybe he wants refs to carry a can of Guinness and wear green velvet suits

[Fredo]

[ame]https://twitter.com/btsportfootball/status/1108044657727078400[/ame]

[Le Chef]

Jordan Henderson : Cunt off ref, cunt off

Guaranteed first mic pick up

[Cormack74]

https://twitter.com/btsportfootball/...44657727078400

They did it years ago with David Elleray. Arsenal were playing someone nondescript.

Tony Adams spent the entire time shouting at him, not swearing that I can recall but literally questioning every decision, sometimes bawling in his face. Elleray should have told him to shut up or leave the pitch but he just took it.

It will never properly happen - the FA PL etc would hate people to see what players are actually like on the pitch, whilst they half halfheartedly condemn people who use verbal and / or physical assaults against refs in grass roots football.

[labourRed]

https://twitter.com/btsportfootball/...44657727078400

Yeah, but he's good, like a footballing Nigel Owens. Jon Moss would just be panting like the fat **** that he is.

I'd like that here but can see the refs putting up some resistance.

[Tatterdemalion]

As a minimum requirement, they must adopt the Rugby system:

• Ref micked up
• Used only for clear & obvious errors
• The on-field ref can ask for opinion from VAR ref,
• The VAR ref cannot influence the on-field ref until opinion is asked for
• Reviews shown on stadium screens
• Review in real-time from various angles
• Slow-mo only used when in real-time repeats have been shown

Would agree, except I think the VAR Ref should be in charge.

[Buzzo]

https://twitter.com/btsportfootball/...44657727078400

I may have posted this before , but that is as it is one Rugby. And it works.

It will force players to respect the officials.

[Exiled_red]

The last couple of weeks and our last couple of games have raised some points about VAR, which I don't think is fit for purpose as it currently stands. A few talking points:

1) The Chelsea goal vs Cardiff obviously this would have been ruled out by VAR

2) Spurs goal vs us: the moving ball apparently VAR won't be used for things such as this (determining whether a freekick is taken with a moving ball, whether the ball is the area for a corner or not etc)

3) Our goal first goal vs Southampton, possibility of Salah being offside in the build up, because we didn't score from that and Southampton had a couple of chances to clear that would apparently be allowed to stand, but had we scored directly from that then the goal would have been disallowed.

4) The offside given against us vs Southampton that wasn't offside. - Assistant referees will be discouraged from putting their flags up for tight calls, they will then let the play continue and review with VAR, but if the game is stopped obviously nothing can be done.

My thoughts on these are VAR should only really overrule in situation 1, where something is clearly wrong. Azpilicueta was clearly offside and you shouldn't really need VAR to spot that.

I am not in favour of VAR being used to overrule tight call situations like situation 2, the question about whether Salah was offside or not is IMO silly I'm not saying that just because it was one of our players but if you need to freeze play and draw a line across the pitch and determine that someone's foot is about an inch or two beyond the last defender, yes technically that is offside but there is no way that can realistically be spotted by a linesman, if we are after this level of accuracy games will take forever and you might as well do away with the assistants running the line completely. I think that there needs to be some level of assistants call being upheld unless they are clearly wrong (as in situation 1). I guess that the problem is 'clearly' wrong is very subjective. I think that the changes to the definition of the offside rule have led to this (any part of your body that you can score with...) IMO the offside rule of 20 or so years ago would be a more VAR appropriate measure it would be a more 'clear and obvious' overrule which was what VAR was originally supposed to be about. I know that this view is probably unpopular, but that's my thought.

Linked to point 2 is point number 4. The idea of assistants not flagging tight calls so that VAR can have the final say essentially makes the assistants pointless for offsides, and will pose problems for the quality of officiating in competitions where VAR is not used such as the lower leagues. If however the assistant wrongly flags there is still nothing that can be done about it.

From point 2 how far back are we prepared to go in a move to spot infringements? The suggestion from last night's game was that Salah's offside wouldn't have caused our goal to be ruled out because Southampton had had chances to clear. I guess we are to phases of play territory here, this doesn't just apply to offsides, I guess that there are fouls etc in the build up that could come into play too. But this is something that no-one really seems to know.

Point number 3 again in my version of the use of VAR I wouldn't be bothered about this either. But in the level of VAR currently being suggested where we are concerned whether a striker's toe is an inch or two beyond the last defender surely it can be argued that the taking of a quick freekick with a moving ball is likely to have at least as much influence on the outcome of a game as a striker being an inch or two offside. I appreciate that this might seem pedantic, but the use and implications of VAR doesn't seem to have been considered, it just seems to be viewed as a magic tool that will solve all the problems with officiating, and IMO I don't think enough thought or planning has gone into it's use.

[Kenneth]

I don't really have anything to add, very good points.

[Red_Polo]

How do you define a tight call on VAR? Once you do, won't there just be tight calls on whether something is a tight call? If you decide to review a situation I think you have to do it properly, using the same rules we always do.

Yes, a smidge offside often makes no real impact and is only technical, but that goes the same as if the lino calls it. It's really a problem of the rule and not of VAR.

Linos being asked not to flag tight calls is a tricky onr. I suppose it really means re-emphasising the 'benefit of doubt to attacker' when they evaluate likelihood they were offside. I can see it causing some teething problems and more goals being disallowed by VAR if the officials are too reluctant to flag themselves, but it's really just a question of the officials recalibrating the level of certainty they need to feel before flagging and striking a balance. The exact guidance they get will be huge here.

[Red_Polo]

I agree with points 2 and 3 being correct, this is as it should be.

[Exiled_red]

How do you define a tight call on VAR? Once you do, won't there just be tight calls on whether something is a tight call? If you decide to review a situation I think you have to do it properly, using the same rules we always do.

Yes, a smidge offside often makes no real impact and is only technical, but that goes the same as if the lino calls it. It's really a problem of the rule and not of VAR.

Linos being asked not to flag tight calls is a tricky onr. I suppose it really means re-emphasising the 'benefit of doubt to attacker' when they evaluate likelihood they were offside. I can see it causing some teething problems and more goals being disallowed by VAR if the officials are too reluctant to flag themselves, but it's really just a question of the officials recalibrating the level of certainty they need to feel before flagging and striking a balance. The exact guidance they get will be huge here.

I agree with points 2 and 3 being correct, this is as it should be.

I agree with problems with the offside being with the offside rule rather than VAR specifically and tried to discuss that in the previous post, but VAR highlights them.

In terms of what is a tight call I think that perhaps giving different guidance to a VAR official which is more in line with the older definition of the offside rule where if a player looks level it's the "assistant referee's call" (like an umpire's call in LBW in cricket reviews. Alternatively you don't give them lines on the screen an a single frame to look at. I don't have an answer for this, but I don't see that the proposed system is going to help or be good for the game.

To me it seems unclear as to what we want from VAR. Originally it was originally supposed to be for overturning clear and obviously wrong decisions. An offside decision that you can only tell based on looking at a single frame with a line across the screen showing that a player's toe is a couple of inches offside can't be clearly or obviously wrong. If we want that level of accuracy surely we want it for every decision so why are there some things that VAR won't consider (like a moving ball from a quickly taken freekick)? If we want that level of accuracy then there are consequences - we have to accept that there could be alot of stoppages of a couple of minutes in the game, resulting in loss of momentum for teams and games lasting alot longer. This seems to be something that isn't really being considered by the footballing authorities. One way to offset this could be to have a VAR official and not have the referee going over to look at a video screen and VAR official questions or gets info from them, but as I say that's not what they are proposing doing.

[Chris]

A blatant red for Kyle Walker still just a yellow after VAR, this whole thing is ****, Utd and City games are still bent as ****.