VAR thread

[Exiled_red]

Football is about emotion. Without it, which lets be honest without fans it is, its ****. Var takes away, in fact kills emotion. So it can't be anything but a bad thing for the game.

I think even with the emotion if VAR reverses a clear error you don't have a problem with that. If the linesman somehow misses a player is 5 yards offside and that is reversed you don't have a complaint. If VAR shows that a player has thrown himself to the floor under no contact which fools the ref into awarding a pen you don't have a problem with that being overturned.

The problem is the millimetre offside calls and the subjective decision being changed for the smallest thing because the ref has seen it in slow motion from 5 different angles.

[Fosterbloke]

VAR is bollocks, just have two refs on the pitch and a lino on each quadrant.

[Exiled_red]

I've been a big critic of VAR but there is a place for it. The issue is with how it is being used, all these attempts to bring so many decisions into it's remit are the problem.

I said really early on that it hadn't been tested properly and the implications and procedures thought through in sufficient detail. Originally it was just the big decisions, I didn't like the clear and obvious error stuff for the above reasons but where we were with that is more what VAR should be about. The fact that few decisions were overturned was a good thing as it was letting referees run the game. Yes there were some frustrating calls where things weren't overturned but that was because VAR wasn't re-refereeing the game.

The trying to re-referee the game is where the problem lies IMO they have brought in other incidents and squeezed margins of error to breaking point. The technology is not capable of accurately determining whether someone is on or offside to the degree of accuracy that they are trying to determine things and I don't think they understand this limitation.

The Pickford VVD incident is a classic illustration of what is wrong with the system, they spent so long trying to determine whether VVD was a mm offside that they forgot or lost sight of the fact that Pickford could have broken his leg, it's farcical and shows the system isn't fit for purpose and/or the people running it are incompetent.

[Mr Pink]

I think even with the emotion if VAR reverses a clear error you don't have a problem with that. If the linesman somehow misses a player is 5 yards offside and that is reversed you don't have a complaint. If VAR shows that a player has thrown himself to the floor under no contact which fools the ref into awarding a pen you don't have a problem with that being overturned.

The problem is the millimetre offside calls and the subjective decision being changed for the smallest thing because the ref has seen it in slow motion from 5 different angles.

agree 100%

I don’t like the fact that there’s now a more gradual release of tension after a goal, instead of an explosion of emotion, but I think that if that’s the cost of getting all the big calls right, then so be it.

I don’t think anyone would feel hard done by if a goal conceded turned out to be offside by the length of a foreskin, they need to cool down on them ones, use common sense and only call the ones that are clearly offside, as opposed to level.

I feel like for penalties, red cards, dives etc, I’d like if the ref went to the pitch side monitor and made the call himself for all incidents. Var should tell him in his ear that he may need to review it, and the ref should take it from there. I think if he’s correcting himself instead of someone overruling him, there’s less hesitance to change your mind on second viewing, talking about clear and obvious nonsense... Also, the buck stops with the ref then...

In all aspects of life I’m a big advocate for using technology to make things easier/better. I think they need to keep it, improve it, make the refs job as easy as possible for him.... and then hold him accountable for any errors- the ref should have to do a post match interview, or at least have his match report public, for all to see.

[Exiled_red]

To be honest I am somewhat conflicted about the use of the pitch side monitor, I like it because it allows the referee who has been making decisions all game to make that decision and therefore from that point of view should give you more consistency.

But on the other hand if the decision is clear the VAR official should be able to make the call, if the VAR official calls the ref over to the monitor it seemingly means that he can't make the call which presumably means it isn't clear and obvious. As I say I am not sure what has happened to the clear and obvious part of the VAR ruling if it is still in force or what. From the evidence of watching it used it seems not. The use of pitch side monitors seem to be an opportunity for the referee to have a 2nd chance at refereeing the game rather than reviewing the decision within some set of VAR rules as was originally supposed to be the case. If that is the way they want to go they need to be sure that everyone is clear with that. The bigger problem however is that the decision to review is upto the VAR official so you are substituting the human error on the field for human error in a VAR box somewhere.

[Norbs]

agree 100%

I don’t like the fact that there’s now a more gradual release of tension after a goal, instead of an explosion of emotion, but I think that if that’s the cost of getting all the big calls right, then so be it.

I don’t think anyone would feel hard done by if a goal conceded turned out to be offside by the length of a foreskin, they need to cool down on them ones, use common sense and only call the ones that are clearly offside, as opposed to level.

I feel like for penalties, red cards, dives etc, I’d like if the ref went to the pitch side monitor and made the call himself for all incidents. Var should tell him in his ear that he may need to review it, and the ref should take it from there. I think if he’s correcting himself instead of someone overruling him, there’s less hesitance to change your mind on second viewing, talking about clear and obvious nonsense... Also, the buck stops with the ref then...

In all aspects of life I’m a big advocate for using technology to make things easier/better. I think they need to keep it, improve it, make the refs job as easy as possible for him.... and then hold him accountable for any errors- the ref should have to do a post match interview, or at least have his match report public, for all to see.

That goal was the first I've cheered at the top of my voice for ages, along with a **** you Everton. Two minutes later it's chalked off and there's no anger, just deflation

[Fivex]

Pray for RoboKlopp after he deflated the front door

[Exiled_red]

That goal was the first I've cheered at the top of my voice for ages, along with a **** you Everton. Two minutes later it's chalked off and there's no anger, just deflation

I was similar, deflated and confused, the anger came later when I saw the images with the lines on

[Maxiedge]

It's not just the fact that it was level/onside. We were clearly the better side, their keeper should have been off, should have been a pen too (VVD still looks onside to me), we had two horror tackles on our players and the VAR bloke still had the nerve to chalk off a well deserved winner in the last minute.

I've said to before on here but a combination of giving the attacker the benefit of doubt and VAR would be that if the lines overlap or touch, then it is called onside. It gives scope for a small percentage of error and defenders should not trying to catch opponents offside anyway with such small margins so it works well all round imo.

[Exiled_red]

It's not just the fact that it was level/onside. We were clearly the better side, their keeper should have been off, should have been a pen too (VVD still looks onside to me), we had two horror tackles on our players and the VAR bloke still had the nerve to chalk off a well deserved winner in the last minute.

I've said to before on here but a combination of giving the attacker the benefit of doubt and VAR would be that if the lines overlap or touch, then it is called onside. It gives scope for a small percentage of error and defenders should not trying to catch opponents offside anyway with such small margins so it works well all round imo.

To be fair the official(s) shouldn't be considering whether tight decisions have gone for or against us (or any side) when evaluating the next one, each decision should be judged on it's own merits.

I don't believe that the official was biased, I think that the issue is a systematic one, the system isn't fit for purpose and I don't believe that the people using it have been trained well enough or understand it's limitations. He may have (accidentally) got the positions of the lines slightly wrong but it seems that if there is a degree of human error in the making of these decisions then that is a limitation of the system that hasn't properly been accounted for in it's development or implementation.

[Norbs]

The worst performance I've seen from Michael Oliver

[Fosterbloke]

That goal was the first I've cheered at the top of my voice for ages, along with a **** you Everton. Two minutes later it's chalked off and there's no anger, just deflation

I went to bed really pissed off. I think my initial cheer alerted one of the nurses to come check on my through the door...

****ing VAR is only funny when a rival has something go against them but I'd rather that wasn't a form of enjoyment.

[labourRed]

[ame]https://twitter.com/AnfieldEdition/status/1317482725767512065[/ame]

[BobTheCharmer]

We are all looking at a line to see who's offside down to the last pixel.

Not one picture ever shows the pass leaving the boot. I don't even think its possible to zoom in enough to see if there is a pixel between boot and ball. So if you are two pixels out on the ball leaving, then when you get to the attacking player it's never going to be right. It's too blocky and unclear when you zoom in. If they see clear distance between boot and ball then that should be applied to the line they draw up. ****ing joke. Still fuming.

[Exiled_red]

We are all looking at a line to see who's offside down to the last pixel.

Not one picture ever shows the pass leaving the boot. I don't even think its possible to zoom in enough to see if there is a pixel between boot and ball. So if you are two pixels out on the ball leaving, then when you get to the attacking player it's never going to be right. It's too blocky and unclear when you zoom in. If they see clear distance between boot and ball then that should be applied to the line they draw up. ****ing joke. Still fuming.

I suspect that they don't show the ball leaving the foot because it would be 'confusing' for us plebs. I could be wrong but I imagine that the ball (and the foot) will be a blur because it is moving so fast. I don't imagine in most cases the exact moment that the ball left the foot can't be determined with anywhere near the level of accuracy that they are showing the difference between the line, this for me is the biggest source of error in the whole system.