VAR thread 2022/23

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
dickie davies said:
If it takes Mason a dozen looks at that stamp to make his mind up, surely he should have referred it back to the ref
Ultimately it's the onfield refs decision
He can have the bollocks to stand by his original decision
Click to expand...
Which stamp ? Gis a clue
 
So far looks like it only applies to United and Liverpool. Not saying it would of made any difference but Diaz looks off v Bournemouth, The media will just blank it though as you just cant explain it.
 
Gorton_Tubster said:
LOL at the freedom to decide who gets the decisions and who doesnt.

Click to expand...

Two tight decisions that we can’t see if they are 100% correct because we don’t have decent angles to see them.

Because one was for the rags, it reaffirms our bias that VAR is only there to help them.

Looking at the stills, we naturally look where the feet and then legs are and the one deemed offside looks offside and the one deemed on seems off.

What we can’t calibrate well is where the top of the arms are. If they weren’t involved in the decision, no football fan would mourn about it.
 
Akira said:
Amazing they took like 5 secs to look at Rashford's to decide it's on. I have zero clue why that's onside and fairly certain the refs don't either.
Click to expand...
The media is a big part of the problem. They get information from the VAR officials which they don't share with the viewers. The broadcasters focus only on selected incidents. The Rashford one was bizarre because they glossed over it so quickly. It was suspicious. Fans and viewers will never trust the sytem until it is fully transparent (as it is with other sports) The paying customers are shut out of the loop. And it stinks. Why have TV cameras never shown us the inside of the VAR room, not even during trial matches? The decision-making process is still a secret.
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
The media is a big part of the problem. They get information from the VAR officials which they don't share with the viewers. The broadcasters focus only on selected incidents. The Rashford one was bizarre because they glossed over it so quickly. It was suspicious. Fans and viewers will never trust the sytem until it is fully transparent (as it is with other sports) The paying customers are shut out of the loop. And it stinks.
Click to expand...
A lot of people won’t trust it however transparent it is.

They believe the system is biased against them, whoever they support.
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
A lot of people won’t trust it however transparent it is.

They believe the system is biased against them, whoever they support.
Click to expand...
That's true but the authorities have made no serious attempt to explain the full decision-making process to fans. We are the paying customers (TV and matchgoers). Why can't they be open and transparent? The poor communications process just fuels the conspiracy theories.
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
Two tight decisions that we can’t see if they are 100% correct because we don’t have decent angles to see them.

Because one was for the rags, it reaffirms our bias that VAR is only there to help them.

Looking at the stills, we naturally look where the feet and then legs are and the one deemed offside looks offside and the one deemed on seems off.

What we can’t calibrate well is where the top of the arms are. If they weren’t involved in the decision, no football fan would mourn about it.
Click to expand...
And yet against Liverpool - I'm surprised a few heads haven't exploded on here already!
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
A lot of people won’t trust it however transparent it is.

They believe the system is biased against them, whoever they support.
Click to expand...
And largely for good reason, as it is bias against the vast majority of the clubs in England.

If people think that one of the largest, most watched, most bet-on sport leagues in the world is the *only* one with no corruption that favours the cash cows of the enterprise then I have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to invest in historic NYC infrastructure they may be interested in.
 
SebastianBlue said:
And largely for good reason, as it is bias against the vast majority of the clubs in England.

If people think that one of the largest, most watched, most bet-on sport leagues in the world is the *only* one with no corruption that favours the cash cows of the enterprise then I have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to invest in historic NYC infrastructure they may be interested in.
Click to expand...
Indeed. I guess in creating VAR, they just wanted the corruption to be more transparent…
 
SebastianBlue said:
And largely for good reason, as it is bias against the vast majority of the clubs in England.

If people think that one of the largest, most watched, most bet-on sport leagues in the world is the *only* one with no corruption that favours the cash cows of the enterprise then I have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to invest in historic NYC infrastructure they may be interested in.
Click to expand...
Just look up Calciopoli (Italian Football League scandal) for reference. I know it was a while ago now, but it is still as relevant today as it was back then.

With every passing scandal in sport, those who seek to benefit through corrupt intentions learn how not to get caught, and employ clandestine techniques in their planning and execution to avoid scrutiny.

I wonder how many of those involved in VAR know what a burner phone is?
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
Two tight decisions that we can’t see if they are 100% correct because we don’t have decent angles to see them.

Because one was for the rags, it reaffirms our bias that VAR is only there to help them.

Looking at the stills, we naturally look where the feet and then legs are and the one deemed offside looks offside and the one deemed on seems off.

What we can’t calibrate well is where the top of the arms are. If they weren’t involved in the decision, no football fan would mourn about it.
Click to expand...
I think you're saying if they made it simple it would be much easier for them. I certainly think that. Just make it feet ffs, no arms, shoulders, armpits... Just feet.
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
Indeed. I guess in creating VAR, they just wanted the corruption to be more transparent…
Click to expand...
They were forced in to implementing VAR. They couldn’t be the only major football league in the world without video review (that *would* make the corruption too transparent). So they implemented it in a manner that allowed it to be as opaque as it could possibly be.
 
Trevor Morley's Tache said:
Just look up Calciopoli (Italian Football League scandal) for reference. I know it was a while ago now, but it is still as relevant today as it was back then.

With every passing scandal in sport, those who seek to benefit through corrupt intentions learn how not to get caught, and employ clandestine techniques in their planning and execution to avoid scrutiny.

I wonder how many of those involved in VAR know what a burner phone is?
Click to expand...
It’s no doubt part of the onboarding care package.
 
Had radio on at the weekend in the car, think radio 5, and the commentator said something along the lines of we have 90 seconds left but there will be a minimum of three minutes added on at the end.

How the fuck does a commentator know how long is left before the board is put up. Presumably the ref will, via the comms, tell the 4th official how many minutes to show near the end of the half so does the radio commentators have some sort of feed from somewhere? Forget the fact that they just make up the added time and it normally bears no relevance to how long should be added. Ref in the Leeds game last night blew up about seven seconds before the minimum time that should have been added just as Leeds were about to launch it. What's that about?
 
SebastianBlue said:
They were forced in to implementing VAR. They couldn’t be the only major football league in the world without video review (that *would* make the corruption too transparent). So they implemented it in a manner that allowed it to be as opaque as it could possibly be.
Click to expand...
They haven’t though. It could be far, far worse.

The vast majority of football fans think the game is corrupt and against their own team. We are no different.

If I believed that the game was manufacturing results, I’d never watch another game again, ever.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top