VAR thread 2022/23

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
blueju said:
Nothing, No discussion, no mention in the studio of it being looked at? What was the commentary and studio reaction?
Click to expand...

not sure on commentary/studio reaction

I've had a look, most see it as he lost his footing and a unfortunate accident - also he apologises within seconds. others seem to think it was deliberate

they could review this but there is no way of proving he meant that deliberately


 
GaudinoMotors said:
Legitimised result manipulation/assistance, and gives almost complete control to Governing bodies. If that's how you want football to go - you must be very happy.
Click to expand...

Did you have this view pre VAR ?

When refs and linos could just award whatever they wanted - watch the Man U v Man City game with Riley officiating for instance
 
Blue Mist said:
But that is missing the point entirely. With Var the referee no longer has to make decisions and so cops out of making important ones.
The problem then arises with the clear and obvious rule. Var have to then decide whether to intervene. In turn that causes controversy. No other sport allows a ref to abdicate his responsibility.
Click to expand...

Not sure I really follow this logic. The referee always has to make a decision. There is no provision for him to refer an incident to the VAR that he hasn’t adjudicated on himself one way or the other. Whether it’s giving a penalty, a goal or a red card or making the decision to not give them and play on.

If by not making a decision you mean not giving a penalty ( for example ) that he actually thinks is probably a penalty, how is that benefitting him?
 
BlueHammer85 said:
Did you have this view pre VAR ?

When refs and linos could just award whatever they wanted - watch the Man U v Man City game with Riley officiating for instance
Click to expand...
Yes of course, they haven't just wanted to shape outcomes, obviously - but they couldn't carry on with that approach ad infinitum with all the furore and scrutiny it attracted; and upon an individual too - Now they have very cleverly come up with this, faceless, unexplained and with some naive support. I take my hat off, I really do.
 
GaudinoMotors said:
Yes of course, they haven't just wanted to shape outcomes, obviously - but they couldn't carry on with that approach ad infinitum with all the furore and scrutiny it attracted; and upon an individual too - Now they have very cleverly come up with this, faceless, unexplained and with some naive support. I take my hat off, I really do.
Click to expand...

But there putting thereselves under way more scrutiny and furore with VAR and leaving themselves caught trapped most of the time

Pre VAR the ref could easily not of spotted that handball v Chelsea and nothing happens

Now. The ref can not spot it but VAR does (vast majority of time) and the ref has no choice but to award the rightful penalty

For example
 
SWP's back said:
Right, so you agree with my original point which was “VAR did it’s job for us in the Chelsea game” then?
Click to expand...
I've never disagreed with your original point.

Where I DO see an issue with the game is that the referee APPEARED to be incapable of ruling in real-time on what looked to be a SIMPLE handball offence, instead leaning heavily on VAR to make the decision for him. This is NOT what VAR was brought in for.
 
BlueHammer85 said:
Anger at VAR/Officials mistakes is fine and fair enough, I feel the same.

Anger towards those that try and bring a bit of balance and objectivity to debate the pros and cons is not right and it ruins the thread - to be fair it's only 1 or 2 on here that try and shut up any opposing views.
Click to expand...
Don't be so hard on yourself :)
 
BlueHammer85 said:
But there putting thereselves under way more scrutiny and furore with VAR and leaving themselves caught trapped most of the time

Pre VAR the ref could easily not of spotted that handball v Chelsea and nothing happens

Now. The ref can not spot it but VAR does (vast majority of time) and the ref has no choice but to award the rightful penalty

For example
Click to expand...
Did you watch the World Cup? Subtle phasing out of contentious replays and "it''s been looked at". Of course that's enough for you - "VAR's looked at it." = legit and dealt with, that's the beauty of it and this is only the tip. I guarantee that as in football grounds, tv companies will be told or encouraged not to dwell or comment upon contentious incidents before long - and who are they to argue - contracts to keep. The whole thing is an insidious carve up. I agree with you though on one point VAR/technology hasn't caused this - it's vested interests, but it gives it a thinly veiled aura of legitimacy.

And yes- I am a very cynical c*nt.
 
Stephen230 said:
Not sure I really follow this logic. The referee always has to make a decision. There is no provision for him to refer an incident to the VAR that he hasn’t adjudicated on himself one way or the other. Whether it’s giving a penalty, a goal or a red card or making the decision to not give them and play on.

If by not making a decision you mean not giving a penalty ( for example ) that he actually thinks is probably a penalty, how is that benefitting him?
Click to expand...
On Sunday the ref was 5 yards away from the handball. It happened quickly. He can whistle and award the penalty. This will of course be reviewed by Var and he could be invited to watch it on the screen as he made a mistake. This opens him up to ridicule for making a mistake.
A far easier option, no matter what he has seen, is do fuck all, give nowt and let Var make the decision. That imo, is what he did, he took the lazy, unprofessional way out.
The problem this can lead to is when it becomes a habit. Don't make big calls, let Var do it but that then brings in the Clear and Obvious rule where Var won't get involved.
The whole Var set up is wrong, it is unprofessional in the way it is operated. Different clubs have a different amount of cameras, some clubs even have blind spots. Everything about Var is unprofessional and open to abuse.
 
BlueHammer85 said:
not sure on commentary/studio reaction

I've had a look, most see it as he lost his footing and a unfortunate accident - also he apologises within seconds. others seem to think it was deliberate

they could review this but there is no way of proving he meant that deliberately


Click to expand...

Mings got a retrospective red for this 'stamp', and Ibrahimovic didn't for the elbow.

I think it is perfectly clear which one of those was done with intent...

(The initial foul by the way should have been given for the dive by Ibrahimovic)



Sky Sports - Sports News, Transfers, Scores | Watch Live Sport

Watch the best live coverage of your favourite sports: Football, Golf, Rugby, Cricket, Tennis, F1, Boxing, plus the latest sports news, transfers & scores.
www.skysports.com www.skysports.com

Sky Sports - Sports News, Transfers, Scores | Watch Live Sport

Watch the best live coverage of your favourite sports: Football, Golf, Rugby, Cricket, Tennis, F1, Boxing, plus the latest sports news, transfers & scores.
www.skysports.com www.skysports.com
 
GaudinoMotors said:
Did you watch the World Cup? Subtle phasing out of contentious replays and "it''s been looked at". Of course that's enough for you - "VAR's looked at it." = legit and dealt with, that's the beauty of it and this is only the tip. I guarantee that as in football grounds, tv companies will be told or encouraged not to dwell or comment upon contentious incidents before long - and who are they to argue - contracts to keep. The whole thing is an insidious carve up. I agree with you though on one point VAR/technology hasn't caused this - it's vested interests, but it gives it a thinly veiled aura of legitimacy.

And yes- I am a very cynical c*nt.
Click to expand...
It makes the TV companies COMPLICIT in any cover up.
 
SWP's back said:
But we saw hundreds of missed penalties for handball and everything else pre-VAR, which is partly why VAR was brought in in the first place.

VAR is very far from perfect but there are more correct decisions now than there previously were. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t demand that it continues to improve or that we get to hear what’s being said of course.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure this is actually the case. There was a study which showed on pitch refereeing got 95% of big decisions right, pre VAR.

Has VAR got that % higher? Maybe. It's certainly righted some wrongs, but its also interfered/not interfered subjectively on some refs decisions, and relied on inaccurate tech to make many many others, so it's net benefit on accuracy is debatable.

That's before we get to the side effects of delay of game and taking away the spontaneity of celebrating goals.

Inexplicably for a multi billion dollar sport it's implementaiton has been terrible. It isn't transparent, has necessaitated all sorts of sub optimal LOTG changes, not resolved controversy (and arguably added to it).

And, it could be so much better.

Have a screen on the side of the pitch and if a ref decides they want to take a second look at something then make it available to them. A la American Football, they explain what they see and what their decision is. It really really is that simple.
 
Blue Mist said:
The media are now saying there were less cameras in use for Var in the FA Cup than the League, further they admit every ground had a different number of cameras.
If true it ruins the integrity of Var, the Premier League and the FA. Any decently run professional organisation would have a set number of cameras sited at specified positions so that every ground is equal in its coverage.
You cannot have the situation where Liverpool deliberately have less than other clubs.
Click to expand...
Does anyone know "why" there are less? Is it a stadium size issue or something>
 
Pingu the Penguin said:
I'm not sure this is actually the case. There was a study which showed on pitch refereeing got 95% of big decisions right, pre VAR.

Has VAR got that % higher? Maybe. It's certainly righted some wrongs, but its also interfered/not interfered subjectively on some refs decisions, and relied on inaccurate tech to make many many others, so it's net benefit on accuracy is debatable.
Click to expand...

According to premierleague.com before VAR was introduced the percentage of correct key match decisions stood at 82 percent.

12 months later with VAR in use for the 2019/20 season, it rose to 94 percent.

Suspect it’s even higher now VAR has improved
 
Blue Mist said:
But that is missing the point entirely. With Var the referee no longer has to make decisions and so cops out of making important ones.
The problem then arises with the clear and obvious rule. Var have to then decide whether to intervene. In turn that causes controversy. No other sport allows a ref to abdicate his responsibility.
Click to expand...
No. You’re missing the point entirely that penalties have always been missed. Now fewer penalties are missed.
 
BlueHammer85 said:
It really is this simple

how anything thinks this view is being a 'wum' i'll never know

some just prefer to live in constant anger and call everything a conspiracy
Click to expand...
Easiest two ways to see VAR works better than no VAR are these:

1: every fan forum’s thread on VAR reckons it’s bent against them.

2: every side playing without VAR in the 3rd round this weekend thought it was unfair that they were denied it’s use.
 
SWP's back said:
Easiest two ways to see VAR works better than no VAR are these:

1: every fan forum’s thread on VAR reckons it’s bent against them.

2: every side playing without VAR in the 3rd round this weekend thought it was unfair that they were denied it’s use.
Click to expand...

3. Those who want rid of VAR posting videos of how bad refs/decisions were pre VAR
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top