VAR Discussion Thread | 2024/25

[TheBeautifulGame]

I watch most games on Tv and all home games in person there are small stoppages in play and these are seconds the Captain talking to the ref when there is “major contention” is usual already a VAR check, to add other where the captain has to appeal to the ref can as I said already mean a further stop in play which we don’t want and also could lead to it being used to stop the opponent momentum Ditch VAR we play football on grass not in the lab

I totally agree with you that we should ditch VAR not replace it with anything and just play normal football. If there's a bad decision, you suck it up and play on, the way it has worked for over 100 years. So I fully agree with you on that. However, given the desire of the powers that be to implement a video review system and given how against the football powers are at ditching VAR and just playing normal football again (sad, I know) we I think should try to be constructive here and move towards a better alternative.

Remember when Wolves tried to get VAR scrapped it turned out they were the only club who voted to scrap it. So unfortunately I think that ship has sailed. However if there's a chance for VAR to be scrapped and replaced with a challenge system, I think we can all agree that that's a better alternative.

Because the frustration with VAR is, as I said earlier, largely due to how the VARs are tasked with not only reviewing decisions but also deciding when to stop the action, when to alert the referee, and what to review. That whole nonsense gives the impression of corruption, of selective reviewing and that whole idea needs to go. I genuinely believe that a challenge system, if designed properly, would be far better than VAR and would satisfy those arguing with you about having a method to review howlers, and in the process, eliminating the need for having VARs in the booth ever again.

Anotherwords, give managers the ability to challenge. Yes there will be some delays but the delays could be handled in a better way if they design the system properly. So, in conclusion, I am with you that VAR should be scrapped and they should go back to playing normal football, with no challenges, no nothing. And they'll be the rare howler or debated decisions like the good ol days. I want football to return to normal just as much as you. But short of that, I think we can all agree that a challenge system would be far better than VAR. So if I had to choose between VAR and a challenge system I would definitely rather have a challenge system.

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

So how would it flow better the captain could be in the fullback position he would somehow have to get to the ref to lodge a challenge Thwn the ref would have to stop the game the captain would have to explain what the challenge was after he has established from team mates as he may not be aware then the ref would have to speak to VAR and so we get the usual delay. It’s all utter nonsense

The frustration as it stands now with VAR is when a captain, or any player for that matter, feels he has been wronged and is arguing with the referee and the referee is having none of it. And then in some cases the incident never gets reviewed because the VARs don't decide to compel him to go to the monitor. Well, under a challenge system, in that scenario, the aggrieved player would have an avenue to compel the referee to review the incident.

But in my view it wouldn't be the captain who could prompt a review, it would be the manager's decision. But if the manager saw his aggrieved player in the referee's face, he would have the ability to back his player and demand a review. Under VAR, what happens is in cases like this they are taught not to allow players arguing with the ref to influence the referee (or the VARs) decision-making. While this sounds great on paper, it often ends up being counter-productive, and it becomes like a pride thing with the ref or the VARs. In a challenge system, however, this dynamic wouldn't exist. And in my mind at least, the match would flow far better than it currently does. And not just the flow but just the fans ability to get a better grasp of what is going on and the decision-making involved.

Under a challenge system, instead of VAR, fans wouldn't be walking on egg shells the entire match always paranoid about goals getting disallowed and all that jazz. Goals could still be disallowed in a challenge system, but not under the same conditions. Throughout a match you wouldn't have random stoppages out of nowhere without a complete understanding of what is being looked at. Like after each goal. Under a challenge system, I would also do away with having every goal automatically reviewed like it is under VAR, so we can move away from the idea that the VARs are looking to find reasons to disallow every goal, which is driving the fans mad!

It would take a challenge from a manager followng a goal to force a review, and in that scenario it should be reviewed more thoroughly, including a corner kick decision that directly led to it, including subjective offsides (i.e. if a clearly offside player got involved or not).

What spoils the game under VAR is when every goal is scored you never know if it will stand because everything is reviewed. Now if a manager decides to challenge a goal scored before the ensuing kickoff, at least then the fans can see that it's the manager who is challenging something about it, and the review takes on a much different feel and something easier for the fans to understand. Under VAR, the whole thing has a very behind closed doors corruptive feel to everything. At least with the managers deciding what gets reviewed or not, reviews would take on a different feel and would (I think) be a better way to go about it.

For example, under a challenge system, managers would have less to complain about, instead of complaining about VAR all the time (justifiably I might add) at least under a challenge system they have some degree of control over what gets reviewed and could explain to the media post match what they challenged. For many reasons, which I've tried to explain, a challenge system would be much better than VAR. A challenge system would satisfy the managers to some extent, who are quite frustrated by VAR, and the fans would at least have a better understanding of the process.

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

How refreshing: watching these games knowing if a goal is given - it’s given.
Oh to have that back for every game.
We can but hope.?

I wish we could go back to normal football. But I'm afraid that ship has sailed. After the vote by Wolves, it's very apparent that all the other clubs were not willing to go in that direction. Even though they should have, even though I hoped they would. But living in endless false hope waiting for football to be returned to normal and knowing that they just refuse is also problematic. We've been living with this VAR nightmare for so long we need a way remove it from the sport. If that means replacing it with a challenge system, if that's the lesser of two evils then so be it. The powers that be are so committed to technology to review bad decisions, that we have no avenue it seems other than to replace VAR with a better alternative.

 

[give it to gordon]

Okay.

There is LITERALLY a thread about the handling of Haaland which should be given as penalties much of the time. This is ignored, but should be challenged. Maybe cos the lads know the ref won't do anything about it cos we're City and Guardiola doesn't want to whinge like Klopp, Teta or Moaninho would, we don't say anything.

However, if challenges were allowed all that BS holding would stop cos we'd bang about this!!

Not sure why you disagree about this stuff!

If the refs had to explain how holding Haaland isn't a penalty than the holding might stop. To get a ref to stand in front of the camera and explain would make the refs look more bent than ever.
It would put pressure on them to award the penalty and ref to the rules.

At the moment the refs, linesman and var can all ignore the rules and no one is allowed to ask them why

 

[Bigga]

I totally agree with you that we should ditch VAR not replace it with anything and just play normal football. If there's a bad decision, you suck it up and play on, the way it has worked for over 100 years. So I fully agree with you on that. However, given the desire of the powers that be to implement a video review system and given how against the football powers are at ditching VAR and just playing normal football again (sad, I know) we I think should try to be constructive here and move towards a better alternative.

Remember when Wolves tried to get VAR scrapped it turned out they were the only club who voted to scrap it. So unfortunately I think that ship has sailed. However if there's a chance for VAR to be scrapped and replaced with a challenge system, I think we can all agree that that's a better alternative.

Because the frustration with VAR is, as I said earlier, largely due to how the VARs are tasked with not only reviewing decisions but also deciding when to stop the action, when to alert the referee, and what to review. That whole nonsense gives the impression of corruption, of selective reviewing and that whole idea needs to go. I genuinely believe that a challenge system, if designed properly, would be far better than VAR and would satisfy those arguing with you about having a method to review howlers, and in the process, eliminating the need for having VARs in the booth ever again.

Anotherwords, give managers the ability to challenge. Yes there will be some delays but the delays could be handled in a better way if they design the system properly. So, in conclusion, I am with you that VAR should be scrapped and they should go back to playing normal football, with no challenges, no nothing. And they'll be the rare howler or debated decisions like the good ol days. I want football to return to normal just as much as you. But short of that, I think we can all agree that a challenge system would be far better than VAR. So if I had to choose between VAR and a challenge system I would definitely rather have a challenge system.

This is a very good post about the situation and you are right; there's no going back. There's too much money invested into the system and far too much club investment hanging on decisions being determined in the right way.

Years ago, when I originally thought up the *two challenge system I attributed one to the manager and one to the capt as both have different PoV and when if they get they challenges wrong the game reverts back to the ref's full decision making.

At first posters said what if the challenges are used frivolously for time wasting (hilarious in its outlook when we see what happens on the pitch!)? My response was 'why waste your challenge when something could happen in the game?' and the question was quelled.

In the end, the point being any initial abuse would be quickly over and the game would run properly with less stoppages because, at the moment, VAR officials themselves choose to look at things themselves which can cause further delays.

 

[Bigga]

If the refs had to explain how holding Haaland isn't a penalty than the holding might stop. To get a ref to stand in front of the camera and explain would make the refs look more bent than ever.
It would put pressure on them to award the penalty and ref to the rules.

At the moment the refs, linesman and var can all ignore the rules and no one is allowed to ask them why

And that's the other side to what I said years ago; that refs would be held to account with a challenge system. It would put PiGMoL under pressure to train their refs to clamp down to things quicker and award pens for unsportsmanlike conduct.

 

[Gordyola]

This is a very good post about the situation and you are right; there's no going back. There's too much money invested into the system and far too much club investment hanging on decisions being determined in the right way.

Years ago, when I originally thought up the *two challenge system I attributed one to the manager and one to the capt as both have different PoV and when if they get they challenges wrong the game reverts back to the ref's full decision making.

At first posters said what if the challenges are used frivolously for time wasting (hilarious in its outlook when we see what happens on the pitch!)? My response was 'why waste your challenge when something could happen in the game?' and the question was quelled.

In the end, the point being any initial abuse would be quickly over and the game would run properly with less stoppages because, at the moment, VAR officials themselves choose to look at things themselves which can cause further delays.

Team is 1:0 up but under pressure from the opposition, their players pretend they have cramp, an opponent or team mate gives them treatment, they don't have to leave the field of play. They obviously are using all the "game management" tricks, some managers get their GK to fake injury again he stays on post treatment

They still have their challenges left, as its late in the game they use them, it wouldn't be wasted, in fact its a useful tool to stem the momentum of the opposition pressure.

VAR looks at things that are in their remit they don't pick and choose. They see their mate on the pitch make clear and obvious errors but it's not in their remit to flag up. A FK is awarded that should have been to the opposition, it leads to a goal but in a different phase of play so it can't be looked at. A corner is awarded that should have been a GK a goal results

Under your system the team may appeal the FK awarded, it's their second and last appeal but the VAR review results in them backing their mate on the pitch, all decisions are subjective after all.

There are lots of minor tweaks to football that could improve things no end, introducing a challenge system isn't one of them as its got too many flaws, it would very quickly become indispute

 

[give it to gordon]

And that's the other side to what I said years ago; that refs would be held to account with a challenge system. It would put PiGMoL under pressure to train their refs to clamp down to things quicker and award pens for unsportsmanlike conduct.

Exactly.
As a paying customer I don't think it's asking to much to have the ref, linesman and var explained their decision.
My understanding of football is that holding is a foul and a free kick. Haaland was more holding to be honest it was wrestling.
All I want to know is why it was missed so it can't happen again. If it was seen for the officials to explain why it wasnt holding or a foul.

I don't think that is to much to ask. It's now Friday and I still don't have a clue how the officials reach their verdict over a clear foul which should have lead to a penalty kick.
With out var it could be missed by the on field officials, in this case that would be hard to believe. How did var miss it?

The fact that us fans are treated with contempt really pisses me off. I saw a clear penalty, everyone in the world saw it apart from the ref, linesman and var. Why can't they explained how they missed it ?

 

[Gordyola]

If the refs had to explain how holding Haaland isn't a penalty than the holding might stop. To get a ref to stand in front of the camera and explain would make the refs look more bent than ever.
It would put pressure on them to award the penalty and ref to the rules.

At the moment the refs, linesman and var can all ignore the rules and no one is allowed to ask them why

It is a clear as mud that the way the law is interpreted for "handling" at corners is different than anywhere else on the pitch. The ref will have a token discussion with the offenders, they see both defender and attacker as offender. I guess they see it as six of one and half dozen of the other. When the attacker ends up going to ground they dismiss it as he is tying to get a penalty. They aren't ignoring the laws they are following the instruction that is laid out by PGMOL as to how to deal with it Rightly or wrongly

 

[Bigga]

Team is 1:0 up but under pressure from the opposition, their players pretend they have cramp, an opponent or team mate gives them treatment, they don't have to leave the field of play. They obviously are using all the "game management" tricks, some managers get their GK to fake injury again he stays on post treatment

They still have their challenges left, as its late in the game they use them, it wouldn't be wasted, in fact its a useful tool to stem the momentum of the opposition pressure.

VAR looks at things that are in their remit they don't pick and choose. They see their mate on the pitch make clear and obvious errors but it's not in their remit to flag up. A FK is awarded that should have been to the opposition, it leads to a goal but in a different phase of play so it can't be looked at. A corner is awarded that should have been a GK a goal results

Under your system the team may appeal the FK awarded, it's their second and last appeal but the VAR review results in them backing their mate on the pitch, all decisions are subjective after all.

There are lots of minor tweaks to football that could improve things no end, introducing a challenge system isn't one of them as its got too many flaws, it would very quickly become indispute

Okay, tell me a time where no incidents happen on the pitch where we get to the nd of a game and things could be utilised? I've heard this argument before and it's just not based on real aspects of modern football. I mean, how long is cramp? How many times can a keeper go down before being forced to swap out the keeper?

So what if a challenge is used at the end of a game? This could be amended to weed this out as time goes on. By your own logic has the game flowed or not, which is what you wanted? 'Challenge' is a tweak. Refs talking on the pitch or after the game is a tweak I would add.

Accountability is the result we, as fans, want when it comes to decisions.

 

[Gordyola]

Okay, tell me a time where no incidents happen on the pitch where we get to the nd of a game and things could be utilised? I've heard this argument before and it's just not based on real aspects of modern football. I mean, how long is cramp? How many times can a keeper go down before being forced to swap out the keeper?

So what if a challenge is used at the end of a game? This could be amended to weed this out as time goes on. By your own logic has the game flowed or not, which is what you wanted? 'Challenge' is a tweak. Refs talking on the pitch or after the game is a tweak I would add.

Accountability is the result we, as fans, want when it comes to decisions.

time where no incidents happen on the pitch where we get to the nd of a game and things could be utilised?
The derby on Sunday Wolves at home Saints at home just a few examples there will be lots more
I mean, how long is cramp?
Its not the time its the breaking up the momentum
How many times can a keeper go down before being forced to swap out the keeper?
As often as they want they can't be forced Missing the point again its used to stop momentum and allow a time out
This could be amended to weed this out as time goes on
How?
Challenge' is a tweak
Its more than a "tweak"
Refs talking on the pitch or after the game is a tweak
This would have to be approved by IFAB and is much more than a "tweak" The refs shouldn't be put under pressure by the media to explain their decisions what would be the benefit of this?

 

[Bluesince1979]

The trouble with ditching VAR is that every single fuckin microscopic decision is still dissected by MOTD and managers etc.

Rather than ditch VAR , i would keep it for black/white decisions only.

Ball in/out
Offsides (once they have the tech bang on, which it isnt now).
Foul in/out of area.

Every other subjective decisions leave to the ref.
Trouble with VAR l getting involved in what is/isnt a foul is you just have more incompetent's making mistakes

 

[Bigga]

time where no incidents happen on the pitch where we get to the nd of a game and things could be utilised?
The derby on Sunday Wolves at home Saints at home just a few examples there will be lots more
I mean, how long is cramp?
Its not the time its the breaking up the momentum
How many times can a keeper go down before being forced to swap out the keeper?
As often as they want they can't be forced Missing the point again its used to stop momentum and allow a time out
This could be amended to weed this out as time goes on
How?
Challenge' is a tweak
Its more than a "tweak"
Refs talking on the pitch or after the game is a tweak
This would have to be approved by IFAB and is much more than a "tweak" The refs shouldn't be put under pressure by the media to explain their decisions what would be the benefit of this?

It's a choice to use a challenge. You don't have to. Same as in tennis.

Pointless speaking about 'breaking up momentum', it happens now!

Yes, the keeper situation is my point about breaking momentum happening now!

New rules are always tweaked looking at pros and cons. This argument is a non-starter.

'Challenge" is a tweak to the unofficial query on the pitch to make official!!

In rugby, refs explain decisions. Are they given pressure afterwards? No, not really as they're explaining reasoning on the pitch or after.

 

[Gordyola]

It's a choice to use a challenge. You don't have to. Same as in tennis.

Pointless speaking about 'breaking up momentum', it happens now!

Yes, the keeper situation is my point about breaking momentum happening now!

New rules are always tweaked looking at pros and cons. This argument is a non-starter.

'Challenge" is a tweak to the unofficial query on the pitch to make official!!

In rugby, refs explain decisions. Are they given pressure afterwards? No, not really as they're explaining reasoning on the pitch or after.

Of course its not pointless it would be another tool to do so, should be looking at reducing not adding
Make a player receiving cramp treatment leave FoP regardless of who administrated treatment
Head injuries, used as a means to stop the game, should mean a 10minute concussion break with a temp sub if desired pending upon diagnosis
What is the unofficial query? you mean players speaking to the ref? Surely it would have to be a more robust process than that?
Rugby is not comparable to football as its a minority sport v the biggest global sport Yes the ref should be missed up to say what a decision is but not justifying it ir being interviewed post match

 

[Bigga]

Of course its not pointless it would be another tool to do so, should be looking at reducing not adding
Make a player receiving cramp treatment leave FoP regardless of who administrated treatment
Head injuries, used as a means to stop the game, should mean a 10minute concussion break with a temp sub if desired pending upon diagnosis
What is the unofficial query? you mean players speaking to the ref? Surely it would have to be a more robust process than that?
Rugby is not comparable to football as its a minority sport v the biggest global sport Yes the ref should be missed up to say what a decision is but not justifying it ir being interviewed post match

Okay, so points of agreement as to where the game is slowed down, it could be looked at. Cramp should moved off the pitch? Agreed.

I don't see any player/ manager using head injury 'to stop a game'. As it stands, players are made to go off the pitch depending on type of injury, possibly causing them to sub or leave the team exposed. Not really sure about genius tactic of that move?!

As for rugby not being "comparable", it doesn't have to be or nobody would try anything innovative anywhere for anything. It's about trying to solve unfair actions and issues on the pitch, is it not?

Personally, I want to be represented on the pitch when some dirty oppo is clearly cheating, and that includes the ref, I want my capt to speak up for me about it.

 

[stonerblue]

The trouble with ditching VAR is that every single fuckin microscopic decision is still dissected by MOTD and managers etc.

Rather than ditch VAR , i would keep it for black/white decisions only.

Ball in/out
Offsides (once they have the tech bang on, which it isnt now).
Foul in/out of area.

Every other subjective decisions leave to the ref.
Trouble with VAR l getting involved in what is/isnt a foul is you just have more incompetent's making mistakes

That's wh it came in in the first place thanks to ski spports

 

[Gordyola]

I don't see any player/ manager using head injury 'to stop a game'. As it stands, players are made to go off the pitch depending on type of injury, possibly causing them to sub or leave the team exposed. Not really sure about genius tactic of that move?!

It happens a lot, eg v Palace Hughes went down in centre circle holding his head City were gaining momentum, ref stopped the game he made a remarkable recovery Absolute despicable to do that considering the implications of suck an injury merits a retrospective red card

 

[Bigga]

It happens a lot, eg v Palace Hughes went down in centre circle holding his head City were gaining momentum, ref stopped the game he made a remarkable recovery Absolute despicable to do that considering the implications of suck an injury merits a retrospective red card

But I agree with you that such blatant unsportsmanlike conduct should be punished. In any teething problems, such actions should be looked at and weeded out. If a player wants a retro red or club gets fined for sanctioning such actions, it would soon stop.

Then we can get on with the 'challenge' system.

Clearly, fringe issues can be rectified, can't they? Honestly, you're not making an impact full argument, but it's been an interesting discussion for me.

 

[Gordyola]

But I agree with you that such blatant unsportsmanlike conduct should be punished. In any teething problems, such actions should be looked at and weeded out. If a player wants a retro red or club gets fined for sanctioning such actions, it would soon stop.

Then we can get on with the 'challenge' system.

Clearly, fringe issues can be rectified, can't they? Honestly, you're not making an impact full argument, but it's been an interesting discussion for me.

I’m not making an impact full argument :)

I haven’t seen an explanation of how this challenge system would work except it would be the captain asking the ref, won’t work for numerous reasons
No explanation of how frivolous ones would be prevented etc

If we have to stick with VAR then my idea,this before it was even introduced, was to have 3 “judges”
Who would watch a match separately and any contentious incident would be looked at in real time, they would have 2 minutes to make a decision, then would hit a button to signal their verdict, the majority would stand and communicated to the ref who would then take the on-field action
Offsides? these would stay with Lino unless the off-field team spotted a very clear and obvious error, it would be clear by the naked eye without replay again communicated to the ref

To repeat get rid and to add an appeals process would make an already bad system much worse

 

[Bigga]

I’m not making an impact full argument :)

I haven’t seen an explanation of how this challenge system would work except it would be the captain asking the ref, won’t work for numerous reasons
No explanation of how frivolous ones would be prevented etc

If we have to stick with VAR then my idea,this before it was even introduced, was to have 3 “judges”
Who would watch a match separately and any contentious incident would be looked at in real time, they would have 2 minutes to make a decision, then would hit a button to signal their verdict, the majority would stand and communicated to the ref who would then take the on-field action
Offsides? these would stay with Lino unless the off-field team spotted a very clear and obvious error, it would be clear by the naked eye without replay again communicated to the ref

To repeat get rid and to add an appeals process would make an already bad system much worse

Hmm...

So, how would you know the 'judges' have no biases in doing their job? We know there are biased refs, so why not judges? Will the judges explain their decision making process? Will a dissenting judge or two get to explain why they chose to oppose? Do journos get to interview them?

To me, your system is far less immersive. It would mean we can't voice our own contention to decisions which is a natural part of the game that is football. In rugby, the self discipline is super high, so it would work there.

As I've said, I prefer representation on the pitch.