You think there are peer-fucking-reviewed studies done on a whether fans want VAR or not in Association Football? Peer-reviewed? By who? You think Professors contributing to things like the Journal of Medical Sciences will be wasting their time on the vox-pop opinions of thick spectators of some entertainment business?
And why you’re going on about whether fans want VAR or not, I have no idea. My point is that video technology in football is not the issue, it’s the standard officiating that’s the problem. My minor point is that VAR has helped in getting more decisions right since it came in but will still be massively flawed because of the appalling standard of the officials. Any passing comment I’ve had on the opinions of fans are not important to those points.
And you’re making yourself look a bit stupid now hanging on this point.
I’ve already explained to you that line you thought was important from that article (which wasn’t said by SKY or IFAB / FIFA, it was said by the PL… yet again showing your appalling comprehension skills so how you’d manage with ‘peer-reviewed’ studies, I have no idea) was nothing to do with the main point of the article and was nothing to do with the point I was making.
I think this was your first post in the chain?:
"Before VAR came in, 82% of decisions made by officials were correct.
Since VAR has been introduced, 96% of decisions made have been correct.
It was always needed but we need to entice and train a better talent pool of officials because the current crop and depth of talent aren’t/isn’t good enough.
The technology itself is fine."
Leaving aside the paradox in saying the results are much better but the people operating it aren't good enough, I, for one, haven't seen anything that supports that improvement in correctness other than by quoting the organisations that are responsible for operating the thing in the first place.
Before I believe that stuff, I would like to see the methodology explained (what does correct decision even mean: what is a correct decision? who determines correctness? on what basis? which incidents were determined to be correct? which weren't?) and the detailed analysis published so they can be analysed by third parties and the results assessed critically.
It just isn't good enough to say, "the PL says ....", "PGMOL says ....", "IFAB says ....", or "independent panel" when in reality it's five washed up ex-players and referees on a PL financed gravy train. They aren't KCs with any professional integrity to call upon.
So, no, I won't believe those statistics until people who are smarter than me have reviewed and assessed them
independently.
As for the quality of VAR officials, I think it's a hopeless situation for them. They have my sympathy. The corrupt bastards. They are expected to apply rules that are largely subjective to the letter and consistently, without the excuse referees used to have that they are only human and have to make decisions instantly. It just isn't possible. And each time they get a decision wrong, they have fucked a game up.
You couldn't pay me to do it.
yougov.co.uk