VAR - 2020/21

[dubblue]

It doesn’t matter if VAR is 99% accurate. Taking away the spontaneity of a goal celebration makes the game so much poorer, and for that reason alone it should be scrapped.

 

[johnnytapia]

It doesn’t matter if VAR is 99% accurate. Taking away the spontaneity of a goal celebration makes the game so much poorer, and for that reason alone it should be scrapped.

Amen.

 

[Blue Mist]

We were informed that it would help spot off the ball incidents, hell it can't even spot on the ball ones as West Ham will testify. Violent conduct!!!! The opposition player should have been done for acting like a silly girl, but var said there was a clenched fist!!!!!

 

[Stiff Little Wingers]

It doesn’t matter if VAR is 99% accurate. Taking away the spontaneity of a goal celebration makes the game so much poorer, and for that reason alone it should be scrapped.

I'm finding that a goal scored is now a mixture of emotions.
Let's take a goal against us (don't have many these days) but watching a game especially live then it is a 4 stage reaction all happening within about 5 seconds.
1. Oh shit
2. Is the flag up?
3. Has the ref seen something?
4. If no to 2 and 3 then oh shit
5. Possibly also, you're shit Kit Symons
6. If 3 or 4 then Oh great goal disallowed but the point is it all happens within 5-10 seconds in virtually all cases.
7. If ref decided to consult linesman then it is quite exciting and a talking point simply because it is so RARE and relatively quick - 30 seconds.

Now if a goal is scored against us it's oh shit to begin with as the natural reaction. Note the opposing fans reaction which of course is the direct opposite (unless Stuart Pearce is in charge and you're thinking " what the fuck has just happened? Did Corradi score just then?")Then what happens can turn into something of a blind date in that once you can see there's no problem with the goal then it's similar to seeing your date turn up and think " I've got a right Ike Immel here". If however the replay shows there's something wrong with the goal then you get the rising excitement that the blind date looks very much like Holly Willoughby and then after the umpteenth replay (and up to 3 bloody minutes) and it's disallowed, Holly has sat at your table and asked with a cheeky smile if we should skip the starter and just get on with the meat and 2 veg. If however, after umpteen replays the corrupt twats give the goal/pen anyway then it's like Holly has made an excuse and left and in gallops Ike asking have I seen his glasses. "Yes Ike you left them on the maine Rd goalpost when you just stood and watched those goals go in mate".
Even though it is a system that takes the spontaneity out of football, I can't help feeling dirty but feeling pleased when I see a goal disallowed against us after VAR review because it feels like natural justice.

So a goal against can be a mixture of despair and hope and then despair again.
When we score a goal despite it being a different side to the same coin, it's really a killer. Think back when we could watch live with all that pent up tension and energy and emotion and the incredible joy/relief etc when the ball goes in and sometimes whilst you're celebrating you can see no flag etc and it's given within 5 seconds and you can then do the Poznan etc.
That's been killed from the game because what happens now is similar to a goal against (see above but in reverse).
1. You think "get in there" but a split second later you're thinking "oh fuck they're going to disallow it.
2. Then you go through the whole VAR process.
Just apply that to the Aguero goal, the Dickov goal as just 2 of the most extreme examples- those legendary moments in time could never have become the stuff of legend.
I won't go into what is clearly the evil bedfellows of corruption and incompetence from PIGMOL.
The only way I could support VAR is with many of the reforms suggested by others - 20 second review max started in the attacking phase, open comms and a consistent set of rules

 

[greasedupdeafguy]

The problem really is the implementation and not the concept.

I was thinking about this watching the Wales v Ireland 6 Nations game on Sunday.

Peter O'Mahoney went into a ruck and hit a Welsh prop sitting on the floor. Some players complain to the referee.

The first thing that happens is Wayne Barnes the referee says "I saw it as a fair clean out, carry on playing, it's getting checked". The game carries on until the ball goes dead. We (the TV audience) hear the TMO say "Check Check. Foul play Green number 6 at the ruck".

So Wayne Barnes stops, looks up at the big screen and sees the replays.

Then, with the TV audience hearing every word, he describes what he sees, and goes through the decision making process. So he says (I'm paraphrasing) "There's no attempt to bind with the arms, so it's an illegal hit to the ruck (This makes it a penalty). He extends his elbow in an almost chicken wing motion, so it's deliberate contact (this makes it a yellow), the contact is with the head, so it's a red card. It was at high speed, out of control and the player didn't change head height as he was on the floor. So there are no mitigating factors to bring it down to a yellow, the decision is a red card. Do you see anything differently?"

Everything was so clear. So precise. He took the audience and the players who can hear him as they're gathered round, through every step of the decision tree, including considering the options that would reduce the punishment.

And as a result, no one can argue with the decision. There's no guesswork.


Football could learn so much from TMO's in rugby and other sports, but they simply refuse to learn from people who've made mistakes and perfected a system over 20 years.

This didn't use to be the case in rugby, but over the years they've worked out a system where everything goes better - from the reaction of the players sent off, the players left on the pitch, to post-match, to coaches comments afterwards - if you just really clearly talk through the decision out loud and the audience hears it.

Some of the gripes around VAR are definitely based around its concept, the spontaneity of the goal celebration for example has definitely been diminished and I'm not sure how this can be altered its just a part of football now. On the other hand, the offside part of the debate where players are getting goals ruled out for millimeters is down more to implementation issues and can possibly be worked on.

Personally I wouldn't like to see refs mic'd up, it would mean the game becoming even more about them which I want to avoid. I get fed up of listening Walton after a few seconds. Also not sure how that would improve things in terms of communication and transparency for actual match goers?

I think the tempo of rugby is more stop start so it suits video technology. Same with American Sports or Tennis where the ball is either in or out. Football on the other hand is pretty unique in that it is so free flowing which creates several problems for VAR. When does a phase of play end and another one start, remember that offside goal against Porto? And then you get into some ridiculous scenarios of phantom play such as in our 2-0 loss to Spurs last season play must have gone for a good few minutes before a penalty was given. Similar thing happened yesterday in the Sheffield United vs Chelsea game. It all feels very alien to football. Even worse when you are actually at the ground and not having a clue what is going on.

 

[Blueknows]

We were informed that it would help spot off the ball incidents, hell it can't even spot on the ball ones as West Ham will testify. Violent conduct!!!! The opposition player should have been done for acting like a silly girl, but var said there was a clenched fist!!!!!

And the explanation from the commentary team as that was happening ? " Mitrovic is trying to explain to the ref that it wasnt a sending off" I thought " If he hadnt gone down holding his face like hed been shot in the first place maybe it wouldnt have even been an issue" the problem we have now with var is we have numerous players cheating the system by going down holding their faces without being touched , diving as soon as they get into the box and screaming with every tackle

 

[Blue Mist]

And the explanation from the commentary team as that was happening ? " Mitrovic is trying to explain to the ref that it wasnt a sending off" I thought " If he hadnt gone down holding his face like hed been shot in the first place maybe it wouldnt have even been an issue" the problem we have now with var is we have numerous players cheating the system by going down holding their faces without being touched , diving as soon as they get into the box and screaming with every tackle

I agree totally about players holding their faces feigning injury but we have a var screen. The idiot went and looked at it and still made the wrong decision. I could accept var a little bit more if he had gone back and booked the defender for simulation but he didnt. I assume the var controller told him it was violent conduct and therefore he had to go. How can he make two huge mistakes in one week with the help of the technology ?
and now instead of being punished he asks for a week off !!

 

[The Future’s Blue!]

Mike Dean + Mason got it very wrong, they had VAR with clear replays and still got it wrong. that doesn't mean the system needs replacing, it means the officials do.

Get the defensive strike in early ;-)

 

[The Future’s Blue!]

The problem really is the implementation and not the concept.

I was thinking about this watching the Wales v Ireland 6 Nations game on Sunday.

Peter O'Mahoney went into a ruck and hit a Welsh prop sitting on the floor. Some players complain to the referee.

The first thing that happens is Wayne Barnes the referee says "I saw it as a fair clean out, carry on playing, it's getting checked". The game carries on until the ball goes dead. We (the TV audience) hear the TMO say "Check Check. Foul play Green number 6 at the ruck".

So Wayne Barnes stops, looks up at the big screen and sees the replays.

Then, with the TV audience hearing every word, he describes what he sees, and goes through the decision making process. So he says (I'm paraphrasing) "There's no attempt to bind with the arms, so it's an illegal hit to the ruck (This makes it a penalty). He extends his elbow in an almost chicken wing motion, so it's deliberate contact (this makes it a yellow), the contact is with the head, so it's a red card. It was at high speed, out of control and the player didn't change head height as he was on the floor. So there are no mitigating factors to bring it down to a yellow, the decision is a red card. Do you see anything differently?"

Everything was so clear. So precise. He took the audience and the players who can hear him as they're gathered round, through every step of the decision tree, including considering the options that would reduce the punishment.

And as a result, no one can argue with the decision. There's no guesswork.


Football could learn so much from TMO's in rugby and other sports, but they simply refuse to learn from people who've made mistakes and perfected a system over 20 years.

This didn't use to be the case in rugby, but over the years they've worked out a system where everything goes better - from the reaction of the players sent off, the players left on the pitch, to post-match, to coaches comments afterwards - if you just really clearly talk through the decision out loud and the audience hears it.

Nice, mate, but it does seem that football officials aren‘t in the same understand/refine process as they did in rugby, they have decided that they have the perfect system and are very stubborn to change. The question is, why?

The noticeable thing is that it seems to give certain teams an advantage, whether you see that as corrupt, bias or just pressure exuded due to the nature of the club involved.

My issue is that the way VAR is being used is to benefit certain clubs rather than get the right decision. As somebody else pointed out, when it’s obvious something was called wrong there is a quick excuse that it wasn’t clear and obvious, even though it was.

VAR has just extended the suspicion with fans and, with the current operating system by PGMOL, this will not change until it is open and transparent.

 

[aguero93:20]

Nice, mate, but it does seem that football officials aren‘t in the same understand/refine process as they did in rugby, they have decided that they have the perfect system and are very stubborn to change. The question is, why?

A few rare exceptions apart, rugby referees are far more honest and far more respected. Plus, you argue with the referee you're getting ten minutes to cool down at best. Different culture. Plus, the likes of the dippers fans and their conspiracy theories and their player's cheating and play acting wouldn't be tolerated.