VAR - 2020/21

Status
Not open for further replies.
BlueHammer85 said:
1. what childish posts have i started ? I think some are annoyed as I sway more in having VAR than completely scrapping it. I genuinely try to be as balanced as possible and state many times the negatives of VAR. My posting style is something I will try and work on, as I’m interested in the debate of VAR rather than looking for fights on here. Much better things to do.
however, if simply having the view of being more in VAR than scrapping it makes me a ‘cheerleader for VAR’ ‘responsible for killing the game’ and a ‘c*nt’ I will rightly tell them to fuck off.

2. ‘Peddled the lie that vast majority want it ‘

is it a lie ?

The YouGov Poll last year on VAR gave :

  • 8 per cent want to keep using VAR as it is used now.
  • 74 per cent say keep using VAR, but change the ways it is used.
  • 15 per cent want to stop using VAR entirely

(I’m in the 74% camp)
Click to expand...
When do you reckon it’s going to be improved @BlueHammer85 ?

asking as from the same poll 63% of respondents think VAR is making the game less enjoyable (I’m in the 63%).

who is going to step up and show the required leadership?
 
Pingu the Penguin said:
When do you reckon it’s going to be improved @BlueHammer85 ?

asking as from the same poll 63% of respondents think VAR is making the game less enjoyable (I’m in the 63%).

who is going to step up and show the required leadership?
Click to expand...

I think it will always look at ways to improve and improve the transparency, that’s the advantage with this system.

the old way of reffing couldn’t be improved. If there view was a penalty. They give a penalty.

where as now they can see replay of different angles and that’s a major help. If they still get it wrong, like they have done. Then it’s on the refs and highlights how bad they are.
 
BlueHammer85 said:
I think it will always look at ways to improve and improve the transparency, that’s the advantage with this system.

the old way of reffing couldn’t be improved. If there view was a penalty. They give a penalty.

where as now they can see replay of different angles and that’s a major help. If they still get it wrong, like they have done. Then it’s on the refs and highlights how bad they are.
Click to expand...
They should probably stop the lines and offsides right now. It’s basically lying to the paying public. VAR with transparency comms exists too.

I wonder how many years of a product spoiling the enjoyment of games will be allowed to continue unreformed
 
The Future’s Blue! said:
Correct, the technology isn’t the problem.
Click to expand...
Totally agree, Rashfords was not a penalty it was a dive - minimal impact, yet the Newcastle one, who should have been a sending off and a pen, nothing given. The technology other than for offsides is working well, it’s the inept and dare I say corrupt implementation that is the issue. UEFA / FIFA need to take full control and implement the same system across all leagues and hold pigmol responsible for any incorrect usage / decisions. Never going to happen though
 
There is a simple solution. Teach the laws of the game to 25 people who have no link to professional football or Pigmol. Teach them how to use the technology and pay them a decent wage. Sit them in a studio that is only linked to the referee and the stadium (NOT sky/ bt etc) and finally tell them they have the final say on decisions which they explain to the crowd.
 
Blue Mist said:
Again you are not 'listening'.
I thought VAR was there 'to correct clear and obvious errors'. If you have to view something for 2 minutes, in slow motion using 4 different camera angles then the decision cannot be a clear and obvious mistake.
VAR is not technically good enough to judge offsides by millimetres and it should not be used. Someone watching a TV monitor could see the obvious offside that the linesman missed (Milner by 2 yards) or the non penalty (Sterling when it clearly hit his back)
The very fact thst VAR has been going for 2 years and we are still posting in this thread shows it and the officials are not fit for purpose.
Click to expand...

There is a difference between judgment calls and line decisions. With line decisions you are always going to get calls so close that with the naked eye you would be guessing. John Stones cleared one off the line that was millimetres from being a goal, but was correctly judged not to be a goal using goal line technology. There can’t really be any argument about using technology in that situation in my view.

I remember a few years ago the offside rule was that there had to be ‘daylight’ between the attacker and the last defender. That would still produce cases where a player is on or offside by millimetres. But it’s better to get more calls right by using technology than it is to leave more to the officials guessing.

With subjective calls, like you say there is a strong argument for reserving the use of VAR for really outrageous cases, like the Henry handball against France. What that means, though, is you are back to square one because a penalty is far more likely to be given at the swamp if the team claiming the penalty plays in red. So you are swapping one set of subjective decisions for another.

To my mind the biggest problem with VAR is the lack of transparency. What’s the problem with hearing the discussion between the VAR official and the ref? Last year if we had heard the discussion between Oliver and the VAR team when TAA hand balled it and they went up the other end and scored that might have avoided a lot of suspicion.

There is no perfect solution but hearing the discussion would at least explain why certain decisions are given.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.