VAR Discussion Thread - 2023/24 | PL clubs to vote on whether to scrap VAR (pg413)

[tommybooth]

The toe nail offside is complete bollocks. That needs sorting first.

 

[BlueHammer85]

should of taken baby steps from the start.

VAR only for offsides next season. nothing else. once they pretty much have it figured. then they bring in VAR for handballs etc. 1 season at a time. very slow implementation.

 

[inchy14]

VAR needs to stay but like every other fucking sport, it needs to be transparent and the ref needs to be shown every close incident on the big screen.

Is the correct answer. This keeping it to themselves only fuels any conspiracies .

 

[SWP's back]

The toe nail offside is complete bollocks. That needs sorting first.

That needs a change in the law. Fuck all to do with VAR and VAR, like it or loathe it, has far fewer blatant wrong offside calls than before. I remember Kane being allowed to score against us when he was about 4 yards offside.

 

[stonerblue]

That wasn’t a technology problem, it was a referee problem. Those referees are still going to exist with or without VAR.

So why didn't the tech put it right?

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

The footballing authorities are too far down the rabbit hole with the companies involved with VAR. Too much money swilling around with various noses in the trough. Even if there is a move to get rid of it, I can see it being removed for a short period closely followed by a series of catastrophic 'errors' leading to a stream of people begging for its return.

 

[Andy TheCatalyst Morrison]

Only if you are on the "offside is a matter of fact", "the technology is good enough", "of course he is offside, his knee is in front of the last defender's heel" group of fans.

Personally, I don't like this obsession for accuracy for several reasons: firstly, it's an accuracy that no human can judge, so what's the point? And how many beautiful and important goals have been ruled out for super-marginal offside?; secondly, it is destroying the art of playing on/offside by players who really can't control movements to the degree to which they are being judged; thirdly, it goes against the original idea of gaining an advantage - there is no advantage gained by being where you are in a running movement; fourthly, the technology isn't accurate enough even, imho, with SAOT; fifthly, the offside laws and interpretations have been bastardised to the point hardly anyone can understand them, all for VAR.

Use VAR for offsides if you have to, but just for clear and obvious offside errors. Go with the on-field decisions unless it is literally feet (distance not body part) offside. The only one I can think of this season was the Spurs/Liverpool offside and I am not even sure about that one. No linesman is looking at a defender's feet.

All imho, of course, and I am sure there are more if you give me a minute.

100% agree about offsides. People seem to have forgotten the purpose of the law. Going back to that Coventry offside against the rags - yeah, the Coventry players toenail might have been off, but he was standing still while the defender was running back to goal. What possible advantage has he gained? Ridiculous to be ruling goals like that out.

Same with an attacker’s knee being ahead of the last defender’s foot. Again , no advantage gained in that situation.

 

[Pell]

But as bad as those moments were pre-VAR, we still have moments which are that glaringly awful even with VAR. The goal not given to Sheffield United against Villa, the Arsenal-Brentford fiasco, all the nonsense handballs given in the Champions League, the Spurs-Liverpool non-offside, all the injuries that have come after obvious offsides haven't been called, countless other incidents in other leagues that we don't hear about every weekend. VAR wasn't a consequence of bad refereeing, it was a consequence of Sky being able to slow down replays and analyse them in detail that we'd never seen before. It then suited Sky to turn everything into a conspiracy or a soap opera plotline, so it got to the point where people lost the ability to just accept mistakes and move on. Everything suddenly required a "response", "something must be done about this", etc. It became an ethical matter to get refereeing decisions right. Instead of just accepting that sometimes it doesn't go your way, managers and club officials got increasingly bitter and angry about every little mistake and governing bodies ushered in VAR without asking match-going fans, without asking players, etc. VAR's for people in suits, people who watch on TV hundreds of miles away, and people like them lot at AFTV.

VAR has proved that football and refereeing are both incapable of finding the absolute truth that everyone's after. Offsides are offsides, and goals are goals, so I'm in favour of semi-automated technology being used to work out binary things like those. But fouls and handballs and throw-ins and that kind of stuff, it's pretty obvious that looking at incidents five and six times, stopping the game, getting the lads at Stockley Park replaying the footage, it hasn't made anything better or easier. Because it's all subjective. Look at the Doku thing with Mac Allister against Liverpool earlier this season - if that gets given as a foul you can sort of see why, if it doesn't get given (which it didn't) you can also sort of see why. As you've said already, VAR has proved that football is full of stuff that's not 100% clear either way and it would be better to try and understand the referee's decision instead of accusing them of conspiracies and bribery and whatever else. If referees want to use the screens to have a second look at incidents in the future, then fine, but that should be their call. VAR, and especially Stockley Park, has made the experience of football worse and it hasn't improved refereeing enough to justify what football has lost. Turns out humans are just humans, no matter how much technology we use to get ourselves closer to playing God. If, as you've said, everyone can have a different opinion on a foul then what's the point of VAR wasting so much time to reach the same results?

All in favour of keeping goalline technology and bringing in semi-automated offsides (although I think the offside rule should be changed), and maybe things like off-the-ball incidents should be kept under someone else's jurisdiction, but I'm absolutely in favour of dumping VAR except for those three things. Sometimes referees just get it wrong regardless of whether they look at things once or 10 times. I'd rather live in a world where referees get 8/10 decisions correct and I can still celebrate goals, and games actually finish on time, instead of living in a world where referees get 9/10 decisions right but I can't properly celebrate goals and games regularly go beyond 100 minutes. It's not worth it.

I agree that the big goal delays need to be sorted out, and there is no perfect solution out there. The subjective calls like fouls and handballs should be kept with the referee and decided at his discretion without interference from an outside body (with possible intervention if it really is blatant and he's missed it, like Henry's handball vs Ireland, or Maradona THoG, when there is no debate to be had). There can be room for VAR, as long as it doesn't undermine the referee. Football is probably the hardest game to officiate, and referee's need all the help they can get, especially with so many dropping out because of abuse.

 

[flook]

The original remit for VAR was to correct clear and obvious errors on specific issues (red card decisions, fouls leading to goals, offsides etc) with the emphasis being on clear and obvious. This was watered down immediately with the C&O being removed from the offside remit,and it has been eroded ever since which, along with constantly shifting rules on handball, means the VAR delivered bares little resemblance to the VAR we were sold.

I'm of the opinion that a return to its original remit of C&O errors only, together with clear transparency on decisions, is the way to get the best out of the tech. The semi-auto offside looks like a small step in the right direction as it will (should) at the very least be consistent and can be available for broadcast in the ground. The latter point being important

 

[Nellies left peg]

So why didn't the tech put it right?

Because it’s the dickheads using the technology that’s the problem. The same incompetent twats on VAR that ref the games and protect their mates

 

[city2]

The offside for me should be clear and obvious to the naked eye that’s what you call a advantage not a toe,knee,or elbow.maybe all players should be bald cos the way it’s going a strand of hair for a headed goal will be penalised soon.

 

[Bluemanc100]

I’d be amazed if they scrap it.. It’s currently been weaponised and used as a tool to influence games

 

[cibaman]

The offside for me should be clear and obvious to the naked eye that’s what you call a advantage not a toe,knee,or elbow.maybe all players should be bald cos the way it’s going a strand of hair for a headed goal will be penalised soon.

The problem is that you’ll never get agreement on what is clear and obvious. They’ll spend just as much time as they do now arriving at a decision but instead of the issue being whether it’s a toe nail involved they’ll be arguing about whether it meets the criteria for clear and obvious

 

[Gordyola]

Would it though? The ref and Linesman “missed the goal”. I thought goal line technology was used to determine whether the ball had crossed the line when the referee wasn’t sure.

Goal Line technology has been in place for 10 years has nothing to do with VAR it’s an automated system that creates a 3D image almost instantly and the ref is notified by a wrist mounted device he will normally point at to show that the ball has crossed the line

 

[Gordyola]

The problem is that you’ll never get agreement on what is clear and obvious. They’ll spend just as much time as they do now arriving at a decision but instead of the issue being whether it’s a toe nail involved they’ll be arguing about whether it meets the criteria for clear and obvious

Lino’s gave the decision for over a hundred years and the majority of time they were spot on and as was said previously the naked eye is better than a five minute delay whilst they decide which frame to use and measure with flawed technology if a player’s toe nail is offside

 

[flook]

Lino’s gave the decision for over a hundred years and the majority of time they were spot on and as was said previously the naked eye is better than a five minute delay whilst they decide which frame to use and measure with flawed technology if a player’s toe nail is offside

have you forgotten the outrage and cries of corruption when they got it wrong though?

 

[Pingu the Penguin]

have you forgotten the outrage and cries of corruption when they got it wrong though?

What do you call it when they watch a video and still get it wrong? Ask a scouser!

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

It's not being used for offsides next season anyway. Champions League-style semi-automated offsides being used instead.

Although only ‘after the winter break’, for some reason.
Yet another example of PGMOL exceptionalism…

 

[city2]

Also they know players are offside but the linesman keeps his flag down to let it play out putting players at risk to injuries.

 

[BlueMoonRisin’]

The offside for me should be clear and obvious to the naked eye that’s what you call a advantage not a toe,knee,or elbow.maybe all players should be bald cos the way it’s going a strand of hair for a headed goal will be penalised soon.

It's a good job VAR wasn't being used when Phil Thompson played because he'd have been offside every game with his conk.