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

[SebastianBlue]

That no penalty decision against Arsenal in the Palace match is exactly why VAR is not *just* the tech — it involves the actual VAR official and the referee on the pitch because of the ‘clear and obvious’ threshold.

The referee did not give the penalty which meant VAR could choose not to deem whatever they saw in the replays as a clear and obvious error, thus no penalty.

 

[Stephen230]

That no penalty decision against Arsenal in the Palace match is exactly why VAR is not *just* the tech — it involves the actual VAR official and the referee on the pitch because of the ‘clear and obvious’ threshold.

The referee did not give the penalty which meant VAR could choose not to deem whatever they saw in the replays as a clear and obvious error, thus no penalty.

But isn’t this one of the most regular calls for how fans want VAR to be used ?

I’ve read a thousand times that what fans want is the VAR to be there to correct howlers and not get involved in giving a different subjective view to the subjective view of the referee.

 

[SebastianBlue]

But isn’t this one of the most regular calls for how fans want VAR to be used ?

I’ve read a thousand times that what fans want is the VAR to be there to correct howlers and not get involved in giving a different subjective view to the subjective view of the referee.

I have not indicated that VAR should only be used for howlers, so unless you are attempting to build a straw man argument, I am not sure what this has to do with my comment, which was about how the “clear and obvious” threshold can be manipulated to achieve desired outcomes of contentious incidents.

In fact, I have specifically said that “only correct the really obvious errors” is a demonstratively flawed approach to mitigating anything, as it is inherently subjective and easily manipulated.

Ironically, “clear and obvious” just adds yet another subjective layer, as it is not a threshold based on whether an error has been made, but rather if the error is of a sufficient level to warrant correcting.

It just allows more variance in decision-making, which makes illicit influence easier, not more difficult.

 

[lasereyes]

I have not indicated that VAR should only be used for howlers, so unless you are attempting to build a straw man argument, I am not sure what this has to do with my comment, which was about how the “clear and obvious” threshold can be manipulated to achieve desired outcomes of contentious incidents.

In fact, I have specifically said that “only correct the really obvious errors” is a demonstratively flawed approach to mitigating anything, as it is inherently subjective and easily manipulated.

Ironically, “clear and obvious” just adds yet another subjective layer, as it is not a threshold based on whether an error has been made, but rather if the error is of a sufficient level to warrant correcting.

It just allows more variance in decision-making, which makes illicit influence easier, not more difficult.

Exactly as we saw in the derby last year and at Trafford Toilet last week

 

[Bluesince1979]

That no penalty decision against Arsenal in the Palace match is exactly why VAR is not *just* the tech — it involves the actual VAR official and the referee on the pitch because of the ‘clear and obvious’ threshold.

The referee did not give the penalty which meant VAR could choose not to deem whatever they saw in the replays as a clear and obvious error, thus no penalty.

The biggest cop out the ‘clear and obvious’ bollocks

 

[Bantamgaz]

VAR will never work while you have poor officials running it .............. would it be so difficult to train other teams to run it who.have no connection to these bent bastards ??????How many tears has it been in now ????? And still they are getting it badly wrong ........... either bin it or get folk in who have no hidden agenda to keep certain clubs inn the spotlight

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

Just watching the Villa penalty incident and neither the ref nor his lineman give that. It’s given via the refs ear and at the same time you see the linesman reach for his ear. Play moves on for a few seconds before he strangely reacts to what he is told and points to the spot and the VAR check took literally 2 seconds.

Don’t tell me that people miles away in rooms are not making decisions during games because they are.

I strongly believe this was happening well before VAR.

 

[shozzabluebird]

Here’s a thought…..we are about 3 or 4 years into this VAR experiment and I was wondering….is it not beyond the wit of man or technology for the guys at Pigmol to have started to build a library of video tapes of situations that are similar, such as the fouls BY the goalkeeper on the forward. Then when it happens again they consult their library and say…we gave it a foul then, it’s very similar/ same so we give the same result ! Not rocket science. Another example the Liverpool forward who got fouled on the edge of the box….you look for similar fouls in other games and give the same decision….is that not how to get CONSISTENCY?

 

[Father Paul]

Here’s a thought…..we are about 3 or 4 years into this VAR experiment and I was wondering….is it not beyond the wit of man or technology for the guys at Pigmol to have started to build a library of video tapes of situations that are similar, such as the fouls BY the goalkeeper on the forward. Then when it happens again they consult their library and say…we gave it a foul then, it’s very similar/ same so we give the same result ! Not rocket science. Another example the Liverpool forward who got fouled on the edge of the box….you look for similar fouls in other games and give the same decision….is that not how to get CONSISTENCY?

Not convinced it would be a feasible option but with the use of AI it should be technically possible.

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

Here’s a thought…..we are about 3 or 4 years into this VAR experiment and I was wondering….is it not beyond the wit of man or technology for the guys at Pigmol to have started to build a library of video tapes of situations that are similar, such as the fouls BY the goalkeeper on the forward. Then when it happens again they consult their library and say…we gave it a foul then, it’s very similar/ same so we give the same result ! Not rocket science. Another example the Liverpool forward who got fouled on the edge of the box….you look for similar fouls in other games and give the same decision….is that not how to get CONSISTENCY?

There's no such thing as consistency. Every situation is different. It's judgement in so many cases.

And no one else besides the ref should be making those decisions. But we have the 4 or 5 VAR refs making judgement calls giving a lot of opportunity for bias or influence to creep in.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

VAR will never work while you have poor officials running it .............. would it be so difficult to train other teams to run it who.have no connection to these bent bastards ??????How many tears has it been in now ????? And still they are getting it badly wrong ........... either bin it or get folk in who have no hidden agenda to keep certain clubs inn the spotlight

On the basis of what I've seen in rugby, cricket 'n tennis I am a supporter of the use of video assistance in football, but the system that hasbeen established, 'improved' on the basis of previous shite decisions, twisted, warped and ultimately contradicting itself, is worse than when football was a VAR-free zone.

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

On the basis of what I've seen in rugby, cricket 'n tennis I am a supporter of the use of video assistance in football, but the system that hasbeen established, 'improved' on the basis of previous shite decisions, twisted, warped and ultimately contradicting itself, is worse than when football was a VAR-free zone.

How bad was it? I. Never heard that, just that it's something football could learn from.

And does anyone know why Rugby would be allowed to play live audio but football can't? Seems like a reason they're throwing out there to stop them having to do that.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

How bad was it? I. Never heard that, just that it's something football could learn from.

And does anyone know why Rugby would be allowed to play live audio but football can't? Seems like a reason they're throwing out there to stop them having to do that.

It'll come because it's something like Canute and the tide - yer can sit there and tell it but it'll still come in. Howie can come up with a raft of explanations as to why we don't have audio but none of them square with what obtains in rugby. And whilst yer talking if any player comes over and adds some profanity to the scene they are automatically booked. But I think we all know the reason why we don't have audio. Bring down the last wall that PiGMOL are hiding behind and we might be on the way to a result in a game that actually matches what the crowd has seen!

 

[the-ecstacy-of-eight]

...does anyone know why Rugby would be allowed to play live audio but football can't? Seems like a reason they're throwing out there to stop them having to do that.

It's a FIFA directive across ALL of professional football that the audio must not be transmitted live.

Don't know why (I have my suspicions but I don't know) but that's the way it is, and the way it will be, until FIFA change their ruling.

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

It'll come because it's something like Canute and the tide - yer can sit there and tell it but it'll still come in. Howie can come up with a raft of explanations as to why we don't have audio but none of them square with what obtains in rugby. And whilst yer talking if any player comes over and adds some profanity to the scene they are automatically booked. But I think we all know the reason why we don't have audio. Bring down the last wall that PiGMOL are hiding behind and we might be on the way to a result in a game that actually matches what the crowd has seen!

I'm assuming we don't hear it because its complete chaos in that VAR room.

I don't believe they are conspiring, I just don't think they know what they're doing half the time which allows biases to crop in unnoticed, like the rashford offside last season.

 

[inchy14]

Just watching the Villa penalty incident and neither the ref nor his lineman give that. It’s given via the refs ear and at the same time you see the linesman reach for his ear. Play moves on for a few seconds before he strangely reacts to what he is told and points to the spot and the VAR check took literally 2 seconds.

Don’t tell me that people miles away in rooms are not making decisions during games because they are.

Go back to the none sending off off David luiz for his foul on Aguero at the Etihad, definite movement by the refs hand to his ear as he’s about to give a foul then suddenly allows play to go on. Been happening since that day.

 

[Iassel]

Just watching the Villa penalty incident and neither the ref nor his lineman give that. It’s given via the refs ear and at the same time you see the linesman reach for his ear. Play moves on for a few seconds before he strangely reacts to what he is told and points to the spot and the VAR check took literally 2 seconds.

Don’t tell me that people miles away in rooms are not making decisions during games because they are.

The VAR ref and the onfield team have an open line of communication and talk during the game - there was a good video of Jarrett Gillett doing his last A-League game before coming to England and they played the comms live.

Most likely the ref and linesman were 50/50 and the VAR ref said ‘looks like a pen’ from their position so they gave it onfield before reviewing.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

I'm assuming we don't hear it because its complete chaos in that VAR room.

I don't believe they are conspiring, I just don't think they know what they're doing half the time which allows biases to crop in unnoticed, like the rashford offside last season.

They might not be deliberately fixing a decision but I think subconsious bias kicks in and is still operating behind the scenes. If we saw the video and heard the explanations I still think there are areas where the LotG are given a little bit of an elbow sideways to accommodate the final decision - the Rashford offside is quite the case. But HTF are they still making crass mistakes?

 

[Fiftyyearsandcounting]

The biggest cop out the ‘clear and obvious’ bollocks

If a ref' misses a clear handball in the penalty area due to 20 players, all crowded in the box and obscuring his view, is that a classed as clear and obvious mistake? He hasn't made an error if he never saw it.

 

[Bluearmy]

I'm assuming we don't hear it because its complete chaos in that VAR room.

I don't believe they are conspiring, I just don't think they know what they're doing half the time which allows biases to crop in unnoticed, like the rashford offside last season.

If that's the case why are the vast majority in a certain teams favour. Rashford/Grealish Handball and KDB none penalty in the cup final, Spuds none penalty Martinez foul, None penalty against wolves, dodgy calls in their Liverpool and Arsenal game last season. Its a torrent in a certain teams favour and that's just off the top of my head.

If it was just incompetence it would be spread out evenly amongst all teams....