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

[Yankunian]

Whatever you may think of Webb, one of the first things he identified when he got the job, was working towards having specialist VARs.

Not as easy as it sounds though. Being a specialist in a job that didn’t exist just a few years ago, is easier said than done.

agree its not an easy task but think its really important to keep onfield and VAR separate

 

[Stephen230]

agree its not an easy task but think its really important to keep onfield and VAR separate

I suspect what we’ll see in the coming years and what Webb has hinted at, is younger referees from further down the leagues popping up as Premier League VARs. People who are young enough to have spent their whole lives around computers and technology. And are comfortable in that environment.

And less of the elite referees doing a game one day and VARing the next.

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

The art of officiating has been contaminated. For the purposes of this discussion, a football match should be viewed as an orchestra and the on field referee is the conductor. The enjoyment and entertainment of the performance is inextricably linked to its natural flow and its center of control, in this case the conductor, or referee.

The talent performs, the conductor maintains and holds the various parts together. There is no "timeout" to review an error that may have occurred during the performance, as that would bring the entire piece to a halt and would be jarring to the audience. It must flow continuously, as that is its very nature, there are too many moving parts to even attempt to isolate an error (a missed note) by one of the performers, as the sum of the various parts are more important than any one individual performer.

On a football pitch, the referee's responsibility is to keep the order of a match, it is not to catch every foul or to punish every infraction. As there is an understanding that the athletes are competing at a high level and struggling to accomplish their goals whilst trying to do so without violating the rules.

Most fouls occur during genuine attempts at playing the ball or trying to gain an advantage, whilst often being unable to anticipate the actions of the opposition. The very fabric of the Beautiful Game has been lost due to this unnatural arrangement of group think adjudication of decisions. The referee's autonomy needs to be restored in order to bring order and legitimacy back to football.

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

Lets hear from good ol Dermy and company talking about the Celtic Rangers match.

Specifically the Lundstram tackle seen here in the first part of the clip.



Was it a foul? Clearly. Was it a Yellow Card? Sure, no problem with that being a yellow. He did come in hard, didn't get to the ball in time. But to turn that into a red is absolute bollocks. There is no way that is a red. A straight red requires either intent to commit a foul or out of control defending. He was not out of control. He came in with speed in an effort to get to the ball in-time, and he just missed getting to the ball in time, as the opponent leg got down a split second before he got to the ball.

The analysis here from Dermy and company here is insulting to our intelligence. As if football is played and balls are contested in super slow motion. For Lundstram to be sent off there is mad.

You know the state of football is in shambles when you have Alan Stubbs coming to the aid of a Rangers player being send off.

John Lundstram gets unlikely backing from Celtic hero over red card challenge

JOHN LUNDSTRAM has found some unlikely back-up in the wake of his red card challenge in the Old Firm derby at the weekend. Lundstram was sent off in first-half stoppage time for a lunge on Alistair…

www.thescottishsun.co.uk

The former Hibs boss reckons that 20 years ago, the tackle would have been deemed okay. But he added that "because of the way rules have changed" that nowadays, the tackle would be considered worthy of s ending off. Stubbs said on the Scottish Football Podcast: "I think in today’s game it’s a red card, Because of the way the rules have changed. "I think when I played, we would’ve said that was a really good tackle.

It's an embarrassing state of affairs to see a perfectly normal foul just missing getting to the ball in time resulting in a player being sent off.

Only through this horrendous re-interpretation of rules and slow motion micro analysis would this turn a perfectly good tackle (a definite foul, but a genuine attempt to get to the ball) into a red card. Dermy, you're an embarrassment to the country and everyone on that panel parroting what he said, shame on you.

Football is in a state of disrepair and disarray, it's a tragedy what's been done to this once beautiful sport.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Blatant red card. Slides in from distance with force and studs are higher than the ankle. Ticks all the red card boxes in 2024.

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

Blatant red card. Slides in from distance with force and studs are higher than the ankle. Ticks all the red card boxes in 2024.

There's no way that's a red. You can make an argument that it's only a red "in 2024" as in this new interpretation of what a red card is. But it's not a red card based on what we know one to be throughout our life.

When you look at the pundits that agreed with the red card, they are seeing the tackle through the VAR prism, they have lost their grasp onto how fouls occur on a football pitch. I would defer you to the comments from Kenny Miller who explains the situation quite accurately and where we are in today's game. We cannot lose sight of what went into that challenge and how problematic it is to see and judge it through an improper context.

Celtic 2-1 Rangers: Was John Lundstram's Old Firm red card for challenge on Alistair Johnston deserved?

Celtic beat Rangers 2-1 to move to verge of title; Matt ORiley opened the scoring with John Lundstrams own goal doubling the lead; Cyriel Dessers replied before Lundstram was red carded; ORiley then missed a penalty; Celtic are six points ahead with two games left

www.skysports.com

Sky Sports' Kenny Miller: "I understand why it is a red card. In this day and age when you slow things down and put the point of contact [on screen] - Lundstram's foot is planted against the side of Johnston's leg. "What I would say is that had VAR not been there, no one is moaning that's not a red card. It was a yellow card, there's no doubt about it.

"When you see it in real time, it's fast, but it's a yellow card for me. VAR comes in, intervenes and when it is slowed down, it's always going to be a red card when he gets called to the monitor. "Had there been no VAR, nobody would have asked for that to be a red card. "He's not out of control. He's running fast to get to the ball. You need to run fast and he's allowed to slide in. He meant to go and win the ball. We are trying to eradicate every bit of contact out of the game. Any contact, any tackle that is made, it needs to be a yellow card or a red card."

So we've gotten to the point where through VAR they are looking for reasons to increase the severity of a foul, trying to make normal fouls become yellow cards or yellow cards become reds. This is wrong. It was not a red card on a football pitch. Only through the corruption and manipulation of football that is VAR.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

There's no way that's a red. You can make an argument that it's only a red "in 2024" as in this new interpretation of what a red card is. But it's not a red card based on what we know one to be throughout our life.

When you look at the pundits that agreed with the red card, they are seeing the tackle through the VAR prism, they have lost their grasp onto how fouls occur on a football pitch. I would defer you to the comments from Kenny Miller who explains the situation quite accurately and where we are in today's game.

Celtic 2-1 Rangers: Was John Lundstram's Old Firm red card for challenge on Alistair Johnston deserved?

Celtic beat Rangers 2-1 to move to verge of title; Matt ORiley opened the scoring with John Lundstrams own goal doubling the lead; Cyriel Dessers replied before Lundstram was red carded; ORiley then missed a penalty; Celtic are six points ahead with two games left

www.skysports.com

Sky Sports' Kenny Miller: "I understand why it is a red card. In this day and age when you slow things down and put the point of contact [on screen] - Lundstram's foot is planted against the side of Johnston's leg. "What I would say is that had VAR not been there, no one is moaning that's not a red card. It was a yellow card, there's no doubt about it.

"When you see it in real time, it's fast, but it's a yellow card for me. VAR comes in, intervenes and when it is slowed down, it's always going to be a red card when he gets called to the monitor. "Had there been no VAR, nobody would have asked for that to be a red card. "He's not out of control. He's running fast to get to the ball. You need to run fast and he's allowed to slide in. He meant to go and win the ball. We are trying to eradicate every bit of contact out of the game. Any contact, any tackle that is made, it needs to be a yellow card or a red card."

I’m alright with the decision. It’s a red card to me in this era. Forceful contact above the ankle will be given as a red far more often than not.

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

I’m alright with the decision. It’s a red card to me in this era. Forceful contact above the ankle will be given as a red far more often than not.

"in this era"? But not in any other era. On a football pitch, that is not a red card. With VAR if that's a red card then it's become something very different. Remember when VAR was introduced it was said to exist only to prevent "clear and obvious" errors.

That being given as a yellow wasn't a "clear and obvious" error. Giving a yellow card there was a good decision by the on-field referee. There was no reason to second guess that decision and turn it into something worse than it was. Had it been given a yellow and not reviewed, no one would have had a problem with it. So once again they've taken a perfectly good decision on the field and turned it into something far more controversial than it was. Sending a player off for a genuine attempt at the ball and missing only by a fraction of a second is wrong and should be condemned as yet another example of VAR creating more problems than it solves.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

"in this era"? But not in any other era. On a football pitch, that is not a red card. With VAR if that's a red card then it's become something very different. Remember when VAR was introduced it was said to exist only to prevent "clear and obvious" errors.

That being given as a yellow wasn't a "clear and obvious" error. Giving a yellow card was good decision by the on-field referee. There was no reason to second guess that decision. Had it been given a yellow and not reviewed, no one would have had a problem with it.

Ok, we’ll agree to disagree then. Football’s laws are applied subjectively and this is the main reason there are so many talking points with VAR.

Officiating can never be 100% consistent when there is a human involved. It’s impossible.

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

Ok, we’ll agree to disagree then. Football’s laws are applied subjectively and this is the main reason there are so many talking points with VAR.

Officiating can never be 100% consistent when there is a human involved. It’s impossible.

That's precisely why VAR is a problem and isn't fit for purpose. There was no reason to stop the match and use VAR to turn a yellow into a red there. Yellow card was fine, get on with it, play on. Instead we get VAR creating more controversy and negatively influencing the trajectory of the match.

I respect your view of this, and we can agree to disagree, but match going fans do not want to see controversial red cards given for genuine attempts at the ball. If you are OK with the red that's one thing, but Dermy and company are trying to paint a picture that this is what VAR is there for, as if this is something that needed to be corrected, they were arguing that the referee needed help by VAR to get the call right. Bollocks, the call on the pitch was perfectly fine.

 

[Stephen230]

A straight red requires either intent to commit a foul or out of control defending.

You can’t just make up your own definition of what constitutes a red card offence and then criticise the referee for not following your personal guidelines.

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

You can’t just make up your own definition of what constitutes a red card offence and then criticise the referee for not following your personal guidelines.

The distinction is between what constitutes a straight red on the pitch vs what can be construed as red during a VAR review. So it's not my definition of what constitutes a red card, it's the collective understanding of what we all have experienced throughout our lives of watching football that needs to occur in order for a referee to give a straight red.

Generally, red cards are not given straight away unless there is an egregious foul, i.e. a hard slide tackle from behind to stop a goal scoring opportunity, an intentional handball in the box to prevent a goal, etc etc.

Generally speaking, if a player is making a genuine attempt to play the ball and is reasonably close to getting to the ball first, a referee will not give a red card. The tackle by Lundstram is in no way a red card, not on the pitch, not in real-time. It was only through the use of VAR video review that such a tackle could turn into a red. That is the point that I am illustrating. The use of VAR is supposedly to correct a clear and obvious error by the referee, which this incident clearly was not, as the yellow card given by the referee was fair and appropriate given the severity of the tackle.

VAR has completely altered the way in which fouls are adjudicated, Lundstram did not commit an egregious foul, nor was it a dangerous challenge. He was simply playing the ball and trying to get to the ball in time, but the opponent got there just a tad sooner. Historically, situations like that throughout football history do not result in straight red cards.

Look at how his colleagues gang up on him with their VAR-pish. (1:00 - 4:35)



Kenny Miller was spot on, said it perfectly. See Kenny still remembers football the way it was, he hasn't had his mind washed by the VAR agenda to the extent of his partners in the studio who have stepped in it, their mind has been so reinforced by this new way of doing things that they have forgotten how this is supposed to work.

And the elephant in the room is that, if it was such a clear red, as so many want to believe now, then why was only a yellow given on the pitch? We all know why it was given as a yellow, because that's what anyone watching it in real-time saw. It's also important to note that Lundstram started the slide tackle ages before the opponent stepped into it. Lundstram had the line to the ball whilst running at full steam well before the opponent put himself between Lundstram and the ball. His opponent stepped right in front of the ball at the last possible moment, long after the slide tackle was underway. It's still a foul on Lundstram, as hard slide tackles always carry the risk of committing a foul, but the fact that he came in late to an already underway slide tackle without a doubt needs to be considered when determining severity of the foul. And once again, that's the beauty and design of determining fouls in real-time, all that goes into the instinctive real-time decision-making of the on field referee, only to be reduced to a contextless slow-mo zoom-in of the contact itself. Bollocks is VAR and the horse it rode in on!

The sport in which we hold dear is being stripped away and we need to come to our senses.

 

[Stephen230]

The distinction is between what constitutes a straight red on the pitch vs what can be construed as red during a VAR review. So it's not my definition of what constitutes a red card, it's the collective understanding of what we all have experienced throughout our lives of watching football that needs to occur in order for a referee to give a straight red.

Generally, red cards are not given straight away unless there is an egregious foul, i.e. a hard slide tackle from behind to stop a goal scoring opportunity, an intentional handball in the box to prevent a goal, etc etc.

Generally speaking, if a player is making a genuine attempt to play the ball and is reasonably close to getting to the ball first, a referee will not give a red card. The tackle by Lundstram is in no way a red card, not on the pitch, not in real-time. It was only through the use of VAR video review that such a tackle could turn into a red. That is the point that I am illustrating. The use of VAR is supposedly to correct a clear and obvious error by the referee, which this incident clearly was not, as the yellow card given by the referee was fair and appropriate given the severity of the tackle.

VAR has completely altered the way in which fouls are adjudicated, Lundstram did not commit an egregious foul, nor was it a dangerous challenge. He was simply playing the ball and trying to get to the ball in time, but the opponent got there just a tad sooner. Historically, situations like that throughout football history do not result in straight red cards.

Look at how his colleagues gang up on him with their VAR-pish. (1:00 - 4:35)



Kenny Miller was spot on, said it perfectly. See Kenny still remembers football the way it was, he hasn't had his mind washed by the VAR agenda to the extent of his partners in the studio who have stepped in it, their mind has been so reinforced by this new way of doing things that they have forgotten how this is supposed to work.

And the elephant in the room is that, if it was such a clear red, as so many want to believe now, then why was only a yellow given on the pitch? The sport in which we hold dear is being stripped away and we need to come to our senses.

Everyone remembers football the way it was. Not just Kenny.

It’s changed.

A lot of straight red cards now, weren’t even fouls in the 90s.

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

Everyone remembers football the way it was. Not just Kenny.

It’s changed.

A lot of straight red cards now, weren’t even fouls in the 90s.

Precisely my point. That was not a red card, only a red in this new bollocks version of football run by those with an agenda to strip away the beautiful game and replace it with a series of redefined parameters that do not serve the interests of anyone associated with the sport. It's a shame what VAR has done and continues to do.

 

[Stephen230]

Precisely my point. That was not a red card, only a red in this new bollocks version of football run by those with an agenda to strip away the beautiful game and replace it with a series of redefined parameters that do not serve the interests of anyone associated with the sport. It's a shame what VAR has done and continues to do.

Which decade in the past would you consider the peak of the beautiful game, out of interest?

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

Which decade in the past would you consider the peak of the beautiful game, out of interest?

It's difficult to pinpoint a specific decade as the peak, I just saw the sport progressing naturally and logically from my youth until VAR. Since then it's been like a dystopian nightmare, I'm not gonna lie I find it very difficult to cope with seeing the greatest sport on earth reduced in such a way. It's wrong and something needs to be done about it, to return the sport to itself. And with football in such a shambles as it's been since VAR has been introduced, it is my belief that it all this has an effect on the world as a whole. When you create these kind of problems in a sport that serves as an outlet and escapism for many from the world around us, you take away the one thing that people really need to cope with the challenges of life. When you can't so much as celebrate a goal anymore, it's a tell tale sign that something is very very wrong in the world around us.

 

[jrb]

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

That was.onside. in that freeze frame the ball.hasn’t left his foot on the way to KDB.

 

[Stephen230]

Those lines look like they were drawn by a toddler with a set of crayons.

 

[Kippax77]

Those lines look like they were drawn by a toddler with a set of crayons.

More like baby Neville and baby Spitty