VAR Discussion Thread | 2024/25

bluealf said:
maybe cricket but not Rugby for example when a foul is committed in Rugby, the decision is explained fully so everybody can hear the process or even for a try it is open and honest.

VAR is anything but open and honest
Click to expand...
Hence my suggestion
 
Bigga said:
Firstly, I'm amused by the fact that my thoughts of improvement is "solid" whereas yours is only a "loose idea"!

It's just bizarre not to look at other examples of sport to find improvement in football. It's like saying a horse and cart is a great way to get around, why do you need a car, plane or boat?!

Your attempted dismantling of refs having 'mates' on the pitch is the same as your 'judges' offering. So, what's the difference? As for your 'judges' what part of an 'incident' would they agree to look at? Who suggests what? What if there are multiple actions in a phase of play, some innocuous, some more serious? Who agrees what part plays a part in the play? What if it takes longer than 2 mins to get to consensus? Why 2 mins and not 3 or 4?

Now you would like 30mins of football and timer stoppages? Do the fans pay less for less actual football then?

Time is up on the clock and the game is finished at next dead ball is similar to rugby, but with phase of play. I thought we weren't copying 'rubbish' rugby?

Vibrating boots to tell a player to come off the pitch? What if the boot is faulty? What if the player chooses to ignore the "vibrations"?

No offence, but if those are your ideas of game improvement, that's just nuts!

Your DoSGO thing is a complete non-starter, so I'm not going to pull that apart! You claim you want the game to 'go back to normal' and then suggest these ideas! It sounds like a Yank just learning about the game!

Might as well play the game in 15 min chucks with live adverts and drinks served in the gaps!
Click to expand...
Glad you are amused

You idea is “solid”
No, it’s dumb and you still haven’t suggested how it will work Maybe because it won’t

I’ve told you already that the games you have suggested don’t correlate with football
Hockey is an example for ideas as it more comparable

Details of judges it’s an idea not a developed process

Time to decide As already explained I don’t want delays if it can’t be determined in one minute then it not a clear and obvious error that’s why it won’t be allowed to take longer

The 30 mins of ball in play is based on thousands of games where this is the average So smart pants it’s what fans pay for now

Finishing the game when the ball next goes out of play is to eliminate any perceived bias of officials like in the Newcastle v LFC game a few weeks ago If that’s what rugby do the fine I don’t watch it

Fly subs could use vibrations in boots If the player doesn’t come off then that’s up to his manager to deal with If the vibrations down work tough shit I’m looking to cut delays and stop subs being used nefariously Have you got any ideas apart form the dumb idea of captains challenge and once again you still haven’t explained how this would work in practice. Because the idea is nuts already I’ve explained to you why

Say “no offence” then calling an idea “nuts” is a offensive

So why is DoGSO a non starter? I doubt you could pull it to bits as you haven’t even though about it so please try I’ll be amused
Do you thinks the current one is ok and fair and equitable? I’ve already explained why it isn’t
My idea is designed to stop players committing the offence as it wouldn’t make sense for them to do so

It sounds like a yank leading the game that’s both offensive to yanks and me

When did I say I want the game to go back to normal, what is normal? I don’t want VAR and I definitely don’t want the dumbest nuttiest idea of challenges just because other sports have it, yes it makes sense in tennis it doesn’t have one iota of sense in football

Last reply as you can’t offer any sensible explanation of you idea which isn’t really yours in any case
 
Last edited:
I suggested this years ago. At full time when all the interviews take place, each manager should be able to question the referee over, for example, three decisions with replays allowed.
The referee can then say either (1) he was correct or (2) he was wrong. He gets his chance to justify his decision. Over time it would show whether or not he is honest. PGMOL would never allow such transparency though.
 
TonyColemansbagofapples said:
I suggested this years ago. At full time when all the interviews take place, each manager should be able to question the referee over, for example, three decisions with replays allowed.
The referee can then say either (1) he was correct or (2) he was wrong. He gets his chance to justify his decision. Over time it would show whether or not he is honest. PGMOL would never allow such transparency though.
Click to expand...
The ref will say he’s correct decisions are subjective and whatever you think of refs they know the laws and interpretation of them better than the rest of us
Refs don’t have to be dishonest on major decisions these are the major obvious ones that could show their dishonesty It’s more subtle things they use to influence games I’ll give you one recent example yesterday he allowed Cash to foul Jack at will 6 fouls until he booked him Lewis was booked for his first foul
 
Gordyola said:
The ref will say he’s correct decisions are subjective and whatever you think of refs they know the laws and interpretation of them better than the rest of us
Refs don’t have to be dishonest on major decisions these are the major obvious ones that could show their dishonesty It’s more subtle things they use to influence games I’ll give you one recent example yesterday he allowed Cash to foul Jack at will 6 fouls until he booked him Lewis was booked for his first foul
Click to expand...
Look at the stats for every match, even academy level. We get the highest rate of bookings per foul almost every week.
 
Gordyola said:
Glad you are amused

You idea is “solid”
No, it’s dumb and you still haven’t suggested how it will work Maybe because it won’t

I’ve told you already that the games you have suggested don’t correlate with football
Hockey is an example for ideas as it more comparable

Details of judges it’s an idea not a developed process

Time to decide As already explained I don’t want delays if it can’t be determined in one minute then it not a clear and obvious error that’s why it won’t be allowed to take longer

The 30 mins of ball in play is based on thousands of games where this is the average So smart pants it’s what fans pay for now

Finishing the game when the ball next goes out of play is to eliminate any perceived bias of officials like in the Newcastle v LFC game a few weeks ago If that’s what rugby do the fine I don’t watch it

Fly subs could use vibrations in boots If the player doesn’t come off then that’s up to his manager to deal with If the vibrations down work tough shit I’m looking to cut delays and stop subs being used nefariously Have you got any ideas apart form the dumb idea of captains challenge and once again you still haven’t explained how this would work in practice. Because the idea is nuts already I’ve explained to you why

Say “no offence” then calling an idea “nuts” is a offensive

So why is DoGSO a non starter? I doubt you could pull it to bits as you haven’t even though about it so please try I’ll be amused
Do you thinks the current one is ok and fair and equitable? I’ve already explained why it isn’t
My idea is designed to stop players committing the offence as it wouldn’t make sense for them to do so

It sounds like a yank leading the game that’s both offensive to yanks and me

When did I say I want the game to go back to normal, what is normal? I don’t want VAR and I definitely don’t want the dumbest nuttiest idea of challenges just because other sports have it, yes it makes sense in tennis it doesn’t have one iota of sense in football

Last reply as you can’t offer any sensible explanation of you idea which isn’t really yours in any case
Click to expand...

Your 'judges' offer is dumb. Sorry.

No, your judges offer won't work! You still haven't worked out potential conflict on decisions. What if one judge can see an incident both ways? Was the incident unintentional or do they follow the rules even if it's unfair? Do they support the pro or con? Who becomes 'the majority'? Do they flip a coin? What's the point of them if that happens?

Your angst with saying I'm comparing rugby and football is hilarious when you try to compare it to hockey? Which hockey? Ice, air, field? What kind of contact is allowed or are you wanted that impact to be lessened?

Your 'DoGSO' is a non-starter because I agree with it as it is. Shit happens and if you're dumb enough to fuck up your own positioning and get rash, hard fucking cheese.

If you can't get a result because of one player's stupidity, so what? We've done it a couple of times like we did it against Spuds in the FA Cup, years ago. Dippers did it the other week.

Penalty goal? It's additional Yank-style bollocks they wanted to insert years back or like rugby for a foul!

"A penalty goal in rugby is a 3-point kick that the non-offending team can take when the opposing team commits a foul. The team can choose to kick for goal instead of continuing play" For someone who doesn't watch rugby, you've ticked off a couple of connections already! How original?!

Let's have a 'Golden Goal/ Next Goal Wins' in the 'Golden Period' 5 mins from the end! Might as well, regardless of who's winning and losing and that way we can fuck off draws and make the game more exciting...

For some reason, you think the game is only in play 30 mins, NOT factoring in the add on time the game has now, at the end of halves. So that theory is flawed, isn't it?

Yeah, I won't respond further.
 
Bigga said:
No, your judges offer won't work! You still haven't worked out potential conflict on decisions. What if one judge can see an incident both ways? Was the incident unintentional or do they follow the rules even if it's unfair? Do they support the pro or con? Who becomes 'the majority'? Do they flip a coin? What's the point of them if that happens
Click to expand...
You are either being obtuse or thick not sure which but I have a good idea
 
Bigga said:
For some reason, you think the game is only in play 30 mins, NOT factoring in the add on time the game has now, at the end of halves. So that theory is flawed, isn't it?
Click to expand...
The average ball-in-play time in the Premier League this season is 54 minutes and 46 seconds. That’s the lowest it’s ever been in the 11 seasons since records began (2012-13). It is 22 seconds shorter than last season and one minute and 57 seconds shorter than the peak of 56:43 back in 2013-14.

theanalyst.com

The Definitive Guide to Premier League Time-Wasting | Opta Analyst

To the losing team, it’s time-wasting. To those leading, it’s game management. But there's one thing that's not in doubt: it's getting worse.
theanalyst.com theanalyst.com

BTW Don’t waste your time replying as I’m ignoring you now
 
Gordyola said:
You are either being obtuse or thick not sure which but I have a good idea
Click to expand...

Nobody cares about your stupid idea!

Nobody I know has written about a secret panel behind doors that I know of! If so, place the article!

However, I know that the 'challenge' system HAS been mooted before now in print/ online! I know cos it was lifted from BM itself!!

Jog on now!
 
Gordyola said:
The average ball-in-play time in the Premier League this season is 54 minutes and 46 seconds. That’s the lowest it’s ever been in the 11 seasons since records began (2012-13). It is 22 seconds shorter than last season and one minute and 57 seconds shorter than the peak of 56:43 back in 2013-14.

theanalyst.com

The Definitive Guide to Premier League Time-Wasting | Opta Analyst

To the losing team, it’s time-wasting. To those leading, it’s game management. But there's one thing that's not in doubt: it's getting worse.
theanalyst.com theanalyst.com

BTW Don’t waste your time replying as I’m ignoring you now
Click to expand...

Time!

Added!

On!!

Bye!
 
mexico1970 said:
Yeah because even though they can look at shit again and again with VAR you get stuff like this which can only be described as BENT.

Click to expand...


You think this is bent rather than a genuine cock up ?

also, wasn't VAR introduced to benefit Liverpool ?
 
BlueHammer85 said:
You think this is bent rather than a genuine cock up ?

also, wasn't VAR introduced to benefit Liverpool ?
Click to expand...

I pointed out the glaring fact they get it so wrong even though they have all the time in the world to get it right, what explanation would you give for that?

Stupidity?

Blindness.

Or trying to keep title challenges alive to drive revenue and excitement artificially?
 
mexico1970 said:
I pointed out the glaring fact they get it so wrong even though they have all the time in the world to get it right, what explanation would you give for that?

Stupidity?

Blindness.

Or trying to keep title challenges alive to drive revenue and excitement artificially?
Click to expand...

Human error , which will always happen with or without VAR - far less with VAR.

What is wrong with checking if a player is offside or not ? Surely when the stakes in the PL are so high then they need to check this. 99% of the time with the help of VAR they are able to determine the outcome and season by season its adapted and improved - I just prefer a offside to be checked briefly rather than a lino not having a clue and taking a guess.

As for your last point, so anything against Liverpool is keeping the title challenges alive anything for Liverpool is ‘corruption’ - do admire the mental gymnastics at times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top