VAR Discussion Thread | 2024/25

[BlueHammer85]

Linesman flag - quickest of all.

Except they get it wrong far too often. Unfortunately.

 

[cmcm0808]

Semi automated offside looks far more accurate and more importantly consistent than someone drawing lines or a human linesman.

I'd be happy for offside to become fully automated, like how the goal line technology is. Then you could take the flags off the linesman and they could assist the referee looking out for fouls.

 

[Stephen230]

Semi automated offside looks far more accurate and more importantly consistent than someone drawing lines or a human linesman.

I'd be happy for offside to become fully automated, like how the goal line technology is. Then you could take the flags off the linesman and they could assist the referee looking out for fouls.

Virtually impossible. Unless you want the law changing to just being in an offside position being an offence?

And nobody who’s given it more than five seconds thought, wants that.

 

[cmcm0808]

Virtually impossible. Unless you want the law changing to just being in an offside position being an offence?

And nobody who’s given it more than five seconds thought, wants that.

I'm pretty confident that A.I. could be programed to understand the offside rules as they are.

 

[Stephen230]

I'm pretty confident that A.I. could be programed to understand the offside rules as they are.

Why I said ‘virtually’ not ‘literally’. But we’re so far away from computers being used to make subjective calls in football, it may as well be literally.

 

[Blue Mist]

According to posters on here and other Var apologist this new system detects exactly when the ball is kicked.
You know like Alvarez penalty kick against the more favoured Madrid.
Fans are now going to sue Uefa as the evidence provided by Uefa to back up the claim has been tampered with. (Allegedly)

It's a shit show.

 

[Pingu the Penguin]

According to posters on here and other Var apologist this new system detects exactly when the ball is kicked.
You know like Alvarez penalty kick against the more favoured Madrid.
Fans are now going to sue Uefa as the evidence provided by Uefa to back up the claim has been tampered with. (Allegedly)

It's a shit show.

What’s this about? The video uefa released. The day after seemed to clear it uo. Is it said they faked that?

 

[Cassandra]

Except they get it wrong far too often. Unfortunately.

Pre-VAR I think the top flight AR’s were very good at getting offsides right, there were exceptions, but on the whole I would say they were good compared with general refereeing decisions. I am broadly in favour of VAR though it needs a lot of improvements, but AR’s seem to find it a lot more difficult to know when to flag than was the case pre-VAR.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Yeh but …. Can we just be angry about it anyway?

I can. For all the reasons I have raised previously. A lot of which still haven't been answered.

You want quick decisions? Leave it to the linesmen unless it's an obvious balls up. You want accuracy, explain to me exactly how this system guarantees accuracy. You want 100% accuracy? Forget it.

But it's OK. They show a nice image. Shame nobody understands how it was created. So that's better then.

Once again, I have no problem with VAR as a concept. It works reasonably well now. My only problem is that it doesn't enhance the experience of the people who really matter - the people in the stadium. It detracts from it. So it is still an overall no from me.

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

I can. For all the reasons I have raised previously. A lot of which still haven't been answered.

You want quick decisions? Leave it to the linesmen unless it's an obvious balls up. You want accuracy, explain to me exactly how this system guarantees accuracy. You want 100% accuracy? Forget it.

But it's OK. They show a nice image. Shame nobody understands how it was created. So that's better then.

Once again, I have no problem with VAR as a concept. It works reasonably well now. My only problem is that it doesn't enhance the experience of the people who really matter - the people in the stadium. It detracts from it. So it is still an overall no from me.

Not to mention the costs involved and the nervous energy it creates surrounding the sport. I do have a problem with VAR as a concept. Because that "concept" created this disaster. When it was first talked about in the mid 2010s, I knew it would be a big problem that would negatively impact the sport. But we just kept hearing repeated false promises that this is going to be the cure all to bad decisions, a delusional endeavour that was always going to cause more problems than it solves and result in disappointment. And when it was formally introduced and soon after it became apparent that it was creating new controversies that never existed before, many fans and most pundits kept telling us to be patient, it'll get better, etc etc etc. And down the rabbit hole we went, pushed down it further and further down.

Since it's introduction, it's been an endless cycle of nonsense and annoying delays and controversies with very limited and rare moments of worthiness, many of which are merely examples of problem-creation-solutionism, anotherwords creating a problem then pretending to solve a problem to claim that progress has been made, as if the problem that they solved was a problem before what they did created that problem.

I agree with you generally halfcenturyup, but I do have to say that I always had a problem with VAR as a concept because going to such lengths to attempt to improve officiating (or eliminiate bad decisions) is not where the focus should be, and in practice, is actually mad. Not that wanting to improve officiating is mad, but going to such lengths to try to achieve it, given the downside associated with it.

That said, I don't have a problem with the genuine desire of fans and those involved in the sport to want to see bad decisions eliminated. The feeling of being wronged, in sport and in life, is a real one and is very appealing as a narrative when sold to the public. But in practice, it's a dystopian nightmare, and that's what we've seen and will continue to see with VAR.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Not to mention the costs involved and the nervous energy it creates surrounding the sport. I do have a problem with VAR as a concept. Because that "concept" created this disaster. When it was first talked about in the mid 2010s, I knew it would be a big problem that would negatively impact the sport. But we just kept hearing repeated false promises that this is going to be the cure all to bad decisions, a delusional endeavour that was always going to cause more problems than it solves and result in disappointment. And when it was formally introduced and soon after it became apparent that it was creating new controversies that never existed before, many fans and most pundits kept telling us to be patient, it'll get better, etc etc etc. And down the rabbit hole we went, pushed down it further and further down.

Since it's introduction, it's been an endless cycle of nonsense and annoying delays and controversies with very limited and rare moments of worthiness, many of which are merely examples of problem-creation-solutionism, anotherwords creating a problem then pretending to solve a problem to claim that progress has been made, as if the problem that they solved was a problem before what they did created that problem.

I agree with you generally halfcenturyup, but I do have to say that I always had a problem with VAR as a concept because going to such lengths to attempt to improve officiating (or eliminiate bad decisions) is not where the focus should be, and in practice, is actually mad. Not that wanting to improve officiating is mad, but going to such lengths to try to achieve it, given the downside associated with it.

That said, I don't have a problem with the genuine desire of fans and those involved in the sport to want to see bad decisions eliminated. The feeling of being wronged, in sport and in life, is a real one and is very appealing as a narrative when sold to the public. But in practice, it's a dystopian nightmare, and that's what we've seen and will continue to see with VAR.

I try to be pragmatic. It's difficult to put the genie back in the bottle.

But with SAOT, I wonder how many of the people who say how wonderfully accurate it is actually know there is a built-in 5 cm tolerance? Why 5 cm if it's so accurate? Why not, say, 15 cm in which case you could leave the decision to the linesman and eliminate at least 90% of the need for SAOT in the first place?

And this is supposed to be the most sophisticated SAOT system there is, yet it needs a 5 cm tolerance. What does that say about all the toenail decisions taken by UEFA and FIFA SAOT the last few years?

Are people really so accepting of a sexy graphic, and one that nobody really knows how it was created at that, without asking the important questions behind the process?

 

[Radcliffe 1309]

Not to mention the costs involved and the nervous energy it creates surrounding the sport. I do have a problem with VAR as a concept. Because that "concept" created this disaster. When it was first talked about in the mid 2010s, I knew it would be a big problem that would negatively impact the sport. But we just kept hearing repeated false promises that this is going to be the cure all to bad decisions, a delusional endeavour that was always going to cause more problems than it solves and result in disappointment. And when it was formally introduced and soon after it became apparent that it was creating new controversies that never existed before, many fans and most pundits kept telling us to be patient, it'll get better, etc etc etc. And down the rabbit hole we went, pushed down it further and further down.

Since it's introduction, it's been an endless cycle of nonsense and annoying delays and controversies with very limited and rare moments of worthiness, many of which are merely examples of problem-creation-solutionism, anotherwords creating a problem then pretending to solve a problem to claim that progress has been made, as if the problem that they solved was a problem before what they did created that problem.

I agree with you generally halfcenturyup, but I do have to say that I always had a problem with VAR as a concept because going to such lengths to attempt to improve officiating (or eliminiate bad decisions) is not where the focus should be, and in practice, is actually mad. Not that wanting to improve officiating is mad, but going to such lengths to try to achieve it, given the downside associated with it.

That said, I don't have a problem with the genuine desire of fans and those involved in the sport to want to see bad decisions eliminated. The feeling of being wronged, in sport and in life, is a real one and is very appealing as a narrative when sold to the public. But in practice, it's a dystopian nightmare, and that's what we've seen and will continue to see with VAR.

Excellent post

 

[Gray]

Thank goodness the Palace third was wiped off, I couldn’t see us coming back from 3 down.

 

[Blue Mist]

What’s this about? The video uefa released. The day after seemed to clear it uo. Is it said they faked that?

So they are saying.. They have 4 fans groups, all have combined to pay for a court case. They say they have evidence that the video was doctored to show a second touch.

 

[Gordyola]

Of course reason to remain skeptical of any new implementation to the game, I’m sure there will be some hiccups soon enough, but the 2 offsides I saw today against City and Brentford were swiftly ruled out without the need for VAR officials to make lines and have a long chat - they were conclusive and very fast. Deffo some optimism.

Not in the stadium they weren't fast at all, there was a delay until the screen displayed a check was being carried out, this was after the players were ready for KO, Gillet had his finger to his ear then he point to the centre spot and the game kicked off before the PA and screen confirmed a goal

 

[Blue Mist]

Thank goodness the Palace third was wiped off, I couldn’t see us coming back from 3 down.

But it had nothing to do with Var. It was clear, the linesman flagged and Rico took the free kick long before it was announced.
Ok he was made to retake but.......

 

[Father Paul]

Not to mention the costs involved and the nervous energy it creates surrounding the sport. I do have a problem with VAR as a concept. Because that "concept" created this disaster. When it was first talked about in the mid 2010s, I knew it would be a big problem that would negatively impact the sport. But we just kept hearing repeated false promises that this is going to be the cure all to bad decisions, a delusional endeavour that was always going to cause more problems than it solves and result in disappointment. And when it was formally introduced and soon after it became apparent that it was creating new controversies that never existed before, many fans and most pundits kept telling us to be patient, it'll get better, etc etc etc. And down the rabbit hole we went, pushed down it further and further down.

Since it's introduction, it's been an endless cycle of nonsense and annoying delays and controversies with very limited and rare moments of worthiness, many of which are merely examples of problem-creation-solutionism, anotherwords creating a problem then pretending to solve a problem to claim that progress has been made, as if the problem that they solved was a problem before what they did created that problem.

I agree with you generally halfcenturyup, but I do have to say that I always had a problem with VAR as a concept because going to such lengths to attempt to improve officiating (or eliminiate bad decisions) is not where the focus should be, and in practice, is actually mad. Not that wanting to improve officiating is mad, but going to such lengths to try to achieve it, given the downside associated with it.

That said, I don't have a problem with the genuine desire of fans and those involved in the sport to want to see bad decisions eliminated. The feeling of being wronged, in sport and in life, is a real one and is very appealing as a narrative when sold to the public. But in practice, it's a dystopian nightmare, and that's what we've seen and will continue to see with VAR.

Unnecessarily pessimistic although I see where your coming from.

 

[dadnlad]

awaiting all grounds arent built the same so automated offsides not as accurate at different venues

 

[ancoats]

Thank goodness the Palace third was wiped off, I couldn’t see us coming back from 3 down.

I think in the old system of VAR then it would have been given, When they put the lines up he would have been on side

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

Going through the details of SAOT in the Premier League and, well, since it was mentioned earlier about the sensor in the ball, I think this really puts things into perspective, when we're talking about what the Premier League is trying to do within the confines of a system that they aren't even allowed to use properly or fully.

So no sensors in the ball, because they can't, due to branding apparently, and even if they could, it would be too expensive if you can believe that. The top football league in the world, with all their neverending price increases due to VAR's neverendingly increasing costs, apparently still couldn't afford to do SAOT fully even if it wanted to. This is how corrupt and insidious VAR and all the technology behind it all is.

Semi-automated VAR offside has arrived in the Premier League, and iPhones are its secret weapon

Semi-automated offside technology has arrived in the Premier League, and it's all thanks to iPhones.

www.espn.com

No wonder why :

The Premier League spent two years testing a number of artificial intelligence-based semi-automated offside technology (SAOT) providers, and now it's ready to be rolled out.

So the Premier League has been tasked with the unenviable task of attempting to jerry rig SAOT without the most important part of the system supposedly, the ever elusive sensor in the ball. No wonder they had so many problems with "congestion" when it was rolled out. See guys, we're only getting the scraps when it come to SAOT. A key component of the system is being held back from the PL and they had to apparently design their own way of determining this. As in, apparently, the calculus that determines where the ball was kicked from. And we were just discussing this with one under the impression that the sensor was in the ball and that it was the technology that was accurately determining the precise location of when the ball was kicked. But no no no, Premier League doesn't have that technology, we don't get the sensor. We get the jerry rigged version.

See, the only really really big money events get SAOT with the sensor in the ball, but that's really pricey, that's only for showcase events like the World Cup and stuff. Are you reading this? Can you believe how dysfunctional and insane this all sounds when you really get into the details?

From article :

Why isn't there a chip in the ball, and does it matter?

The chip in the ball undeniable provides greater accuracy of the key touch. But Adidas, the provider for FIFA and UEFA, developed the original SAOT and it owns the patent for how the chip sits in the centre of the ball to ensure reliability of performance.

That patent means any other ball manufacturer would need to find a new way of balancing a chip without infringing the Adidas patent. As no top European league has a contract with Adidas, they've had to develop their own software.

But the chip system is so much more expensive that it's only used in major tournaments like Euro 2024 and the World Cup. Even for the Champions League, UEFA uses a non-chip system like in the Premier League.


Without the chip, it has to work slightly differently. SAOT will suggest a kick point to the VAR and automatically create the offside line to that frame. The VAR then checks it's the correct frame before approving the final decision.

‍