VAR Discussion Thread | 2024/25

[halfcenturyup]

I don’t think there ever was a clamour for getting off sides correct to the millimetre. There was a clamour for getting blindingly obvious errors overturned. The trouble is, once you’ve got the technology, they are always going to use it to the best of its abilities.

You hear people saying, have one look and if it’s not clearly a wrong decision, let the on field decision stand. But are fans really going to be happy to see goals ruled out, when replays prove it was narrowly but definitely on side? I’m not so sure.

I suppose that was the situation before VAR came in, although I guess it was more likely to be the opposite: goals standing that were marginally offside.

Maybe I am remembering my own approach: it was just onside but it's difficult to see and they are only human (possibly after a bit of a sweary rant). Maybe it was more generally: why can't we have the technology to get it right? Especially with idiot commentators and pundits analysing every incident to the nth degree and coming out with absolute bollocks for reasons of controversy.

Personally, I preferred the former but I get that some people may prefer the latter.

I am old, I prefer the flow of the game, the spirit of the game, and the benefit of doubt to beautiful goals, all of which to me make the game what it is, rather than robotic accuracy. People lamenting the in-stadium experience these days? Then disallowing great goals for a toenail is part of the problem, imho.

 

[Stephen230]

I suppose that was the situation before VAR came in, although I guess it was more likely to be the opposite: goals standing that were marginally offside.

Maybe I am remembering my own approach: it was just onside but it's difficult to see and they are only human (possibly after a bit of a sweary rant). Maybe it was more generally: why can't we have the technology to get it right? Especially with idiot commentators and pundits analysing every incident to the nth degree and coming out with absolute bollocks for reasons of controversy.

Personally, I preferred the former but I get that some people may prefer the latter.

I am old, I prefer the flow of the game, the spirit of the game, and the benefit of doubt to beautiful goals, all of which to me make the game what it is, rather than robotic accuracy. People lamenting the in-stadium experience these days? Then disallowing great goals for a toenail is part of the problem, imho.

I think what most fans would like ideally is some kind of system where absolute clangers are overturned and anything marginal left to the referee.

But once you’ve opened up the box, it’s impossible to achieve and retain some kind of consistency. It’s easy to point at something like the Walker offside for Tottenham against City and say, that’s what we want VAR for. But where do you stop exactly?

It’s easy to give an example of a clanger. It’s a lot trickier to define one. You’re always going to get clanger + or - 1cm.

We do have an offside system at the moment with an in built in tolerance level. I believe it’s about 5cm. You could extend that to 10cm or 20cm. But then you’re on the wrong end of one that’s 20.1 cm and the whole world is against you again.

Although the clamour at the moment seems to be to bring in the SAOT, which doesn’t have any tolerance level at all.

 

[halfcenturyup]

I think what most fans would like ideally is some kind of system where absolute clangers are overturned and anything marginal left to the referee.

But once you’ve opened up the box, it’s impossible to achieve and retain some kind of consistency. It’s easy to point at something like the Walker offside for Tottenham against City and say, that’s what we want VAR for. But where do you stop exactly?

It’s easy to give an example of a clanger. It’s a lot trickier to define one. You’re always going to get clanger + or - 1cm.

We do have an offside system at the moment with an in built in tolerance level. I believe it’s about 5cm. You could extend that to 10cm or 20cm. But then you’re on the wrong end of one that’s 20.1 cm and the whole world is against you again.

Although the clamour at the moment seems to be to bring in the SAOT, which doesn’t have any tolerance level at all.

No clamour from me :)

There is so much subjectivity on every offence. Every decision can be debated. Just give the benefit of the doubt to the attacker and do away with offside calls that can't possibly be made on-field, that's all I am asking.

And people will soon realise SAOT isn't the messiah when it's introduced, it will be just another naughty boy.

 

[Stephen230]

Match officials Mic’d Up on now.

City’s last minute winner at Wolves is being shown. Should be interesting. Particularly what exactly was said during the 30 odd seconds it took to give the initial off side decision.

 

[Blue Mist]

Match officials Mic’d Up on now.

City’s last minute winner at Wolves is being shown. Should be interesting. Particularly what exactly was said during the 30 odd seconds it took to give the initial off side decision.

I need to know what David Coote said :-)

Do you mean a programme on Sky is doing this ?
If so why ? the match was weeks ago.

 

[Stephen230]

I need to know what David Coote said :-)

Do you mean a programme on Sky is doing this ?
If so why ? the match was weeks ago.

It’s on Sky and TNT.

It’s a monthly programme showing the most contentious decisions of the previous few weeks. It’s being going since the start of last season.

 

[TonyColemansbagofapples]

Watched the programme once. It’s a load of shit designed to create a narrative. Won’t be watching again, Howard Redd is a twat and always will be.

 

[Stephen230]

Watched the programme once. It’s a load of shit designed to create a narrative. Won’t be watching again, Howard Redd is a twat and always will be.

It’s not compulsory. But there was a lot of people confused about exactly what went on around that Stones goal at Wolves.

There’s also people constantly calling for VAR audio to be released. It’s not ideal because it only covers four or five incidents per month. But it’s a start and I find it reasonably interesting for one at least.

 

[TonyColemansbagofapples]

It covers (from the one programme I watched) incidents that were easily explainable, even to the thickest football watcher. Waste of time with the sole intention of showing how great an innovation VAR is and how it's run by totally impartial officials. Absolute shite.
Let's do what cricket and other sports with a fraction of the money available do. Let everyone see exactly what has happened and hear the comments for all decisions, not just a select, handpicked few.

 

[thismeansfour]

It’s not compulsory. But there was a lot of people confused about exactly what went on around that Stones goal at Wolves.

There’s also people constantly calling for VAR audio to be released. It’s not ideal because it only covers four or five incidents per month. But it’s a start and I find it reasonably interesting for one at least.

The audio being released ages after the incident proves it isn't credible