VAR Discussion Thread | 2024/25

.db. said:
So you’ve been proven wrong but are hanging onto sentence about a survey on whether fans are in favour of or against VAR to deflect from the data on VAR that proves you wrong? You do know that sentence is not about the investigation done into the increase of correct decisions, don’t you?

What about ‘A report, external from football's lawmakers said VAR was used in 804 competitive matches in more than 20 competitions. It said the technology increased the accuracy of decisions that can be reviewed from 93% to 98.9%’?
Click to expand...
I’ve asked for stats on City matches.
“No evidence your honour.”
“Case dismissed.”
Too easy this.
 
johnnytapia said:
“Go old school allow human error without the fannying about”
This is what nearly every fan wants. It’s how the game was for nearly 200 years. Then we got this sack of unwanted shit.
Click to expand...
ive said before numerous times weve end up here because media whatever you watch or listen to only focused on certain teams and decisions that went against them and the rest oh well thats football swings n roundabouts some you win some you lose but did you see that goal X had chalked of disgraceful
 
The biggest culprit in all of this is sky.
Before Var, to help fill 24 hours with controversy, they examined every incident in minute detail, looking for something to highlight as a wrong decision.
Now we have Var it simply helps them even more to fill the 24 hours. Dermot Gallagher and a puppet discussing Var decisions is just a joke.
Before sky, the bbc and itv did not do endless 'the ref was wrong' scenarios'

No matter how good it is, sky will find a way to attack and undermine a referee, it fills the hours, gets people arguing and keeps them in business
 
Last edited:
.db. said:
www.skysports.com

VAR: Premier League claims 96 per cent of referee decisions are correct - so what is future of technology in football?

The Premier League claim the “majority” of supporters are in favour of VAR and the technology has led to a 14 per cent increase in correct decisions; Sky Sports senior reporter Rob Dorsett sits down with Tony Scholes to discuss VAR’s performance and ideas for improvement
www.skysports.com www.skysports.com
www.bbc.co.uk

VAR: Report shows technology has been 98.9% accurate in decision-making

The video assistant referee system has been accurate in 98.9% of decisions during its trial, says the International Football Association Board.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk

Here’s the evidence of what I’ve said about the Premier Lesgue and IFAB’s findings. You know, the ones you just said i had ‘zero evidence’ of.

You will have to ring or email City directly for your ridiculous demands of wanting specific stats on City in the General Football Forum when talking generally about football when I’ve never mentioned decisions solely in City games not claimed ever to have any data on referee decisions in City games.
Click to expand...

I have never found a report on the efficacy of VAR that doesn't use data on % correct decisions provided by IFAB /UEFA /the PL. Do you have one?
 
.db. said:
www.skysports.com

VAR: Premier League claims 96 per cent of referee decisions are correct - so what is future of technology in football?

The Premier League claim the “majority” of supporters are in favour of VAR and the technology has led to a 14 per cent increase in correct decisions; Sky Sports senior reporter Rob Dorsett sits down with Tony Scholes to discuss VAR’s performance and ideas for improvement
www.skysports.com www.skysports.com
www.bbc.co.uk

VAR: Report shows technology has been 98.9% accurate in decision-making

The video assistant referee system has been accurate in 98.9% of decisions during its trial, says the International Football Association Board.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk

Here’s the evidence of what I’ve said about the Premier Lesgue and IFAB’s findings. You know, the ones you just said i had ‘zero evidence’ of.

You will have to ring or email City directly for your ridiculous demands of wanting specific stats on City in the General Football Forum when talking generally about football when I’ve never mentioned decisions solely in City games not claimed ever to have any data on referee decisions in City games.
Click to expand...
Pupil in “marking own work getting grade A shock”
 
Blue Mist said:
The biggest culprit in all of this is sky.
Before Var, to help fill 24 hours with controversy, they examin every incident in minute detail looking for something to highlight as a wrong decision.
Now we have Var which simply helps them even more to fill the 24 hours. Dermot Gallagher and a puppet discussing Var decisions is just a joke.
Before sky, the bbc and itv did not do endless 'the ref was wrong' scenarios'

No matter how good it is, sky will find a way to attack and undermine a referee, it fills the hours, gets people arguing and keeps them in business
Click to expand...
Bang on
 
.db. said:
www.skysports.com

VAR: Premier League claims 96 per cent of referee decisions are correct - so what is future of technology in football?

The Premier League claim the “majority” of supporters are in favour of VAR and the technology has led to a 14 per cent increase in correct decisions; Sky Sports senior reporter Rob Dorsett sits down with Tony Scholes to discuss VAR’s performance and ideas for improvement
www.skysports.com www.skysports.com
www.bbc.co.uk

VAR: Report shows technology has been 98.9% accurate in decision-making

The video assistant referee system has been accurate in 98.9% of decisions during its trial, says the International Football Association Board.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk

Here’s the evidence of what I’ve said about the Premier Lesgue and IFAB’s findings. You know, the ones you just said i had ‘zero evidence’ of.

You will have to ring or email City directly for your ridiculous demands of wanting specific stats on City in the General Football Forum when talking generally about football when I’ve never mentioned decisions solely in City games not claimed ever to have any data on referee decisions in City games.
Click to expand...
When PGMOL tell the watching world that no mistakes were made by VAR at last years FA Cup final it really doesn't help your case regarding their claimed percentages of correct decisions made.

It's smoke and mirrors mate and I'm sorry to say that you appear to have been hoodwinked by them.


EDIT (after reading both of the things you posted)

...and what exactly does...

"It said the technology increased the accuracy of decisions that can be reviewed from 93% to 98.9%."

...mean? Because it most certainly isn't saying that the 98.9% of the decisions it makes are correct.
 
Last edited:
.db. said:
www.skysports.com

VAR: Premier League claims 96 per cent of referee decisions are correct - so what is future of technology in football?

The Premier League claim the “majority” of supporters are in favour of VAR and the technology has led to a 14 per cent increase in correct decisions; Sky Sports senior reporter Rob Dorsett sits down with Tony Scholes to discuss VAR’s performance and ideas for improvement
www.skysports.com www.skysports.com
www.bbc.co.uk

VAR: Report shows technology has been 98.9% accurate in decision-making

The video assistant referee system has been accurate in 98.9% of decisions during its trial, says the International Football Association Board.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk

Here’s the evidence of what I’ve said about the Premier Lesgue and IFAB’s findings. You know, the ones you just said i had ‘zero evidence’ of.

You will have to ring or email City directly for your ridiculous demands of wanting specific stats on City in the General Football Forum when talking generally about football when I’ve never mentioned decisions solely in City games not claimed ever to have any data on referee decisions in City games.
Click to expand...
Your first bit of evidence is from 2018 and from that beacon of impartiality, skysports. It proves nowt.
 
the-ecstacy-of-eight said:
When PGMOL tell the watching world that no mistakes were made by VAR at last years FA Cup final it really doesn't help your case regarding their claimed percentages of correct decisions made.

It's smoke and mirrors mate and I'm sorry to say that you appear to have been hoodwinked by them.
Click to expand...
If they had shown that live on the stadium screens there would have been a riot.
 
.db. said:
So you’ve been proven wrong but are hanging onto sentence about a survey on whether fans are in favour of or against VAR to deflect from the data on VAR that proves you wrong? You do know that sentence is not about the investigation done into the increase of correct decisions, don’t you?

What about ‘A report, external from football's lawmakers said VAR was used in 804 competitive matches in more than 20 competitions. It said the technology increased the accuracy of decisions that can be reviewed from 93% to 98.9%’?
Click to expand...
That report was written by, wait for it….

“The IFAB,in close partnership with FIFA’s Football Technology Innovation Department. “
Ha ha ha ha ha - as independent as the Soviet Politburo.

Nowhere, repeat, nowhere does that report show how they compare VAR to non-VAR matches, just some spurious non-evidential remark that VAR has improved decision making to 98%.

You’re gonna have to try harder, much harder.
 
halfcenturyup said:
I have never found a report on the efficacy of VAR that doesn't use data on % correct decisions provided by IFAB /UEFA /the PL. Do you have one?
Click to expand...
He’s busily typing one up himself. It won’t be peer-reviewed, it won’t say where the data came from. It might have some footage from Tuvaluan tiddlywinks, and it will definitely show how VAR has improved everything by at least one billion %.
 
stonerblue said:
If they had shown that live on the stadium screens there would have been a riot.
Click to expand...
Wasn't aware (from my couch) that they hadn't shown it.

In other news, there was absolutely nothing amiss with the role Rashford played in "that" goal either, 96% correct decisions made and rising. Isn't VAR magnificent :)
 
It's Orwellian. If the games' authorities say it works, then it works. If they say that every single decision made that benefits the main two red clubs is correct, then it is. If it says Howard Webb and his cronies at pgmol are whiter-than-white, then they are.

But what saddens me is that there are posters on here who either cannot or will not see the wood for the trees.
 
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