VAR Discussion Thread

Blue Mist said:
If it wasn't for the guest wum this thread would be on page 6
Click to expand...

It jumps 6+ pages whenever there’s a controversial decision, usually by the same posters that repeat VAR has killed the game and they’re done with it now. Until the next time .. when they repeat the same.
 
RobinHood said:
Posted in the Palace match thread but got lost.

Can anyone tell me - if the ref plays advantage after a foul in the box, can VAR overrule the advantage?
Click to expand...
It would depend on what the referee communicated his decision to the VAR as.

If he said he said he didn't see a foul and just played on, then the VAR could recommend a review for a penalty. But if he said, he saw a foul, played advantage and the attacker missed, there's nothing the VAR can do about that.

It's extremely unlikely to happen though. A referee is only going to play advantage on a penalty if it's an absolute tap in. Also it would probably happen that quickly after the foul that it wouldn't even give him time to indicate an advantage, so would probably still give the penalty anyway.
 
Stephen230 said:
It would depend on what the referee communicated his decision to the VAR as.

If he said he said he didn't see a foul and just played on, then the VAR could recommend a review for a penalty. But if he said, he saw a foul, played advantage and the attacker missed, there's nothing the VAR can do about that.

It's extremely unlikely to happen though. A referee is only going to play advantage on a penalty if it's an absolute tap in. Also it would probably happen that quickly after the foul that it wouldn't even give him time to indicate an advantage, so would probably still give the penalty anyway.
Click to expand...
you've answered my question in bold without the caveats.
 
BlueHammer85 said:
Ruddiger impedes Haaland and they go over in the box, ref would never have gave pen. VAR correctly informs Ref to take a look.
Penalty to Man City. Rightly so. why should City be denied a penalty - which was vital.
Click to expand...
What about all the other times that Erling has blatantly been hauled to the ground yet the impeccable VAR failed to highlight it to the onfield incompetent? The above was the exception not the rule. Why, wasn't the penalty given against Newcastle when Phil was fouled in the area or the handball outside the area in the FAC Final There as many missed or not reviewed wrongly than corrected by VAR
There is also the fact that refs will not give a decision and ask VAR to look at it to see if its reviewed until we get to listen to all communications we will never know VAR is a crutch that they rely on
 
Remember that feeling of random referee calls, how its a decision lottery, where there is no consistency, and decisions were just basically wrong, glaring errors....What's changed?

Well, we have a load of suckers who believe it's all been fixed.

Show them some technology and a "process" and they think things are fixed
 
BlueHammer85 said:
It’s true, it’s a pointless debate that goes round in circles- I point out a handball goal being given and no doubt later there will be a controversial incident where var have got the wrong decision and the arguments go on.
I don’t want perfection and I don’t expect that. I just want a ref to have a second look with tech help or goals like that one today to be rightly ruled out.
Click to expand...
So why do you want VAR then?

VAR was introduced to improve decision-making accuracy, which is commendable. However, despite the fabricated statistics, it hasn’t been effective. Football laws and their interpretations are inherently subjective, and adding VAR with video replays introduces even more subjectivity, as there are now multiple opinions involved in a decision. IFAB has attempted to minimize subjectivity by altering the Laws of the Game (LoTG), but this has actually worsened the situation, particularly in the case of handball, which changes every season.

People often discuss the use of technology in football as if there’s a specific application that determines decisions, but in reality, it’s just video footage. When the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) uses the video, they employ slow motion and freeze frames to check if the referee missed something. However, if the only way to see the incident is through slow motion and freeze frames, it means the referee didn’t miss anything. What makes the use of VAR wrong is that it can distort the perception of the event, often making it appear worse.

VAR also distorts a game the Lino doesn't flag, as instructed, but there was a definite offside, play continues immediately a free kick is conceded and a goal is scored direct from the FK
Can you see what is wrong? Before VAR the Lino flagged ref gave an indirect FK and play continued correctly. Does this appear in the stats to show how VAR is getting things wrong? Of course not

Match going fans don't want VAR, see below, and in a small sample size on here neither does posters on this forum and Im sure the same could be said of the club's fan forums

thefsa.org.uk

Survey: Fans say they will attend fewer games because of VAR - Football Supporters' Association

The results of our fan consultation on VAR are in, and they make for interesting reading: more than four out of ten fans say they will attend fewer games in future due to the effect VAR is having on the game.
thefsa.org.uk thefsa.org.uk

So, why do Howard and his mates? Well its a nice little earner, before VAR it was one match a weekend now its more its also means when they have to retire, as they cant run anymore, its a nice desk job extending their careers

VAR has indeed spoiled the game. Yes, we all complained about referees, and we still do. However, in retrospect, after a game, we would generally accept that the referee had one interpretation of an incident. TV made it unfair to officials with their endless debates and use of video footage about incidents, almost introducing VAR before it was actually implemented. They drew lines across the pitch to indicate a player’s on- or offside position without any correction for parallax. Yet a Lino in real time, inline with play had made a good decision as to whether a player was offside, not his toenail, a genuine human assessment of infringement of the law this meant that the sprit of the law applied, now they use laboratory techniques to find mm infringements and no application of the spirit of the law
 
halfcenturyup said:
They have never explained how the graphics are created, because they can't in a way that won't get ripped to pieces.
Click to expand...
They have actually
www.premierleague.com

Semi-automated offside technology: What you need to know

Ahead of semi-automated offside technology (SAOT) being used in the Premier League this weekend, here is more information as to how it will work
www.premierleague.com www.premierleague.com

The system uses up to 30 newly installed cameras mounted around Premier League stadiums – with *several capturing footage at 100 frames per second, twice the frame rate of typical broadcast cameras.
The cameras track the exact movement of the ball as well as up to 10,000 surface "mesh" data points per player - meaning the technology will track to see if any attacking player involved in the build-up to any incident was offside.
These are then "flagged" automatically in SAOT software to the VAR and SAOT operator.

The technology is "semi-automated", meaning there is human input as the VAR still needs to confirm the decision and that the SAOT system has accurately identified the "kick-point" and the correct players with the correct part of the body – and the outcome of the SAOT.

The VAR can still over right the "kick point" suggested by SAOT which is what I believe they did with the gaol at Newcastle which when they published the 3D image showed Dias jumping which he did after the actual kick point, the header.

Once the decision is made – a decision visual (image) will be sent to broadcast, giant screens in stadiums and shared on the @PLMatchCentre X account.
This will feature a 3D virtual replay of the relevant players identifiable by each team’s kit.

* Why not all the cameras?
 
VAR decided to tell the referee that he needed to give Simons a red card, effectively re-refereeing the original decision, but then thought there was nothing wrong with Ekitike's foul that enabled him to score.

Clear and obvious manipulation of the outcome of the game. It must be corrupt, because the group of blokes in the VAR room can't all get it so wrong unless they are complicit.

And as for VAR not telling the ref to review Saliba's massive foul on Barry, words fail me!
 
Gordyola said:
What about all the other times that Erling has blatantly been hauled to the ground yet the impeccable VAR failed to highlight it to the onfield incompetent? The above was the exception not the rule. Why, wasn't the penalty given against Newcastle when Phil was fouled in the area or the handball outside the area in the FAC Final There as many missed or not reviewed wrongly than corrected by VAR
There is also the fact that refs will not give a decision and ask VAR to look at it to see if its reviewed until we get to listen to all communications we will never know VAR is a crutch that they rely on
Click to expand...
The rules were applied subjectively before VAR and still continue to be with VAR. It's unconscious bias at best, and that's giving them the benefit of the doubt.
 
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