VAR (PL introduction 2019)

[BolinCell]

not long now before the most expensive player in the world is the player who can consistently hit the defenders arm with a chip ball to gain a penalty.

 

[Bigga]

I didn't know that, so had a read of this: https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1666250-the-history-of-instant-replay-in-the-nfl

It's genuinely staggering that the NFL introduced our version of VAR way back in 1986 and then decided it was completely unworkable TWENTY-SEVEN years ago. It finally reemerged in 1999 with a much more manageable "challenge" system that endures to this day.

Here's a proven case study of a sport that simply couldn't get official-led VAR to work in a fair way without killing the supporter experience, so they binned it off and handed authority for reviewing decisions to the players/managers.

So what does FIFA do? It ignores 30 years of valuable experience and ploughs on regardless. The arrogance of football's governing authorities is breathtaking.

I don't like this version of VAR at all.

I've been talking about a 2 challenge system for years and then let the ref get on with game once the challenges ran out.

 

[penguins4kompany]

Think it's very open to manipulation, for instance the ref strangely not being shown the alternate/best angles of the llorente arm assisted goal.
And this from the league cup semi first leg, spurs v chelsea https://www.telegraph.co.uk/footbal...ide-chelsea-provide-alternative-camera-angle/

 

[stonerblue]

Another day, another match ruined.

 

[tornandfrayed]

not long now before the most expensive player in the world is the player who can consistently hit the defenders arm with a chip ball to gain a penalty.

My money's on a certain ginger haired wizard currently playing in sky blue.

 

[Mon Autre]

Feel like if VAR is here to stay and we're going to judge things in such forensic detail then I'd like the offside rule to be updated.

I know it won't eradicate narrow and contentious decisions but I think strikers need a bit more to work with if their movements are going to be judged in super slow mo over and over again. Think I'd prefer it if there needed to be clear daylight between the attacker and defender in order for it to be offside.

 

[Colthekid]

Feel like if VAR is here to stay and we're going to judge things in such forensic detail then I'd like the offside rule to be updated.

I know it won't eradicate narrow and contentious decisions but I think strikers need a bit more to work with if their movements are going to be judged in super slow mo over and over again. Think I'd prefer it if there needed to be clear daylight between the attacker and defender in order for it to be offside.

The problem is, you will still get the "narrow & contentious decisions" whichever way the offside law is implemented...

either, using the current law - "The attacker is level...No, his big toe is offside";
or if we use your version - "The attacker is offside, there's daylight between them...No, the defenders big toe is overlapping the attackers heel"

Small margins either way, so where do you draw the line? Personally I think these very narrow offside decisions are one of the reasons why VAR is necessary, the margin can be so small as to defeat the naked eye of the Linesman or Referee. I would rather the right decision, no matter how small the margin. No-one (except the dippers) seems to mind about the small margins the goal-line decision system gives (last season being a prime example!)

I don't mind the delay's VAR can cause either, just adds to the tension & excitement as far as I'm concerned. Although I admit the times are a bit long at the mo, I'd be surprised if they didn't come down as everyone (Ref's included) got used to the system.

 

[Deleted member 77198]

Why does the ref have to go over and have a look at a screen on the side of the pitch to make a decision?

There are half a dozen people seeing the same thing in a studio without any pressure on them. Why the fuck can’t they make the decision like in rugby?

It takes the piss having to wait while the ref runs over the to sideline, watch the same video that the VAR panel have already watched and then run all the way back to the incident.

The game is already littered with time wasting ****s, we don’t need VAR boring everyone in the stands to death n’all.

Fuck this shit off immediately!

 

[toffee balls]

I'm confused.
Tight but correct call on both major incidents.

 

[Mon Autre]

The problem is, you will still get the "narrow & contentious decisions" whichever way the offside law is implemented...

either, using the current law - "The attacker is level...No, his big toe is offside";
or if we use your version - "The attacker is offside, there's daylight between them...No, the defenders big toe is overlapping the attackers heel"

Small margins either way, so where do you draw the line? Personally I think these very narrow offside decisions are one of the reasons why VAR is necessary, the margin can be so small as to defeat the naked eye of the Linesman or Referee. I would rather the right decision, no matter how small the margin. No-one (except the dippers) seems to mind about the small margins the goal-line decision system gives (last season being a prime example!)

I don't mind the delay's VAR can cause either, just adds to the tension & excitement as far as I'm concerned. Although I admit the times are a bit long at the mo, I'd be surprised if they didn't come down as everyone (Ref's included) got used to the system.

I agree with you. I don't think my suggestion would really change much when it comes to close calls. It just feels like VAR is giving all of the benefit to the defending teams and we're losing out when it comes to teams showing anticipation and foresight. As a fan, I don't want to see well worked goals ruled out for the sake of a millimetre and I think giving the attackers that little extra margin of error might alleviate that. They should aim to be level, if they've strayed so far ahead there's daylight there then they only have themselves to blame if it's one millimetre one way or the other. Like I say, I know what i'm saying creates new issues in itself but it's just how I feel and I think i'd just prefer to see strikers given that little bit more leeway if this is how the game is going to be from now on.

I can only speak for myself but I don't think i've ever felt too hard done by if a goal like Ellen White's last night has been awarded against us. And I've never felt especially like we've "gotten away with one" when we've had goals like last night's stand in our favour.