VAR thread 2022/23

[kaz7]

It would certainly make it easier to adjudicate but the whole point of a VAR is to increase the number of correct decisions, not to change the laws of the game to make them easier to apply.

They change the rules often ! all season they tinker with offside and handball , they have changed it so many times they are confused themselves hence it is subjective and they are not in a position to state var works

 

[Stephen230]

you didn’t really answer my question.
There should be little pressure on referees if the process is open, transparent and fair. Mike them up. Show fans the pictures they are making decisions on, let us hear the discussions and the rationale for a decision. As I have constantly said. Like Rugby Union. It’s the lack of transparency and evidence based decision making that is putting pressure on them.

for example. Phil’s goal against Liverpool. How it should have worked;

Goal Scored
Goal check
referee to VAR; any reason why I can’t give this goal
Var to referee; we are looking at two incidents, potential foul by Haaland on Fabinho, potential foul by Haaland on Alisson
referee to Var; show me both incidents,
first film plays,
Referee; ok, yes there is a slight pull of the shirt but I have been letting similar go all game. No foul.
second clip plays Referee asks for it to be played from three angles
Referee; ok, Alison appears to have control of the ball as both hands are touching the ball which is grounded. By the laws of the game a challenge in those circumstances is deemed foul play. Free kick to Liverpool. Goal disallowed.
Referee; is there any reason why I shouldn’t give that as a revised decision
VAR no.
other than Liverpool are cunts


Disclaimer: this scenario included as an example. In no way should it be read that the goal should have been disallowed :-)

Conversations like that happen all the time in Rugby.
in all seriousness, if that is miked, broadcast in real time, the same clips shown in the ground and on Tv as the referee is seeing, 95% of problems solved. Those disciplines will sure as hell make referee and Var decision making better, tighter and quicker.

I’ve no issue with them broadcasting the conversations. I have an issue with people thinking it will “solve” anything though. In this example there would be fucking uproar that a referee has admitted live on air that he has clearly seen a foul but decided not to penalise it.

 

[Stephen230]

They change the rules often ! all season they tinker with offside and handball , they have changed it so many times they are confused themselves hence it is subjective and they are not in a position to state var works

Maybe, but there’s a fundamental difference between changing the laws with the intention of improving the game and changing them simply to make a referee’s job easier.

If you go down that road, you may aswell make it a handball offence every single time the ball hits a hand or arm.

 

[M16 citeh]

It would certainly make it easier to adjudicate but the whole point of a VAR is to increase the number of correct decisions, not to change the laws of the game to make them easier to apply.

What is a correct decision though? Most decisions are subjective and open to interpretation

 

[Saddleworth2]

I’ve no issue with them broadcasting the conversations. I have an issue with people thinking it will “solve” anything though. In this example there would be fucking uproar that a referee has admitted live on air that he has clearly seen a foul but decided not to penalise it.

why?
He did it all game and in the main was commended for it.
what I described happens in Rugby and there is nowhere near the same controversy. Rugby has a far more complex set of rules to referee as well.

 

[Stephen230]

why?
He did it all game and in the main was commended for it.
what I described happens in Rugby and there is nowhere near the same controversy. Rugby has a far more complex set of rules to referee as well.

Because both games of rugby are minority sports that are not put under anywhere near the same level of scrutiny as football.

Example. I’ve heard a video ref in rugby league live on TV telling the ref he thinks he’s missed a clear forward pass, when it is quite clearly stated that forward passes are not to be judged by the video ref. I’m guessing he didn’t realise his microphone was on. Either way, he disallowed the try, the commentator made a comment along the lines of…. Bit unorthodox but they got the right decision so all’s good. And as far as I’m aware, it’s never been mentioned since.

Can you imagine if a comparable scenario happened in a high profile football game?

 

[Paladin]

you didn’t really answer my question.
There should be little pressure on referees if the process is open, transparent and fair. Mike them up. Show fans the pictures they are making decisions on, let us hear the discussions and the rationale for a decision. As I have constantly said. Like Rugby Union. It’s the lack of transparency and evidence based decision making that is putting pressure on them.

for example. Phil’s goal against Liverpool. How it should have worked;

Goal Scored
Goal check
referee to VAR; any reason why I can’t give this goal
Var to referee; we are looking at two incidents, potential foul by Haaland on Fabinho, potential foul by Haaland on Alisson
referee to Var; show me both incidents,
first film plays,
Referee; ok, yes there is a slight pull of the shirt but I have been letting similar go all game. No foul.
second clip plays Referee asks for it to be played from three angles
Referee; ok, Alison appears to have control of the ball as both hands are touching the ball which is grounded. By the laws of the game a challenge in those circumstances is deemed foul play. Free kick to Liverpool. Goal disallowed.
Referee; is there any reason why I shouldn’t give that as a revised decision
VAR no.
other than Liverpool are cunts


Disclaimer: this scenario included as an example. In no way should it be read that the goal should have been disallowed :-)

Conversations like that happen all the time in Rugby.
in all seriousness, if that is miked, broadcast in real time, the same clips shown in the ground and on Tv as the referee is seeing, 95% of problems solved. Those disciplines will sure as hell make referee and Var decision making better, tighter and quicker.

Excellent example. 100% agree with this.

 

[Paladin]

I don't see how a miked-up ref last night would have made much difference

Spurs score
VAR ''Hold up, might be offside''
Ref 'Ok, let me know'
Ref 'hurry up lads, got Dier and Doherty going mad''
VAR (4 Mins later) ''sorry for the hold up, tight one, it was offside''
Ref ''ok cheers''

That honestly would just be the jist of it

I need to see how that played out, as I was playing footy last night. It sounds rather farcical though, and must be an extreme example of VAR application. It certainly isn't a common scenario.

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

We are going to get to a stage where fans don't cheer goals in the future
It's ruined the game

I don’t do it now as I’m sure there’ll be a VAR check!

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

the ref knew it was totally out of his hands and he was the one getting lambasted

Just shows that he wsn't the one who made the decision. He took his marching orders from the VARs in his ear. He was told to chalk off the goal due to being "told" that it was offsides.

 

[the-ecstacy-of-eight]

I don't see how a miked-up ref last night would have made much difference

Spurs score
VAR ''Hold up, might be offside''
Ref 'Ok, let me know'
Ref 'hurry up lads, got Dier and Doherty going mad''
VAR (4 Mins later) ''sorry for the hold up, tight one, it was offside''
Ref ''ok cheers''

That honestly would just be the jist of it

The on-field referee should lead the discussion/VAR, NOT VAR leading the on-field referee.

You are, as always, being deliberately obtuse in order to swerve.

 

[Stephen230]

Just shows that he wsn't the one who made the decision. He took his marching orders from the VARs in his ear. He was told to chalk off the goal due to being "told" that it was offsides.

That’s exactly how it is supposed to work with offside decisions.

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

What struck me last night was the smirk on the referees face as he was 'explaining' the decision to the Spuds players. He was having a whale of a time. I have to say it smelt bad.

It was disgusting. While the Spurs player were protesting and saying "The ball's gone backwards." All he did was stand there like a robot saying "it's offside. it's offside."

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

That’s exactly how it is supposed to work with offside decisions.

He's supposed to have autonomy when it comes to decisions. His ability to make decisions have been compromised.

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

why?
He did it all game and in the main was commended for it.
what I described happens in Rugby and there is nowhere near the same controversy. Rugby has a far more complex set of rules to referee as well.

The referee is sacrosanct in rugby as well. Even if he’s wrong the players just crack on with it, which is exactly what should happen in football. If players, managers and pundits had ever just accepted the decisions we wouldn’t have gone down this rabbit hole, from which football will never likely reappear!

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

100% with your analysis and analogy - top post - but fear the emotionless technocrat nerds will win the day.

They can't be allowed to win, otherwise the sport is doomed.

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

But the officials in the VAR room have the laws of the game, they know if it’s offside or not - it’s not the referees judgment call - they are the ones to tell the ref if it is off or not

Having the referee run to the monitor for a look and a chat for a offside is pointless and wastes more time - it’s a simple yes or no decision

Doesn't it trouble you that the laws of the game have been altered in order to accommodate VAR? Under the pre-VAR laws as they were Kane would have been played on by the deflection.

 

[the-ecstacy-of-eight]

But the officials in the VAR room have the laws of the game...

You mean like the one we had in Copenhagen who knew the rules so well that he disallowed a goal for an accidental handball 2 passes before the shot was struck?

 

[Stephen230]

He's supposed to have autonomy when it comes to decisions. His ability to make decisions have been compromised.

If you want to get right down to semantics, it is officially at the referee’s sole discretion whether he uses a VAR before every game. If he does then an extension of that is giving him permission to rule on offside decisions and advising ( telling ) him whether there’s been an offside or not.

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

The Spurs game serves to highlight the really simple thing they could do to make VAR not only work but be palatable. If they just made the law say: “If ANY part of the attacker is onside, it’s onside” there would be absolutely NO controversy.

That OR to implement a margin of error, take both the frame before and after the VAR snapshot frame and if any of those frames show him onside then then he would be considered on. Because as we know deciding which frame to pause it at to draw the lines is guesswork at best, and the drawing of the line itself is also guesswork.