VAR... really??

[Alex 35077]

2 hours ago, Kid Dynamite said:

 

The clear and obvious part doesn't apply to offsidss apparently because you are either onside or offside. Its not an objective decision

I get the application of the rule and everything, I just think it should be there for the ‘howler’. More widely I think it interferes far too much with the flow of the game. The decision was correct though, in terms of the offside but I’m not actually clear if the official was at fault for putting his flag up or not tbh.

Edit: I thought HMHM was saying it should just be there for clear and obvious errors 

Edited December 7, 2019 by Alex

[RobinRobin 11263]

If the referee had blown for the incorrect offside decision, then the replay would have shown it was not offside and there would have been no end to it, especially if we had gone on to lose. 

It is not just this season when players have been told to play to the whistle.  Players have been told that since they were able to stand and kick a ball competitively.  

We have multiple replays, due to the television coverage, so we may as well get them right when we can.  I understand that it causes delays in reaching a decision, but I would much prefer having the right decision (when it goes in our favour) than not   

[Kid Dynamite 7025]

Tbf, VAR has definitely gone in our favour so far this season. I appreciate there have been some horror decisions, but it's also stopped the big clubs getting subconscious favours by the refs 

[wykikitoon 20129]

One thing it has cut down on.

Salah going down quicker than a CT at an all you can eat buffet 

[ohhh_yeah 2964]

 

   

 

 

[PaddockLad 17248]

“THOSE WHO ARE STILL IN FAVOUR OF VAR ARE THE SAME AS THOSE WHO STILL THINK BREXIT IS A GOOD IDEA”  

 

 

[OTF 7295]

On 07/12/2019 at 19:32, Alex said:

I get the application of the rule and everything, I just think it should be there for the ‘howler’. More widely I think it interferes far too much with the flow of the game. The decision was correct though, in terms of the offside but I’m not actually clear if the official was at fault for putting his flag up or not tbh.

Edit: I thought HMHM was saying it should just be there for clear and obvious errors 

 

Maybe that's the measure; if you can't prove the onfield decision wrong in 10 seconds then it's not a clear and obvious error and the game goes on. Minimal disruption to the flow of the game and anything that's actually clear and obvious is addressed. Drop the charade of the ref going over the the screen, just have the VAR announce the correct decision and have the audio able to be heard in the stadium and by TV audience. Simple. Effective.

[Alex 35077]

17 minutes ago, OTF said:

 

Maybe that's the measure; if you can't prove the onfield decision wrong in 10 seconds then it's not a clear and obvious error and the game goes on. Minimal disruption to the flow of the game and anything that's actually clear and obvious is addressed. Drop the charade of the ref going over the the screen, just have the VAR announce the correct decision and have the audio able to be heard in the stadium and by TV audience. Simple. Effective.

Probably said this before on here but there should definitely be a time limit (say 30 seconds at the absolute max) and the officials doing VAR should own the decisions. They do for offside but for the other decisions too. I.e. they can clearly see the on-field ref has either made a mistake or missed something so the VAR officials reverse or make a decision. Or they can’t see that, so they stay out of it. Simple. None of this sending the ref to the monitor. It puts them under unfair pressure and you also get the ridiculous inconsistencies, like where they aren’t shown a crucial replay (or part of one) that the VAR refs have seen. It’s a fucking ludicrously simple and obvious improvement imo. Especially seeing as VAR would appear to be here to stay. 

Edited April 22 by Alex

[Monkeys Fist 42415]

2 minutes ago, Alex said:

Probably said this before on here but there should definitely be a time limit (say 30 seconds at the absolute max) and the officials doing VAR should own the decisions. They do for offside but for the other decisions too. I.e. they can clearly see the on-field ref has either made a mistake or missed something so the VAR officials reverse or make a decision. Or they can’t see that, so they stay out of it. Simple. Non of this sending the ref to the monitor. It puts them under unfair pressure and you also get the ridiculous inconsistencies, like where they aren’t shown a crucial replay (or part of one) that the VAR refs have seen. It’s a fucking ludicrously simple and obvious improvement imo. Especially seeing as VAR would appear to be here to stay. 

Very simple solution this…

 

 

… but it would inevitably lead to VAR for the VAR. 

[Meenzer 15524]

It's been done

 

[Monkeys Fist 42415]

10 minutes ago, Meenzer said:

It's been done

 

Talented bloke the chap on the left. 
 

Had a massive hit in Romania with
” Săbii de o Mie de Oameni“

 

 

[Craig 6682]

1 hour ago, Alex said:

Probably said this before on here but there should definitely be a time limit (say 30 seconds at the absolute max) and the officials doing VAR should own the decisions. They do for offside but for the other decisions too. I.e. they can clearly see the on-field ref has either made a mistake or missed something so the VAR officials reverse or make a decision. Or they can’t see that, so they stay out of it. Simple. None of this sending the ref to the monitor. It puts them under unfair pressure and you also get the ridiculous inconsistencies, like where they aren’t shown a crucial replay (or part of one) that the VAR refs have seen. It’s a fucking ludicrously simple and obvious improvement imo. Especially seeing as VAR would appear to be here to stay. 

 

Didn't they do this initially though and everyone said it was ludicrous that a bloke behind a TV screen in Stockley Park was making the decisions rather than the on-field referee who to that point had ALWAYS had the final say?

There definitely needs to be amendments if it's to remain as it's ruining the game. I'm still in favour of each team having a limited number of VAR challenges per match (3 each maybe) and once they've burned them that's it - it's down to the on-field referee to decide.

[Gemmill 44853]

If we're going with 30 seconds, they absolutely have to play the Countdown music in the ground. Fans singing along and a brand new moment of celebration on the "boooooo" sound as the clock runs out. 

[Alex 35077]

17 minutes ago, Craig said:

 

Didn't they do this initially though and everyone said it was ludicrous that a bloke behind a TV screen in Stockley Park was making the decisions rather than the on-field referee who to that point had ALWAYS had the final say?

There definitely needs to be amendments if it's to remain as it's ruining the game. I'm still in favour of each team having a limited number of VAR challenges per match (3 each maybe) and once they've burned them that's it - it's down to the on-field referee to decide.

I wasn’t aware that they’d done that initially. But if that’s the case and they binned it without trying it properly based purely on knee jerk comments then it’s little wonder VAR isn’t working. 

[ewerk 30598]

I think it was FIFA or IFAB or some of those twats who forced them to bring in the pitch side monitor.

[Craig 6682]

I'm probably in the minority but I've never advocated it in any shape or form - it over-sanitises to the point where it takes what is magic about the sport away. The moments that hooked us all when we were kids. 

Look at the Coventry game yesterday, technically they were right to disallow the goal but in the spirit of the game it just felt like the magic of the cup was ripped away in an instant. Consider our CL campaign in 2002/03 when we got the last minute winner at Feyenoord to take us through to the next round and imagine that goal have been ruled out thanks to a fag-paper thin offside decision in an earlier phase of play. 

Offsides need a review for me as well - make it so there has to be clear air between attacker and defender for it to be offside. That way we don't have this utter nonsense where you're offside due to a hand / toenail / etc.

[Gemmill 44853]

The problem with changing the definition, as one of the Aussie lads pointed out the other day, is that you just shift the argument. What's clear daylight, etc, and some dick is drawing the same lines in a different place. As long as video reviews exist, the game is fucked in terms of that "sporting moment" being stolen. 

 

I was in favour of it coming in cos I thought it would be used to fix howlers. But the implementation has properly fucked things up. I'd rather they did away with it and the DRS thing is as good an idea as anything. Cos that really does have the potential to fix howlers. 

 

One review per half, if you review and you're right you retain it, if not, then you're at the mercy of onfield decisions for the rest of that 45.

[thebrokendoll 9203]

50 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

If we're going with 30 seconds, they absolutely have to play the Countdown music in the ground. Fans singing along and a brand new moment of celebration on the "boooooo" sound as the clock runs out. 

 

good idea.

they could also show on the big screen a montage of rachel riley images in her skimpy.mini skirts. 

[Dazzler 9742]

3 minutes ago, thebrokendoll said:

 

good idea.

they could also show on the big screen a montage of rachel riley images in her skimpy.mini skirts. 

If the decision goes against the home team the final image is Vorders in the 80s before her tit and arse implants. Got to end on a low point so the decision seems more trivial.

[Alex 35077]

28 minutes ago, Craig said:

I'm probably in the minority but I've never advocated it in any shape or form - it over-sanitises to the point where it takes what is magic about the sport away. The moments that hooked us all when we were kids. 

Look at the Coventry game yesterday, technically they were right to disallow the goal but in the spirit of the game it just felt like the magic of the cup was ripped away in an instant. Consider our CL campaign in 2002/03 when we got the last minute winner at Feyenoord to take us through to the next round and imagine that goal have been ruled out thanks to a fag-paper thin offside decision in an earlier phase of play. 

Offsides need a review for me as well - make it so there has to be clear air between attacker and defender for it to be offside. That way we don't have this utter nonsense where you're offside due to a hand / toenail / etc.

I just took the dog for a walk and didn’t even bother checking the pens score until about 2 or 3 hours later once that goal was disallowed. Apart from the inevitability of the penalty shootout like you say - it was just another (but particularly extreme) instance of it sucking all the fun and magic out of the moment. 
Agree about offsides too. 

[Gemmill 44853]

7 minutes ago, Dazzler said:

If the decision goes against the home team the final image is Vorders in the 80s before her tit and arse implants. Got to end on a low point so the decision seems more trivial.

 

I'm well into Vorders these days. She looks like a walking sex doll and basically sounds like she's up for owt.  Plus she fucking hates the Tories. 

 

[Dazzler 9742]

1 minute ago, Gemmill said:

 

I'm well into Vorders these days. She looks like a walking sex doll and basically sounds like she's up for owt.  Plus she fucking hates the Tories. 

 

Aye she’s pure filth ever since she hit her golden years. Getting her back blown out by numerous younger lads. She needs to just be honest about the surgery though, no one is buying it, she went from flat arsed and chested to Kardashian as soon as she hit her 50s

[Gemmill 44853]

 

I think Forest have got a point here mind. If Attwell is a Luton fan, of course you don't give him the VAR job with 5 games to go when the two are in a relegation battle together. 

 

And if Webb didn't know, he's not really doing his job. But once he does know, he has to sort it out. 

 

Cos now even if Attwell somehow really thought he got those decisions right, the whole thing still LOOKS like it reeks. 

[Alex 35077]

On a more serious note, I saw Vorders once about 20 years ago and the main thing I noticed was she had a relatively big arse. Which is not to say she hasn’t had the sag put right since 

[Gemmill 44853]

You would have been smaller then as well though. My back garden seemed massive when I was a kid but I bet if I saw it now....