Jump to content

Like VAR? Hate VAR? Have your say!


Blagdon red
 Share

Recommended Posts

A survey is being run by the Football Supporters Association on VAR:

https://thefsa.org.uk/news/have-your-say-on-var/

The results will be fed into the PL's end-of-season review of the system.

So, if you have any views on VAR, it's worth a couple of minutes of your time to complete the survey.

I told them it should be scrapped!

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I told them the game would be better with a cricket style referral process, whereby the captain or gaffer of each team has 2 referrals and the referee will not use video assistance unless a referral is made.

Just like in cricket, mistakes will be missed, but the flow of the game will be better and teams have a fair opportunity to overturn poor officiating.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mozo said:

I told them the game would be better with a cricket style referral process, whereby the captain or gaffer of each team has 2 referrals and the referee will not use video assistance unless a referral is made.

Just like in cricket, mistakes will be missed, but the flow of the game will be better and teams have a fair opportunity to overturn poor officiating.

That's not a bad idea  and I have said before that we need some version of "umpires call" to negate these ridiculous borderline decisions. 

Like others, I was initially positive about the idea but I feel that they very quickly ditched the original ethos of "clear and obvious error". If some of these decisions take minutes to turnover, then they are not "clear and obvious" by definition.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Port Said Red said:

That's not a bad idea  and I have said before that we need some version of "umpires call" to negate these ridiculous borderline decisions. 

Like others, I was initially positive about the idea but I feel that they very quickly ditched the original ethos of "clear and obvious error". If some of these decisions take minutes to turnover, then they are not "clear and obvious" by definition.

It clearly hasn't improved the game but instead of binning the tech off, just change how we use it.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, exAtyeoMax said:

I just said to get rid of it! Goal line technology is ok though 

Goal line tech is fine because it requires no human involvement - the technology gives a yes/no decision.

The concept of VAR is fine, but undone the minute the administrators become involved, start changing the laws to fit and, instead of a man in black having a split second to interpret an incident and get he decision wrong, it now takes a panel with TV replays from every conceivable angle and in slow motion to do just the same!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, downendcity said:

Goal line tech is fine because it requires no human involvement - the technology gives a yes/no decision.

The concept of VAR is fine, but undone the minute the administrators become involved, start changing the laws to fit and, instead of a man in black having a split second to interpret an incident and get he decision wrong, it now takes a panel with TV replays from every conceivable angle and in slow motion to do just the same!

It just totally ruins the flow of the game. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mozo said:

I told them the game would be better with a cricket style referral process, whereby the captain or gaffer of each team has 2 referrals and the referee will not use video assistance unless a referral is made.

Just like in cricket, mistakes will be missed, but the flow of the game will be better and teams have a fair opportunity to overturn poor officiating.

Agree. Except I’d also allow referees the discretion to interpret any player holding his hand up to claim a foul or a throw in as a request for a referral! Really annoys me when the ball has quite clearly come off a player and they still claim the throw! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VAR works, however the rules its used for are outdated and were never designed for VAR to be applied to. I do however think that VAR should only be used for objective decisions and subjective decisions should be left on the pitch with the referee and no decisions made by someone at Stockley Park. If the referee wants to use a pitch side monitor to aide their decision making they should be able to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mozo said:

I told them the game would be better with a cricket style referral process, whereby the captain or gaffer of each team has 2 referrals and the referee will not use video assistance unless a referral is made.

Just like in cricket, mistakes will be missed, but the flow of the game will be better and teams have a fair opportunity to overturn poor officiating.

Wouldn't work in my opinion, if teams have referrals left they'll use them to stop teams on the counter by saying they want to use a referral, you can't delay until the next time the ball goes out of play as the ball can stay in play for 5 minutes

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just don’t find it necessary for my enjoyment of the game.

I like goal line technology and that’s it.

VAR offers me nothing. In fact it detracts from my enjoyment of a spontaneous, subjective game.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 054123 said:

I just don’t find it necessary for my enjoyment of the game.

I like goal line technology and that’s it.

VAR offers me nothing. In fact it detracts from my enjoyment of a spontaneous, subjective game.

I suspect this is view of the majority yet won’t be scrapped sadly.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Alex_BCFC said:

I suspect this is view of the majority yet won’t be scrapped sadly.

Yeah for sure it's a total shitfest nobody who has enjoyed football over the years wants it, but it's here to stay, no way will it be reversed.

The pure joy of a goal at the top level has been taken away, Roberts goal against Hartlepool imaging trying to go mental but looking at the ref just in case.

****** hate it and makes me hate modern football even more.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Done. For me, needs to be more transparent as it is in Rugby.

  • Referee and VAR must be mic'd up and audible to TV audience.
  • Referee must give an 'on-field' decision i.e. player goes down in box. On-field decision = penalty.
  • Referee must ask VAR for any reason to overturn this decision.
  • VAR either agrees with on-field decision (penalty stands) or refers referee to video playback which is shown on the BIG SCREEN (not the pitch side monitor).
  • [If club does not have big screen then no VAR simples].
  • Referee makes the final decision (penalty vs no penalty) and clearly talks through the decision making process so that TV audiences can understand what is going on (i.e. "number 9 red was clearly clipped by number 5 blue, preventing him from playing the ball therefore the decision is penalty kick")
  • For fans in the stadium, clear indication of what is being reviewed on the BIG SCREEN should be sufficient

I also said that VAR awarding an offside should only be when a player is gaining a clear advantage from being in an offside position i.e. >/= half a yard ahead of the final defender. All this nonsense about players toes or shoulders being offside after a line being drawn on the pitch with MS paint is nonsense.

 

TMO in Rugby doesn't get it right every time, but at least being able to hear the thinking and logic process behind the referee and TMO's decision making process helps fans to understand what exactly is being reviewed and why they have arrived at their final decision.

 

Edited by OddBallJim
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, OddBallJim said:

Done. For me, needs to be more transparent as it is in Rugby.

  • Referee and VAR must be mic'd up and audible to TV audience.
  • Referee must give an 'on-field' decision i.e. player goes down in box. On-field decision = penalty.
  • Referee must ask VAR for any reason to overturn this decision.
  • VAR either agrees with on-field decision (penalty stands) or refers referee to video playback which is shown on the BIG SCREEN (not the pitch side monitor).
  • [If club does not have big screen then no VAR simples].
  • Referee makes the final decision (penalty vs no penalty) and clearly talks through the decision making process so that TV audiences can understand what is going on (i.e. "number 9 red was clearly clipped by number 5 blue, preventing him from playing the ball therefore the decision is penalty kick")
  • For fans in the stadium, clear indication of what is being reviewed on the BIG SCREEN should be sufficient.

 

TMO in Rugby doesn't get it right every time, but at least being able to hear the thinking and logic process behind the referee and TMO's decision making process helps fans to understand what exactly is being reviewed and why they have arrived at their final decision.

 

Or just do away with it in football...would be easier, save time, cost less and improve the game/experience for fans and players?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, OddBallJim said:

Done. For me, needs to be more transparent as it is in Rugby.

  • Referee and VAR must be mic'd up and audible to TV audience.
  • Referee must give an 'on-field' decision i.e. player goes down in box. On-field decision = penalty.
  • Referee must ask VAR for any reason to overturn this decision.
  • VAR either agrees with on-field decision (penalty stands) or refers referee to video playback which is shown on the BIG SCREEN (not the pitch side monitor).
  • [If club does not have big screen then no VAR simples].
  • Referee makes the final decision (penalty vs no penalty) and clearly talks through the decision making process so that TV audiences can understand what is going on (i.e. "number 9 red was clearly clipped by number 5 blue, preventing him from playing the ball therefore the decision is penalty kick")
  • For fans in the stadium, clear indication of what is being reviewed on the BIG SCREEN should be sufficient

I also said that VAR awarding an offside should only be when a player is gaining a clear advantage from being in an offside position i.e. >/= half a yard ahead of the final defender. All this nonsense about players toes or shoulders being offside after a line being drawn on the pitch with MS paint is nonsense.

 

TMO in Rugby doesn't get it right every time, but at least being able to hear the thinking and logic process behind the referee and TMO's decision making process helps fans to understand what exactly is being reviewed and why they have arrived at their final decision.

 

or just get rid…

It's over complicating things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, OddBallJim said:

Nah, I feel it has a place in the elite tier of the game but it needs change to make it work.

unlikely I'll be watching that for a while :rofl2br:but as soon as we get promoted they can get rid, I don't see any benefits to it at all

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...