Palace v Man Utd (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Nick
- Start date
Otis
Well-Known Member
Nothing wrong with VAR. It's the numpties operating it and how they implement their decisions
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
the refs are relying on the people watching in Stockley park. I can only think of one instance since the restart (can't remember which game), where the ref has gone over t the monitor and watched for himself.
Apparently in Europe that's the norm.
eastwoodsdustman
Well-Known Member
So they’ve invested millions into it and the bigger clubs still get the decisions going their way.
You’d think var was just a box ticking exercise to try and make it look like they’re playing fair.
You’d think var was just a box ticking exercise to try and make it look like they’re playing fair.
Frostie
Well-Known Member
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
Could be such as useful tool but they're taking all the crap bits of it.
1. Make it so those in the stadium can see/hear what's going on.
2. VAR can only ask ref to look at it again - they have no authority to make a decision.
3. Timed decision - if it takes more than a minute it's not clear and obvious - decision stands.
4. Margin of error for offside - favouring the attacker - to take account of frame rates etc.
5. Possibly have NFL challenge system so it's on the team management to decide whether to appeal. If a howler is made and they don't appeal it's on them. Incorrect challenge lose a sub. This may well lead to every goal being challenged but they're all checked now anyway.
1. Make it so those in the stadium can see/hear what's going on.
2. VAR can only ask ref to look at it again - they have no authority to make a decision.
3. Timed decision - if it takes more than a minute it's not clear and obvious - decision stands.
4. Margin of error for offside - favouring the attacker - to take account of frame rates etc.
5. Possibly have NFL challenge system so it's on the team management to decide whether to appeal. If a howler is made and they don't appeal it's on them. Incorrect challenge lose a sub. This may well lead to every goal being challenged but they're all checked now anyway.
Otis
Well-Known Member
Which is why I have always said, if they cannot see an obvious error within 20 seconds, it goes back to the onfield decision.
VAR is fine if they implement it properly. It's supposed to be for obvious errors, not for someone's toenail sticking out
Last edited:
Frostie
Well-Known Member
Clear & obvious doesn't apply to offsides. They're foolishly believing the tech is good enough to be definitive when it's not, it's impossible.
Also as VAR can't overrule on free-kicks or yellow cards etc. you get farcical situations like Grealish proven to have dived on the VAR penalty review but can't be booked for it.
Even worse in the Man City v Liverpool game when Walker was booked for fouling Mané & a free kick given to Liverpool.
VAR reviewed as the incident was close to being in the area, concludes that actually there was no contact & Mané had dived. Ok, so no penalty - great but it can't reverse the referee's original decision so Liverpool still get the free kick & Walker is still booked!
The new handball law is another farce that was brought in specifically to make VAR reviews easier & it's an absolute clusterfuck.
BIN THE LOT!
*Goal line tech is fine (when they remember to switch it on).
Also as VAR can't overrule on free-kicks or yellow cards etc. you get farcical situations like Grealish proven to have dived on the VAR penalty review but can't be booked for it.
Even worse in the Man City v Liverpool game when Walker was booked for fouling Mané & a free kick given to Liverpool.
VAR reviewed as the incident was close to being in the area, concludes that actually there was no contact & Mané had dived. Ok, so no penalty - great but it can't reverse the referee's original decision so Liverpool still get the free kick & Walker is still booked!
The new handball law is another farce that was brought in specifically to make VAR reviews easier & it's an absolute clusterfuck.
BIN THE LOT!
*Goal line tech is fine (when they remember to switch it on).
lifeskyblue
Well-Known Member
VAR is a joke...it’s not for the benefit of the game. Refs and linos do make mistakes (not as many as professional footballers mind) but it was part of the game and we all enjoyed blaming the ref for an injustice we had no real idea was a mistake or not. Refs are certainly not cheats (again unlike many professional footballers (sly tugs in the box, diving as if taken out by a high calibre rifle etc). VAR with all the technology constantly baffles fans, pundits and managers alike; it still relies on interpretation (handball etc) or imperfect science (the moment a ball is played/parts of body in advance position etc).
VAR is there for the interests of tv companies and armchair fans; areas where they make something interesting/debatable out of the ordinary and mundane. It takes away from the immediacy and leaves the paying customer in limbo...whilst at home and the studio you can watch from every angle in super slo mo, high definition and close up...and then pass judgement on the original ref decision and the guy at stockly Park.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
VAR is there for the interests of tv companies and armchair fans; areas where they make something interesting/debatable out of the ordinary and mundane. It takes away from the immediacy and leaves the paying customer in limbo...whilst at home and the studio you can watch from every angle in super slo mo, high definition and close up...and then pass judgement on the original ref decision and the guy at stockly Park.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Otis
Well-Known Member
So, like I say, it is the implementation of the system. VAR CAN be used for whatever they wish to use it for.
It is how they have applied the rules to the system that is wrong, not the system itself.
That one last night should have taken one single look, too close to call, go with the onfield decision.
They have decided to complicate the system.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
They've completely lost sight of what it was for. People wanted the huge errors corrected, not spending 5 minutes to see if someone's toe is offside. For me you have someone in the video room flag up to the ref he needs to take a look and the ref has a quick look at the pitch side monitor. If its something you can't determine after one or two replays its not clear and obvious.
And the point Frostie makes I've been banging on about for ages. Its simply not accurate enough to make the decisions they are using it for. You've got issues with the speed the ball travels compared to frame rate of the camera, the issue of what point you actually count as the ball being played (sounds stupid but if they're calling things that close its an issue) - is it when the foot touches the ball of when the ball leaves the foot and my old favourite the parallax angle. Have posted this before but its a great example.
And the point Frostie makes I've been banging on about for ages. Its simply not accurate enough to make the decisions they are using it for. You've got issues with the speed the ball travels compared to frame rate of the camera, the issue of what point you actually count as the ball being played (sounds stupid but if they're calling things that close its an issue) - is it when the foot touches the ball of when the ball leaves the foot and my old favourite the parallax angle. Have posted this before but its a great example.
Otis
Well-Known Member
Exactly that. It is not accurate for the things they are trying to use it for, but the system wasn't supposed to be used for those things in the first place.
It's a madness.
Frostie
Well-Known Member
I'd rather they invested the huge sums it's costing into additional training for officials, encourage more to take up officiating - subsidised courses, make lower level refs professional etc.
Also they should instead use video for retrospective punishment for the likes of Grealish's dive, horror tackles like Romeu's that was somehow missed even with VAR etc.
I know there was supposed to be a panel doing this kind of thing anyway but they've achieved next to nothing.
Also they should instead use video for retrospective punishment for the likes of Grealish's dive, horror tackles like Romeu's that was somehow missed even with VAR etc.
I know there was supposed to be a panel doing this kind of thing anyway but they've achieved next to nothing.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Could not agree with this more. You can easily get rid of diving in the game. Start at the top, every PL game reviewed and 5 match ban for a dive. Might sound extreme but they'd soon stop. Imagine Grealish having to explain to his manager he'll be out for 5 games because he tried to cheat.
Remember seeing a discussion on a US sports channel about growing the game over there and they highlighted diving in televised games as a huge issues. North American audience can't get their head round it.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
I'd rather they entice more ex pros into officiating. But nowadays with the large sums earned during a playing career and the lucrative cushy job of pundit where you can just criticise them instead it's not going to happen. Those who've played pro but at a lower level could do though, but also prefer the coaching/management side. They always talk about how they don't understand because they've never played the game - well get a whistle and do it yourself as you do. Let's see how much better your experience helps in making those decisions - my guess is not a great deal.
As for having the panel how bad is it going to look if VAR look at something and then someone else later changes that decision? It renders the entire system worthless. Having an official in real time make an error is one thing - having someone look at numerous replays and doing it is quite another.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Bournemouth got a goal chalked off by VAR at Man City earlier in the week which was also farcical. If you have to get the thin lines out and drag and drop only to still be unsure, give the fricking goal.