VAR needs an overhaul (3 Viewers)

ProfessorbyGrace

Well-Known Member
@chiefdave Alluded to the process of the technicians physically ‘drawing’ the lines, to ascertain an offside…this sent me down the rabbit hole, haha. Bear with me:

This kind of process is still human error territory, potentially. It’s not an automated system, with a functional AI making the decisions, it’s people. People with emotions, deficits and allegiances. So it certainly isn’t fool proof.

It’s a system that is relying on dodgy cameras, rushed decisions and applying new levels of pedantry to a sport that really only needs a 4th official with access to goal-line cameras, live footage of the run of play and cameras to verify/overrule any marginal or ‘clear and obvious’ offside decisions. 🤷‍♂️

Which, in my mind, makes this entire VAR adventure an exercise in greater control of outcomes, in the grand scheme of things, rather than a mere vehicle to overrule refereeing errors in the ‘interests of fairness’.

And this is only the embryonic stage of such a systems. Yoinks.

This could very well destroy the beautiful game, if it’s permitted to remain and ‘evolve’. It’s already causing ructions.
 

Otis

Well-Known Member
nah, it needs to be there but for actual fuck ups, say like the Leeds goal against Boro.
And that West Brom one where they gave a penalty for handball when the ball hit the player's head and was absolutely nowhere near his hands. So obvious. That's what it should be there for

Shocking decision and I think you have to be able to say that's incorrect and change the decision..

Some are so blatantly obvious
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Absolutely not. Slows down the game, encourages more tactical/cynical stoppages, gives a new advantage to bigger/wealthier teams, and exposes the ref to yet another genre of partisan criticism (“They deliberately took more than/less than 30 seconds” etc etc)

If you get two challenges to a ref’s decision, in reality you get one because you want to keep one for a really big one you’re sure they missed. I doubt refs will be using is that often and it would be limited to goals/red cards like it is now essentially.

The ref is going to get criticism whatever. The aim can’t be eliminating criticism from fans. It should be to give the ref all the tools needed then ensure respect on the pitch.
 

Nick

Administrator
GNe4Ac2XEAEh_sV


Player at the bottom clearly offside.

It's Liverpool though so it's given.
 

Calista

Well-Known Member
It's corrupt. Clear as day.
You can say it's over-precise or flawed but you can't say it's corrupt FFS.

If they really wanted to fix results they'd stick purely to employing refs and linesmen who (theoretically!) could be bought off. They wouldn't introduce a complex system involving numerous officials and technicians (= potential whistle-blowers), and expose the workings on screen for the entire nation to pick apart.
 

Hobo

Well-Known Member
Overhauled into the nearest canal and forgotten.
 

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
What a farce


To my eyes - They take ages lining the vertical up with the forwards back, draw the line across the pitch, they press the button to fix the line in place and it moves a little to the right making the forward “more” offside - by enough to have made a difference at Wembley.
 

Bad Boy

Well-Known Member
Do away with the offside rule completely and football has to adapt to a different way of defending.
 

Nick

Administrator
Thought at the time it looked at least questionable. I really don't understand why they didn't look at this given that they spend ages over things that look clear cut from the beginning.

Like I keep saying, they pick and choose what they spend time looking into. Sometimes like this they don't look, othertimes they will go back 5 minutes looking for fouls in the buildup.
 

wingy

Well-Known Member
You can say it's over-precise or flawed but you can't say it's corrupt FFS.

If they really wanted to fix results they'd stick purely to employing refs and linesmen who (theoretically!) could be bought off. They wouldn't introduce a complex system involving numerous officials and technicians (= potential whistle-blowers), and expose the workings on screen for the entire nation to pick apart.
Andrew Oliver being suggested indirectly influenced by trip to a friendly by the nation that sponsors,paid by the nation, friendly or something like?
 

Flying Fokker

Well-Known Member
To my eyes - They take ages lining the vertical up with the forwards back, draw the line across the pitch, they press the button to fix the line in place and it moves a little to the right making the forward “more” offside - by enough to have made a difference at Wembley.
It’s a complete shambles.
 

Otis

Well-Known Member
"The Premier League believes removing VAR would increase the number of incorrect decisions and potentially leave the on-field officials open to even greater criticism than they currently receive.

The Premier League’s figures show the number of correct decisions in matches has increased from 82% before VAR was introduced to 96% currently."

Very interesting. It can definitely work for the better. But not as it is in its present form, with all the microscopes and delays of forever and a day.

This shows it has improved the accuracy.

I am an advocate, as I have stated many times, but I hate the way it is implemented at the moment. It's utterly ridiculous.

Also, most definitely agree with the first sentence. The refs would undoubtedly get much increased pressure and flak without VAR.
 

nunchuckas

Well-Known Member
Regardless of the implementation:

For anyone who goes to games it's shit. For people watching on TV, it's exciting.

As someone who goes to games, I've stomached incorrect decisions for years, and that's football. But having something taken away 2 minutes+ later due to VAR (even if it's incorrect on fewer occasions), just doesn't feel like I'm at a sporting event, more like the filming of a reality TV show.

In terms of the implementation:

Sport is art, not science. If we HAVE to suffer having it, then let them review everything once from 3 different angles, at full speed, and if it's too close to call, the onfield decision stands. No jiggery pokery using engineering tolerances to judge a human sport.
 
Last edited:

Frostie

Well-Known Member
"The Premier League believes removing VAR would increase the number of incorrect decisions and potentially leave the on-field officials open to even greater criticism than they currently receive.

The Premier League’s figures show the number of correct decisions in matches has increased from 82% before VAR was introduced to 96% currently."

Very interesting. It can definitely work for the better. But not as it is in its present form, with all the microscopes and delays of forever and a day.

This shows it has improved the accuracy.

I am an advocate, as I have stated many times, but I hate the way it is implemented at the moment. It's utterly ridiculous.

Also, most definitely agree with the first sentence. The refs would undoubtedly get much increased pressure and flak without VAR.

Marking their own homework though aren't they?

They claim there have only been 3 "wrong" decisions this season when VAR has intervened & that the "majority" of supporters are in favour of VAR. I'm not sure anyone agrees with that.
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
The Premier League’s figures show the number of correct decisions in matches has increased from 82% before VAR was introduced to 96% currently."
Did they give any evidence to back this up or is it like when they have ex-refs of tv broadcast who always wait for the on field officials / VAR to make their decision then declare its 100% correct no matter what you can see with your own eyes?
 

shepardo01

Well-Known Member
Did they give any evidence to back this up or is it like when they have ex-refs of tv broadcast who always wait for the on field officials / VAR to make their decision then declare its 100% correct no matter what you can see with your own eyes?
Interesting - I was part of some of the very first trials of VAR, part of that was talks/ lectures from a couple of select group one officials. At that point*, they claimed they got 95% of decisions correct!
*Before the official intro.
 

skybluecam

Well-Known Member
I don’t think it will happen now but I would give so much for them just to sack it off.

I don’t know how people can’t see it completely ruins the match going experience- can’t celebrate properly, long delays for any close decision and a completely opaque decision making process

Incorrect decisions are part of football. We’ve been playing this game for over 100 years at the mercy of human judgement, and it’s become the biggest sport in the world.

Is there anyone here who would honestly prefer it stays?
 

stevefloyd

Well-Known Member
Well generally refs are very poor and not helped with the grey laws of interpretation or the cheating diving bastards so maybe technology should first clear up on the UNSPORTMANSHIP (cheats) behaviour of the players by retrospective bans and make them good bans for bringing the game into disrepute...get the fucking cheats out of the game !!! Then maybe get a fully automated system in place to determine offsides or let the linesmen take their guide dogs with them VAR is a fucking disgrace which is made up as they go along and again introduces grey areas of interpretaion even though they have the facts in front of them...They should be given 30 seconds and after that a goal stands if the ref cannot determine on the pitch in a fraction of a second and the blind overpaid idiots that sit as VAR 'officials' then move on and stop making the game a fucking laughing stock!!!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top