VAR: Sponsored by Chelsea

[Gutter Boy]

If it's so quick it can't be seen in real time, then it can't be given. It was another 'everything looks significant in slow-motion' decision.

 

[Lemonade Money]

If it's so quick it can't be seen in real time, then it can't be given.

 

[r-u-s-x]

The ref apparently didn't see the handball. Thats fair enough.

All VAR has done is enable him to have a (good) look at a potential infringement he did not see.

All the arguing about whether it was a penalty or not is not VAR's fault.

Without VAR the only outcome was 'no penalty' simply because the ref didn't see it, which in this and many other games is not really good enough.

He could have come away from the screen and said 'no penalty' and that would have been ok as well (as he can interprete the law/offence as he sees it), but at least he had the two options available to him.

It is an enabler.

its never VARs fault - if it misses something then "the ref wouldn't have seen it anyway" - if it does not give the correct decision "its the Ref not the VAR".

There is a cost to using VAR (not financial) and the benefits do not seem to be worth it. I have been convinced it can work for offsides and would like them to work on a good solution with this in mind (similar to Goal Line) and come back with a fully functional working solution.

Basically anything black and white seems to be ideal for, anything else what does it really resolve - there will still be arguments, people will still disagree with the decisions and we will still be screwed by Man U when they get favourable decisions and we don't.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

If it's so quick it can't be seen in real time, then it can't be given. It was another 'everything looks significant in slow-motion' decision.

Once upon a time a liitle guy jumped up and nodded it past the oncoming Shilton with the left side of his head.........but hold on, take another look and even maybe slow it down.....the dodgy line sniffing bellend has knocked that in with his hand.

Cant give it though as in real time i'm not sure

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

Maybe the ref missed it in real time?

A handball in the box is clearly something VAR should look at. In the end it's still up to the ref. Either he saw it and can say it was nothing or he can have a look.

This is the sticking point for me, the on field ref still choosing whether or not he cares.

The VAR ref should have power to make calls from the bunker as he sees them.

Not this "Oh, hey, ref - something went on there do you want to take a look? No? Ok then..."

 

[Baleforce]

Once upon a time a liitle guy jumped up and nodded it past the oncoming Shilton with the left side of his head.........but hold on, take another look and even maybe slow it down.....the dodgy line sniffing bellend has knocked that in with his hand.

Cant give it though as in real time i'm not sure

one time, a West Ham player spun on the Wembley turf and hit the ball hard and true, but also high, the bar, the line, the bounce

wasn't a goal though, in real time nobody was sure

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

its never VARs fault - if it misses something then "the ref wouldn't have seen it anyway" - if it does not give the correct decision "its the Ref not the VAR".

There is a cost to using VAR (not financial) and the benefits do not seem to be worth it. I have been convinced it can work for offsides and would like them to work on a good solution with this in mind (similar to Goal Line) and come back with a fully functional working solution.

Basically anything black and white seems to be ideal for, anything else what does it really resolve - there will still be arguments, people will still disagree with the decisions and we will still be screwed by Man U when they get favourable decisions and we don't.

I agree with most of that.

And the subjective decisions will always be debated (Hopefully those decisions can be helped with minor changes to the rules?), but in relation to yesterdays penalty at least it gave the referee the opportunity to make that decision.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

This is the sticking point for me, the on field ref still choosing whether or not he cares.

The VAR ref should have power to make calls from the bunker as he sees them.

Not this "Oh, hey, ref - something went on there do you want to take a look? No? Ok then..."

I think we need to get to the point you suggest.

I think it is the way it is at the moment just to give the impression the on field ref is 'the boss' and fully in charge of proceedings and has final say on everything.

 

[Gazza Dazzla]

its never VARs fault - if it misses something then "the ref wouldn't have seen it anyway" - if it does not give the correct decision "its the Ref not the VAR".

There is a cost to using VAR (not financial) and the benefits do not seem to be worth it. I have been convinced it can work for offsides and would like them to work on a good solution with this in mind (similar to Goal Line) and come back with a fully functional working solution.

Basically anything black and white seems to be ideal for, anything else what does it really resolve - there will still be arguments, people will still disagree with the decisions and we will still be screwed by Man U when they get favourable decisions and we don't.

Exactly this!

For my part, when I’m criticizing VAR, I’m clearly not saying the technology is at fault (obvious) but the use of it and the fact that grey areas in the laws will never allow for a satisfactory decision being made, 50% of people will still not be happy and argue it (see the pen last night). Bias for big clubs can still easily exist giving them the benefit of the doubt in these decisions.

Offsides is a no brainer though, bring it to the PL in 3weeks time please!

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

I think we need to get to the point you suggest.

I think it is the way it is at the moment just to give the impression the on field ref is 'the boss' and fully in charge of proceedings and has final say on everything.

Its a silly point to stick on, IMO, and Im hoping they get over it soon.

The rules are the rules, and the refs arent in a position to enforce them at all times because they simply arent equipped too.

Who can tell what happened with an incident, through a crowd, where the feintest touch of the ball changes the decision from red card and penalty to "play on" from 20 yards away in real time?

The sooner the VAR ref (a qualified ref) is able to simply make calls as they are equipped to do, the better.

 

[Grays_1890]

VAR as a whole was not a great success but had some success, should it have been rolled out in this form in such a BIG tournament? I don't think it should have.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

How do you define success? Stats show that with VAR more decisions were made correctly than without. That would be success.

Unless you heap unreasonable expectation on it, in which case you are just setting up to confirm your own bias.

It is and always was a tool for refs to use, and for me the failing in nearly all "wrong" or "missed" decisions is that human element.

The same human element many people against VAR dont want removed, but also want to complain about, make sense of that...

 

[Baleforce]

VAR as a whole was not a great success but had some success, should it have been rolled out in this form in such a BIG tournament? I don't think it should have.

I think a 4 week tournament in the same country (admittedly a massive one) where all continental organisations are present and providing their best officials is the perfect time to do so.

 

[Grays_1890]

How do you define success? Stats show that with VAR more decisions were made correctly than without. That would be success.

Unless you heap unreasonable expectation on it, in which case you are just setting up to confirm your own bias.

It is and always was a tool for refs to use, and for me the failing in nearly all "wrong" or "missed" decisions is that human element.

The same human element many people against VAR dont want removed, but also want to complain about, make sense of that...

Unreasonable expectation because of the expectation levels set by those bringing it in. It was talked about as if it was going to be a full proof plan, all the "if we have the tech let use it" was pushed out along with line of "lets get the big decisions right"

Well it didnt not all the time and as I said all along it was not used to pick up things the ref missed which was the whole points. Once we got ref'd to the system it was more or less right, and it should be you get the benefit of replays etc, but you can list lots of things the men in the box did not pick up that changed the course of games.

 

[jts1882]

Mark Clattenburg: World Cup final referee got penalty call wrong

I am shocked that the referee, Néstor Pitana, gave France a penalty for a supposed handball against Ivan Perisic. His hand was in a natural position — ie not above his head — and the distance from ball to hand was close.

Pitana was correct not to give the penalty originally but was then called over to review the decision by the VAR. Although that is the right process, the problem is that, when the referee is called over, he thinks he must have missed something so he is more likely to overturn the decision.

But it was not a clear and obvious error so he shouldn’t have changed it. He should have stood by his decision, like Cuneyt Cakir did when Argentina’s Marcos Rojo was accused of handball against Nigeria.

One thing that would be worth discussing is whether handball incidents should be viewed in slow motion because, when they are, penalties are more likely to be awarded as the impression is given that there is time to get your hand out of the way. It distorts things. Those decisions would be better off being seen again in real time.

I think the handball decision is a matter of judgement, which some refs will give and others not. Beyond that Clattenburg makes several good points: the psychological effect of being alerted to a potential handball, predisposing him to give it; the effect of reviewing it multiple times in slow motion, making it seem more deliberate; and whether the evidence was clear enough to change his call. The fact that he had to look several times suggests it was not clear and obvious.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

I didnt go into it with any expectation other than "lets see", well aware that it is not a finished product and this tournament was something of a proving ground/testing situation.

To expect all the big decisions correct, all the unseen things spotted and acted upon is indeed unreasonable, IMO.

 

[Baleforce]

Mark Clattenburg: World Cup final referee got penalty call wrong



I think the handball decision is a matter of judgement, which some refs will give and others not. Beyond that Clattenburg makes several good points: the psychological effect of being alerted to a potential handball, predisposing him to give it; the effect of reviewing it multiple times in slow motion, making it seem more deliberate; and whether the evidence was clear enough to change his call. The fact that he had to look several times suggests it was not clear and obvious.

I think they are only issues if the referee isn't confident in his knowledge of the laws and hasn't been trained on var accordingly.

 

[Grays_1890]

To expect all the big decisions correct, all the unseen things spotted and acted upon is indeed unreasonable, IMO.

Refs on average make 95%+ decisions correct, is it not unreasonable to expect more?

If you bring in a system that says the current correct decision rate is not good enough I don't think it is unreasonable to expect better, they have more to play with to get it right than refs so I think the expectations should be higher.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

Refs on average make 95%+ decisions correct, is it not unreasonable to expect more?

If you bring in a system that says the current correct decision rate is not good enough I don't think it is unreasonable to expect better, they have more to play with to get it right than refs so I think the expectations should be higher.

And its now at 99%+

You seem to be demanding 100%.

 

[Grays_1890]

And its now at 99%+

You seem to be demanding 400%.

With as many grey areas as we had before its introduction and people are defending the things they criticised refs on their own for.

We are back at square one of just having the ref as far as I can see