VAR: Sponsored by Chelsea

[ricky2tricky4city]

One thing they should immediately stop is the pitch-side review, IMO. If the guys in the studio with a big fudge off monitor and associated tech can't see what's what, then a small screen at the side of the pitch will not illuminate matters any better. Let the VAR tacos make the call.

It obviously for the onfield official. If you've communicated he has missed something or got something wrong, it fair to say he might want to know what or why.

Of course, the officials could all just trust each other and this wouldn't be required

 

[Rorschach]

It obviously for the onfield official. If you've communicated he has missed something or got something wrong, it fair to say he might want to know what or why.

Of course, the officials could all just trust each other and this wouldn't be required

Var should just tell him he is a dopey taco and get on with things.

 

[MartyFunkhouser]

One thing they should immediately stop is the pitch-side review, IMO. If the guys in the studio with a big fudge off monitor and associated tech can't see what's what, then a small screen at the side of the pitch will not illuminate matters any better. Let the VAR tacos make the call.

I find it performative and does nothing for the game and certainly doesn't do it quickly

If the refs made a mistake, tell him and over ride it in real time and we can all move on. The whole "you might want to check your decision" fcuk off, you have already decided he is wrong.

Currently the whole thing feels like a social experiment to push the acceptance levels of fans whilst creating an sh1tty working environment for refs who were already having a hard time of it.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

All you're doing is moving the threshold and giving a bit more leeway to the attacker. You'll still have people moaning that it's marginal so shouldn't be offside.

I don't think it helps anyone against VAR to moan about one area of decisions that are objective.
As you say we could move the line to favour the attacker more...but regardless off is off. If you pander to the conclusion people moan about 'oh it's a toe or nose', ok let's just say those ones are onside...the arguing stops? Yeah of course not... 'but he's actually offside'

 

[MartyFunkhouser]

Surely, nobody wants entire matches, league campaigns and even world cups changed by referees incompetence. They are actually changing history when you think about it. It is likely to change our own history this season. Is that fair?

I think if you are accepting of their being human error in all forms of the game then I think its ok. Tel overhead kick might send us down in isolation but I don't wanna see the bloke strung up for it.

In the whole history of the game there have been likely only a small handful of moments like that.

For me its never been enough for what we are seeing now, given we are using tech and getting alot wrong is far more embarrassing that what came before in football

 

[Rorschach]

I don't think it helps anyone against VAR to moan about one area of decisions that are objective.
As you say we could move the line to favour the attacker more...but regardless off is off. If you pander to the conclusion people moan about 'oh it's a toe or nose', ok let's just say those ones are onside...the arguing stops? Yeah of course not... 'but he's actually offside'

The obvious answer is cranial implants. Every player gets a chip implanted in their head. If the chip is offside, then no arguments about noses or toes or anything else that happens to be sticking out. Also, if you do argue, you get a little shock. Nothing too severe, mind. We're not monsters.

Of course then you'll get conspiracy nuts saying the players are being controlled by drone operators or something.

 

[Lost Mango]

It's an interesting concept.

One difference I often explain between football and rugby is substitutions. In rugby one player gets off the pitch quickly but the one that enters needs to be seen to be making an effort to get into position. If they don't then the game continues and it could cost them. Doesn't even occur to the players to time waste, get any adulation from the crowd or go to the point on the pitch that takes longest to head off the pitch. It's because rugby has way more class about it and the players and fans would get one their backs for not getting into position. I can remember a ref getting stick because he hadn't allowed a sub who was making every effort to get on the pitch time to set. It cost a try. That was such a rare moment.

I also like your point about retrospective action especially with yellows. I'm all for the video refs having a look at an incident and then advising the on pitch ref to brandish a yellows up to a minute later. Coud be as innocuous as kicking the ball or not retreating 10 yards when they know they should.

Whilst I'm really tough on the officials, I would be all over these players and managers if the officials went down the path of enforcing the laws. That is with or without tech. They simply don't seem to have the directive or motivation to do so.

Agree with all this.

 

[Muttley]

I think if you are accepting of their being human error in all forms of the game then I think its ok. Tel overhead kick might send us down in isolation but I don't wanna see the bloke strung up for it.

In the whole history of the game there have been likely only a small handful of moments like that.

For me its never been enough for what we are seeing now, given we are using tech and getting alot wrong is far more embarrassing that what came before in football

I think the difference is that Tel has already been punished for it. He should have headed it, decided to try the spectacular and cost his team a penalty. That is all the punishment a football players needs. He'll feel bad enough. Now he needs love.

I absolutely don't feel the same about Howard Webb's lot because they continue to make mistake after mistake, never get any action on them and then act arrogantly to anyone who dares to question their performance and processes, especially Howard himself. Now if they showed some humility, corrective action and owned it more, I'd advocate for them somewhat. P45s are the best corrective action on most of this.

 

[Muttley]

All you're doing is moving the threshold and giving a bit more leeway to the attacker. You'll still have people moaning that it's marginal so shouldn't be offside.

I think I'm trying to bring it back to the spirit of the game and the naked eye. I don't want every fan and player to have to reprogram themselves. We were absolutely fine with using our eyes as fans in stadia and judging when players were level or offside. We were fine with strikers playing off the shoulders of the defenders and finding that place that was level. I just feel that has been taken away from us in the same way because we drew the 2 lines and made 1cm offside. It's calibrating the tech now to find that magic number where level can be back to what it was. Fans will accept 51cm way more than they will 1cm.

 

[DeanoAustin]

I think I'm trying to bring it back to the spirit of the game and the naked eye. I don't want every fan and player to have to reprogram themselves. We were absolutely fine with using our eyes as fans in stadia and judging when players were level or offside. We were fine with strikers playing off the shoulders of the defenders and finding that place that was level. I just feel that has been taken away from us in the same way because we drew the 2 lines and made 1cm offside. It's calibrating the tech now to find that magic number where level can be back to what it was. Fans will accept 51cm way more than they will 1cm.

That's the problem. I'm all for the "spirit of the game" but my "spirit of the game" is very different to someone else's "spirit of the game". It's leaves room for interpretation and room for interpretation brings inconsistency.

Fans weren't absolutely fine with using our own eyes. Officials got absolutely battered for wrong offside calls before VAR. People were moaning every week about it.

Offside is objectively a yes or no question and you can only get a near perfect level of accuracy using VAR. Of all the issues with VAR, offside is near the bottom for me.

 

[MartyFunkhouser]

Fans weren't absolutely fine with using our own eyes. Officials got absolutely battered for wrong offside calls before VAR. People were moaning every week about it.

The moaning has not stopped, in fact I would argue its worse now with the "help" of tech than it ever was before.

Leadership means taking decisions that cuts out the noise, the head of the game and the PGMOL should IMO reprogramme the game to how it was before, using tech for absolutes like goal line and offside and then invest in training refs to the game and the rules that does not include video refs and rules that are there to work around video etc.

People are going to moan regardless but at least this way there are no delays, no stopping for the ref to go to screens when a decision has already been told is wrong, no mic's on refs like the US, no breaks, no room for future ad breaks (they are coming).

There has to be a level of the eye test in the game, its fundamental to the sport, you can see what has happened to the quality of the game because of the introduction of stats and so called facts in that part, its become an awful product, VAR in the same was has contributed negatively to it.

Money aside, its amazing how all other leagues without VAR manage to live and continue without them, fans are not throwing themselves off bridges because the ref in a Huddersfield game. I go to plenty of non league games and its general a much better experience when the game isn't stopped like it is in the PL, yes there is less on the line, I get it, but I am just talking generically here.

VAR is a massive burden on the game, more so because of how it was packaged to fans and what its failed to deliver on. If the PL is too big a product to not have VAR surely its too big a product to have it as a work in progress which is throwing up so much BS

 

[Muttley]

That's the problem. I'm all for the "spirit of the game" but my "spirit of the game" is very different to someone else's "spirit of the game". It's leaves room for interpretation and room for interpretation brings inconsistency.

Fans weren't absolutely fine with using our own eyes. Officials got absolutely battered for wrong offside calls before VAR. People were moaning every week about it.

Offside is objectively a yes or no question and you can only get a near perfect level of accuracy using VAR. Of all the issues with VAR, offside is near the bottom for me.

Level is onside based on the actual laws of the game and 1cm offside surgically is therefore actually onside based on the laws. Therefore you could build a case that the naked eye is more accurate than VAR based on the actual laws. It's a moot point as with the adjustment, we could let 2 things absolutely converge and all get to a happy place where tech = laws = common sense. Just tweak the system to build the buffer in.

I do agree though that VAR as it pertains to offside isn't the big topic nowadays. The big topic is not administering the laws on everything else. If you used the actual laws of the game, how many offsides would we see? How many red cards? The other part of this conversation is making the refs on pitch decision more important than the laws. I'm absolutely fine with everyone saying "You are human, you made the best decision you could with the naked eye. However, based on the laws and using tech, you got it wrong so therefore change it". It should never be about how badly someone got it wrong or whether it was clear and obvious. Why introduce grey space where it is not needed. Just use the laws.

It's not personal either. Humans will make mistakes so we gave them tech to improve.

The football community has made this entire thing way more complicated than it actually is right?

 

[DeanoAustin]

Level is onside based on the actual laws of the game and 1cm offside surgically is therefore actually onside based on the laws. Therefore you could build a case that the naked eye is more accurate than VAR based on the actual laws. It's a moot point as with the adjustment, we could let 2 things absolutely converge and all get to a happy place where tech = laws = common sense. Just tweak the system to build the buffer in.

I do agree though that VAR as it pertains to offside isn't the big topic nowadays. The big topic is not administering the laws on everything else. If you used the actual laws of the game, how many offsides would we see? How many red cards? The other part of this conversation is making the refs on pitch decision more important than the laws. I'm absolutely fine with everyone saying "You are human, you made the best decision you could with the naked eye. However, based on the laws and using tech, you got it wrong so therefore change it". It should never be about how badly someone got it wrong or whether it was clear and obvious. Why introduce grey space where it is not needed. Just use the laws.

It's not personal either. Humans will make mistakes so we gave them tech to improve.

The football community has made this entire thing way more complicated than it actually is right?

Where does it say that in the laws of the game?

A lot of the stuff outside of offside is subjective. The Maddison one the other night. Some people think it's a pen, some don't. That's after having two days to digest and review it.

The West Ham goal the other day. Again, three days later people are still debating it and I saw a headline that West Ham are going to complain to PGMOL.

 

[Muttley]

Where does it say that in the laws of the game?

A lot of the stuff outside of offside is subjective. The Maddison one the other night. Some people think it's a pen, some don't. That's after having two days to digest and review it.

The West Ham goal the other day. Again, three days later people are still debating it and I saw a headline that West Ham are going to complain to PGMOL.

I could well be wrong, and they may have changed it based on the VAR fiasco.

I googled "football laws onside definition" and got this

In association football (soccer), a player is considered onside—and therefore in a legal position to play or receive the ball—if they are not in an offside position according to Law 11. An onside position generally means the player is behind or level with the required defenders at the moment the ball is played by a teammate

 

[Muttley]

The West Ham goal the other day. Again, three days later people are still debating it and I saw a headline that West Ham are going to complain to PGMOL.

The goal that was overturned at the end? Good luck to West Ham with that. They won't have the laws on their side in that debate. The only argument will be PGMOL's inconsistency on their treatment of such decisions. They will have a point on that one and can gather evidence of the inconsistency throughout almost every match.

The good news is that the more noise about PGMOL, eventually the PL and FA will need to take action on that setup. We need every vtype of football stakeholder pushing back until they take corrective action on their performance. As I've said a lot, I want to see some P45s issued.

 

[DeanoAustin]

I could well be wrong, and they may have changed it based on the VAR fiasco.

I googled "football laws onside definition" and got this

In association football (soccer), a player is considered onside—and therefore in a legal position to play or receive the ball—if they are not in an offside position according to Law 11. An onside position generally means the player is behind or level with the required defenders at the moment the ball is played by a teammate

I'd interpret that to be if your toe is offside, you're offside. bricky I know, frustrating I know but can't see how you could administer the rule otherwise.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

I'd interpret that to be if your toe is offside, you're offside. bricky I know, frustrating I know but can't see how you could administer the rule otherwise.

I hope Mutley doesn't use a spirit level at work if that's his interpretation of 'level'

'dont worry luv....it'll be fine, well within commercial tolerance '