UPTHEPORT wrote:They should give each manager one challenge per game all this stopping is pathetic that would solve it

You win the challenge you keep it you lose tough

One extra challenge extra time

That won't stop the vast majority of mistakes being rectified though.
Just use it for goal line and offiside (with a straight line) yes or no decisions

UPTHEPORT wrote:They should give each manager one challenge per game all this stopping is pathetic that would solve it

You win the challenge you keep it you lose tough

One extra challenge extra time

This would be an interesting system.

I think the world and his wife are exasperated by defenders holding/shirt-pulling at corners. This appeal system would surely eradicate the problem (though probably not until after a couple of nine-all draws).

I see there was less than 25,000 there then bit disappointing for the money for Dale

UPTHEPORT wrote:I see there was less than 25,000 there then bit disappointing for the money for Dale

Not surprising considering the weather conditions.

JonD wrote: I think the world and his wife are exasperated by defenders holding/shirt-pulling at corners. This appeal system would surely eradicate the problem (though probably not until after a couple of nine-all draws).

The simple fact of VAR is that not a single goal will ever come from a corner ever again. There is ALWAYS a foul somewhere in the build up, and every goal would be disallowed unless they actually chose to ignore what they saw on the replay.

SJG99 wrote:

JonD wrote: I think the world and his wife are exasperated by defenders holding/shirt-pulling at corners. This appeal system would surely eradicate the problem (though probably not until after a couple of nine-all draws).

The simple fact of VAR is that not a single goal will ever come from a corner ever again. There is ALWAYS a foul somewhere in the build up, and every goal would be disallowed unless they actually chose to ignore what they saw on the replay.

True.

But it would mean approximately 50% of corners would result in a penalty.

We are seeing some significant teething problems but here's the aim(s).

"The IFAB confirmed the VAR will be used, with the aim of reducing unfairness caused by 'clear and obvious errors' or 'serious missed incidents', in relation to the following:

- Goal / no goal

- Penalty / no penalty

- Direct red card (not second yellow card)

- Mistaken identity (when the referee cautions or sends off the wrong player)"


rgds Dave

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

SJG99 wrote:

JonD wrote: I think the world and his wife are exasperated by defenders holding/shirt-pulling at corners. This appeal system would surely eradicate the problem (though probably not until after a couple of nine-all draws).

The simple fact of VAR is that not a single goal will ever come from a corner ever again. There is ALWAYS a foul somewhere in the build up, and every goal would be disallowed unless they actually chose to ignore what they saw on the replay.

True.

But it would mean approximately 50% of corners would result in a penalty.

With the interesting outcome that teams would be better off playing for corners than trying to score goals.

PerthDave wrote:We are seeing some significant teething problems but here's the aim(s).

"The IFAB confirmed the VAR will be used, with the aim of reducing unfairness caused by 'clear and obvious errors' or 'serious missed incidents', in relation to the following:

- Goal / no goal
- Penalty / no penalty
- Direct red card (not second yellow card)
- Mistaken identity (when the referee cautions or sends off the wrong player)"

rgds Dave

This is the exact same criteria as used for the abysmal failure of a trial period they've had. It doesn't work in this format.

Frankly if referees were making "clear and obvious errors" often enough to warrant a video replay system to "support" them, they shouldn't be refereeing top flight football to begin with. Apparently this is now the case, for all of them.

Of course part of the teething problems has been that absolutely every goal has been reviewed even when there's been no reason to do so, and on a number of occasions the video system has picked up technically accurate but frankly nit-picky fouls. Llorente's push on the Rochdale defender was completely incidental to the goal he scored shortly after, Juan Mata's knee might possibly have been marginally offside but frankly it was impossible to tell in real time - and I'm absolutely fine with that, especially considering that most of the 90s saw the need for daylight between the attacker and defender and giving the benefit of the doubt to the attacking player. I don't even agree these are necessarily even fouls, never mind justification for taking decision-making away from referees.

Most importantly though, I think we can all agree we can't wait to see what a pillock Jonathan Pearce makes of himself when trying to understand it. I mean goal-line tech worked perfectly and even I think that's inarguable now, but Pearce was clueless.

SJG99 wrote:

PerthDave wrote:We are seeing some significant teething problems but here's the aim(s).

"The IFAB confirmed the VAR will be used, with the aim of reducing unfairness caused by 'clear and obvious errors' or 'serious missed incidents', in relation to the following:

- Goal / no goal
- Penalty / no penalty
- Direct red card (not second yellow card)
- Mistaken identity (when the referee cautions or sends off the wrong player)"

rgds Dave

This is the exact same criteria as used for the abysmal failure of a trial period they've had. It doesn't work in this format.

Frankly if referees were making "clear and obvious errors" often enough to warrant a video replay system to "support" them, they shouldn't be refereeing top flight football to begin with. Apparently this is now the case, for all of them.

Of course part of the teething problems has been that absolutely every goal has been reviewed even when there's been no reason to do so, and on a number of occasions the video system has picked up technically accurate but frankly nit-picky fouls. Llorente's push on the Rochdale defender was completely incidental to the goal he scored shortly after, Juan Mata's knee might possibly have been marginally offside but frankly it was impossible to tell in real time - and I'm absolutely fine with that, especially considering that most of the 90s saw the need for daylight between the attacker and defender and giving the benefit of the doubt to the attacking player. I don't even agree these are necessarily even fouls, never mind justification for taking decision-making away from referees.

Most importantly though, I think we can all agree we can't wait to see what a pillock Jonathan Pearce makes of himself when trying to understand it. I mean goal-line tech worked perfectly and even I think that's inarguable now, but Pearce was clueless.

The one thing that is clear is that VAR has divided opinion and that we aren't going to agree - or at least not for now ! Even top class ref will make an error/errors but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be doing the job. The IFAB stats taken after an analyses of 1000 games (which statistically is a good representative sample) showed that refs were getting it right 93% of the time but after VAR it was 99%..
I know these things are difficult to quantify but nonetheless this needs to be done.
One of the issues at the moment is that there seems to be outrage at what are perfectly good VAR calls ..

rgds Dave

In my view, the main stat is that 100% of VAR decisions become talking points for the numpties in the TV studio

PerthDave wrote: The one thing that is clear is that VAR has divided opinion and that we aren't going to agree - or at least not for now ! Even top class ref will make an error/errors but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be doing the job. The IFAB stats taken after an analyses of 1000 games (which statistically is a good representative sample) showed that refs were getting it right 93% of the time but after VAR it was 99%..
I know these things are difficult to quantify but nonetheless this needs to be done.
One of the issues at the moment is that there seems to be outrage at what are perfectly good VAR calls ..

Tbf I'd argue that the VAR decisions are self-selecting - they can only be "right" afterwards by their very definition - but having seen some examples of "correct" decisions, I'm in no way convinced they are either relevant or better than the "wrong" ones. As you say, there is outrage at "perfectly good" VAR calls. Except the examples I've already given are from guff, unnecessary, pointless and fundamentally still questionable decisions post-review. The issue isn't "did Llorente pull the defender", it's "did Llorente pull the defender, did he get an advantage from it, are we sure no one else on the pitch was committing a foul as well that could also be a reason to give a penalty, or free kick or otherwise stop play" or the whole thing is flawed. With Mata, it's "do we want to know that a player being a distance offside that is impossible to judge with the naked eye actually matters, or is there a case for giving the benefit of the doubt to the attacking player?".

VAR impacts not only on the fundamental assumption that referees are right, and undermines the perception of them as the final arbiter of decisions, it also raises fundamental questions about the extent to which incidental foul play needs to be reviewed in football, and raises expectations to a level that it's already proven it can't attain, and just shifts the blame from an understandable judgement or physical error to a convoluted discussion of where a system can be used to overrule and undermine the immediate decision - hence my repeated point about fouls at corners. There will be fouls and VAR will not eradicate fouls, but it might choose to conveniently ignore them. How is that in any way better?

Crikey, that’s a well-constructed post.

SJG99 wrote:

PerthDave wrote: The one thing that is clear is that VAR has divided opinion and that we aren't going to agree - or at least not for now ! Even top class ref will make an error/errors but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be doing the job. The IFAB stats taken after an analyses of 1000 games (which statistically is a good representative sample) showed that refs were getting it right 93% of the time but after VAR it was 99%..
I know these things are difficult to quantify but nonetheless this needs to be done.
One of the issues at the moment is that there seems to be outrage at what are perfectly good VAR calls ..

Tbf I'd argue that the VAR decisions are self-selecting - they can only be "right" afterwards by their very definition - but having seen some examples of "correct" decisions, I'm in no way convinced they are either relevant or better than the "wrong" ones. As you say, there is outrage at "perfectly good" VAR calls. Except the examples I've already given are from guff, unnecessary, pointless and fundamentally still questionable decisions post-review. The issue isn't "did Llorente pull the defender", it's "did Llorente pull the defender, did he get an advantage from it, are we sure no one else on the pitch was committing a foul as well that could also be a reason to give a penalty, or free kick or otherwise stop play" or the whole thing is flawed. With Mata, it's "do we want to know that a player being a distance offside that is impossible to judge with the naked eye actually matters, or is there a case for giving the benefit of the doubt to the attacking player?".

VAR impacts not only on the fundamental assumption that referees are right, and undermines the perception of them as the final arbiter of decisions, it also raises fundamental questions about the extent to which incidental foul play needs to be reviewed in football, and raises expectations to a level that it's already proven it can't attain, and just shifts the blame from an understandable judgement or physical error to a convoluted discussion of where a system can be used to overrule and undermine the immediate decision - hence my repeated point about fouls at corners. There will be fouls and VAR will not eradicate fouls, but it might choose to conveniently ignore them. How is that in any way better?

I'd say that at the moment there isn't a fundamental assumption that the referee is right - it's more a case of trying to respect the decision whichever way it goes. Which often doesn't happen.
Nothing will ever eradicate fouls or fouling but if we can get more of these calls right then surely this is the way to go.

I had an interesting introduction to VAR. As my user name suggests I once resided in Perth and being so far from home used to follow the local team. VAR was introduced in the (Oz) A-League finals last season and Perth were in the play-offs away to Sydney. Sydney had 2 goals that were initially chalked off overturned by VAR. The Perth bench were besides themselves (and to some extent so was I). There was disbelief and controversy. But in after having a second look it was clear that the overturns were correct. VAR had worked.
There will be issues and the co-ordination problems - the latter needs to improve significantly. There will be the occasional wrong call (eg Tottenham's first 'goal' against Rochdale - the FA have fessed up this).

But ultimately VAR will assist the referee in getting it right and there will be less bad calls on the pitch.

rgds Dave

But who is going to help the players get it right on the pitch? I wonder how far away we are from the game being played by cyborgs (in the interests of reducing players’ mistakes)?

As I grow older I enjoy football less and less. Things like the EPL, the Champions League, SKY TV, have been gently eroding the pleasure I glean from my favourite sport. Why should I expect VAR be any different?

I dare say my generation will be replaced by more tech-friendly crowd who won’t have grown up in an uncertain age when different teams competed for the title every year; when refs got things wrong, people complained, shrugged, moved on; when through the luck of the draw good teams failed to make it to the quarter-finals of European competitions.

I feel by opposing VAR I’m made to feel as though I’m standing in the way of progress when in fact I feel as though I’m clinging to the last vestiges of what made me fall in love with football in the first place.

I understand that opposing VAR is a battle I am unlikely to win, but that doesn’t mean I will meekly surrender my right to object to it.