pembsexile wrote:Read a great story about VAR this evening. Today in a game in Germany a penalty was awarded because of VAR, nothing unusual about that. However, the player was not even on the pitch. He was a sub warming up behind the goal and kicked the ball back as it was going out of play. However, the ball had not crossed the line and the ref awarded a penalty.

The problem with VAR is that it is absolute. It's decisions are invariably correct but the way it is used is complete madness. What a crazy way to run the game.

Hi Mike,

I'm not sure VAR is always right because some decisions are so marginal that you simply can't be sure. In addition slow motion often makes fouls seem much worse than they are.

Perhaps a better way of using VAR would be to allow each side two appeals per game. The referees decision should only be overturned if it is clearly wrong. If an appeal is successful the right to appeal should not be lost. Neither should the right to appeal be lost if it is turned down on close decision. (Referees call).

Merely suggestions.

Morning Brendan,

I don't know what the answer is, but it has to be used in a better way than it is now. Across a few sports VAR, TMO whatever you want to call it has been brought in so that technology can improve the game. What has actually happened is that it is dragging games out way too far.

Yesterday, the rugby started at 9.00am. The game didn't finish until just past 11.00am. For an 80 min game of rugby ffs. Before anyone mentions it, football games are being dragged out as well. There just has to be a better way.

With VAR how can anyone celebrate a goal, what will happen to spontaneous joy? “They think it’s all over,” I can hear Kenneth Wolstenholme saying, spinning in his grave. “Give it a few minutes, and half a dozen replays, and it very well may be.”

penycwm county wrote:With VAR how can anyone celebrate a goal, what will happen to spontaneous joy? “They think it’s all over,” I can hear Kenneth Wolstenholme saying, spinning in his grave. “Give it a few minutes, and half a dozen replays, and it very well may be.”

Again I don't disagree. VAR has both it's advantages and disadvantages.

I'm struggling to see exactly what the advantages are. All decisions with the exception of line calls remain a matter of opinion. Its just causing more uncertainty. Waste of time, as many predicted before it was introduced

pembsexile wrote:Read a great story about VAR this evening. Today in a game in Germany a penalty was awarded because of VAR, nothing unusual about that. However, the player was not even on the pitch. He was a sub warming up behind the goal and kicked the ball back as it was going out of play. However, the ball had not crossed the line and the ref awarded a penalty.

The problem with VAR is that it is absolute. It's decisions are invariably correct but the way it is used is complete madness. What a crazy way to run the game.

I saw this too, the laws on "outside interference" - including the ref, were changed in the summer - the restart is meant to be an uncontested drop ball, so I'm confused why it would be a penalty. This one's got nothing to do with VAR to be honest.

Though VAR *is* crap. Which tbf I was saying when Saints were 8-0 up on decisions, as opposed to when they just had a player retrospectively sent off for a borderline red card tackle, after which advantage was played and they conceded the first of nine goals, 8 of which were scored against 10 men...

As I've been saying all along, it doesn't improve decisions - which was the basis for its implementation - so it should be forgotten about, and we can go back to moaning about the entirely simpler concept of human error. Oh, and if they can remove egomaniacs like Mike Dean from his position too that might help. It's not about you, ref.

SJG99 wrote:

pembsexile wrote:Read a great story about VAR this evening. Today in a game in Germany a penalty was awarded because of VAR, nothing unusual about that. However, the player was not even on the pitch. He was a sub warming up behind the goal and kicked the ball back as it was going out of play. However, the ball had not crossed the line and the ref awarded a penalty.

The problem with VAR is that it is absolute. It's decisions are invariably correct but the way it is used is complete madness. What a crazy way to run the game.

I saw this too, the laws on "outside interference" - including the ref, were changed in the summer - the restart is meant to be an uncontested drop ball, so I'm confused why it would be a penalty. This one's got nothing to do with VAR to be honest.

Though VAR *is* crap. Which tbf I was saying when Saints were 8-0 up on decisions, as opposed to when they just had a player retrospectively sent off for a borderline red card tackle, after which advantage was played and they conceded the first of nine goals, 8 of which were scored against 10 men...

As I've been saying all along, it doesn't improve decisions - which was the basis for its implementation - so it should be forgotten about, and we can go back to moaning about the entirely simpler concept of human error. Oh, and if they can remove egomaniacs like Mike Dean from his position too that might help. It's not about you, ref.

The Ifab rules may have changed in the summer and this incident had everything to do with VAR. It was VAR that had spotted that the ball was touched before it went out of play, not the ref.

The rules state that if a substitute interferes with play the ref can either award a direct free kick or penalty kick. In this case a penalty was awarded and the player also received a yellow card.

VAR misses nothing and is absolute. It certainly missed nothing in this case. Pity. Management reform of VAR is required in my opinion.

Brighton's penalty v. Everton was shocking. The extra two points could keep them up.

This is not directed at SJG99 (who actually follows his team live) but for the TV watching 'top flight footballphiles', I think you need to have a good look at yourselves, - yes it might 'run over time' (not as bad as traffic or missing your connection though) and with regards of taking the instantaneous nature out of the game (well you are well used to replays and the borefest analysis paralysis show). Whilst VAR is being implemented why not go and take a leak, or grab a beer from the fridge or get your round in at the local and then you can resume your TV watching and you then wouldn't have missed anything (OK you might miss the start of your favourite soap or mini series or whatever but then you have catch-up to get you out of your predicament caused by that nasty old VAR).

I think this is about implementation of VAR, there are 10 matches with 10 different referees and hundreds of moments where they may be asked to make a call. If there is not clarity in when and how to use VAR, chaos ensues.

Maybe the easy answer would be to remove the, 'clear and obvious error' part of the rule.

The Video Referee(s) should be able to tell the Pitch Referee that he missed something or got something wrong. There is no need to spend too long on all decisions.

OK. My view - goal line no brainer. Ref and lino's to ref match as they would if there were no VAR. Ref to check on key moments - is there any reason to change my intial decision which is (penalty/goal/red card). VAR to bring to attention any off the ball incidents that merit intervention (eg stamping/shoving).

Then you just have to roll with the fact it isn't perfect but more times than not the combined efforts of the officials plus VAR provide more correct decisions. Now if a 'toe' is considered offside that is more to do with the absolute rules than VAR, so if it a'toe' then them are the rules, if it isn't an absolute then it is open to interpretation on the day - just like without VAR - but in the round a more considered decision will have been made on the day for that specific instance, similarly with other decisions made. The one element that has been mention is realtime v''s Slow Motion on intent/contact - tough call but on this one but once you are in that world....

On balance, I would have to say: decisions - it's better for getting to the right decisions (overall) if that is one of the main reasons for it; consistency - yeah good luck with that one, but surely it should be better than just relying on the officials of the day (overall in the round) and as a fan: enjoyment/the game/overrun/spontaneity/flow - when has the PL ever given top consideration to the fans at the game oh and for those watchers on TV, well that is what you get - simariarly like having to put up with ads in free downloads - because at the end of the day you are a big part of the issue - the PL brand plays to the tune of Sponsors and TV rights - if you don't like it watch something else.

I've seen at least 5 VAR-amended goal, red card and penalty decisions in Southampton v Leicester, Arsenal v Palace and Norwich v Man U this weekend and all but one of them ended in arguably maybe accurate but certainly not definitively correct decisions. The only one VAR got definitely right was overruling Zaha's dive being converted into a Palace penalty, all of the others were subjective (Chambers being pushed first, then pushing and tripping an off balance Palace defender), just plain wrong (James running into Norwich defender and falling over) or just terrible recent law amendments due to VAR (Norwich "handball" with back turned and elbow deflecting a ball which otherwise would have hit his his body anyway).

In short, no need, get rid.

Forgot about the Brighton v Everton nonsense where Keane is looking at the ball and steps on Maupay's foot in the box, and the comical "definitely offside but not given offside" goal for Man City from De Bruyne's cross, from which Sterling was offside TWICE, from the original ball in and still in an offside position from the possible second, unconfirmed even after VAR, touch by Silva - for both of those he was in the goalkeeper's line of vision and definitely interfering from an initially offside position, yet for some reason the goal was given. He doesn't need to have touched the ball either...

ref23 wrote:I'm struggling to see exactly what the advantages are. All decisions with the exception of line calls remain a matter of opinion. Its just causing more uncertainty. Waste of time, as many predicted before it was introduced

Agree with this as all such decisions are subjective not objective. Should only by e used on statements of fact eg ball in or out.