teddyp 8:07 Sat Sep 28
VAR
|
|
The review system works in Cricket, VAR definitely doesn't in Football This is killing the game Bin this NOW...
|
|
|
Replies - In Chronological Order ( Show Newest Messages First)
Mart O
8:13 Sat Sep 28
Re: VAR
|
It's fucking shit, bores me rigid all the pissing about.
|
gph
8:32 Sat Sep 28
Re: VAR
|
Bournemouth's equalising goal was about a pixel onside.
It's the blatant ones that they faff around over that are inexplicable.
|
1964
8:40 Sat Sep 28
Re: VAR
|
It’s OK for the decisions we’ve seen. What’s bad is the inconsistent decisions on when it’s used
|
chedylan 2
8:45 Sat Sep 28
Re: VAR
|
When we were told about var and the benefits, I don't think anyone realised it would mostly end up being used for these ridiculous inhumanly tight offside decisions. What happened to advantage to the attacking team when level? Why bother having linesmen doing that part of the job anymore?
And why do some seemingly clear penalty decisions not get reviewed?
|
Stubbo
9:55 Sat Sep 28
Re: VAR
|
I think we have to remember they're 7 games in to a brand bew system. Id expect it to get refined over this and the next couple of seasons.
Im hoping to improve it they review the handball and offside laws to remove ambiguity.
However they are getting more big decisions right (like Bournemouth's equalising goal today). And that justifies it as far as I'm concerned, especially when you think how that run of bad decisions cost us last year.
Agree they need to get a serious grip on fouls in the box. I'd like to see the refs give more penalties and have VAR review to check if theyre wrong. Some fouls are tough though since it's a contact game and it's about whether contact is sufficient to impede.
I think there are certain infringements like shirt holding/pulling and arms round bodies that should be explicitly defined as always fouls and then when these happen they can be immediate penalties.
|
gph
3:26 Sun Sep 29
Re: VAR
|
"I think there are certain infringements like shirt holding/pulling and arms round bodies that should be explicitly defined as always fouls and then when these happen they can be immediate penalties."
But what happens when players have hold of each others shirts?
|
rochesterjohn
3:58 Sun Sep 29
Re: VAR
|
They’ve just announced we didn’t win the World Cup in ‘66.
|
only1billybonds
4:10 Sun Sep 29
Re: VAR
|
Personally i'd sack it off,part of being a fan is to debate/moan about moody decisions. Saying that,if we got say 9 points more than we would have done pre var due to having the system i'd possibly change my mind.
To summise,fucked if i know what to do with it.
|
dicksie3
4:22 Sun Sep 29
Re: VAR
|
I was livid after the Man City game when I thought that most of the VAR calls went against us and they favoured a ‘top team’ instead of us.
Once I’d sobered-up and watched the highlights again the following day; I didn’t have any complaints about any of them.
So far, I think that VAR has been okay. Decisions for and against us have evened themselves out so far, for me.
The only glaringly obvious incident which VAR has missed for me was the foul on Haller Vs Norwich which was a blatant penalty and it would’ve given us the chance to make it 3-0 which would’ve been a much fairer reflection of our dominance in the game.
|
zico
4:48 Sun Sep 29
Re: VAR
|
I don't think VAR is the issue it's the laws themselves. The offside rule because VAR is now used needs to be addressed because this millimetres stuff is ridiculous.
|
dicksie3
4:51 Sun Sep 29
Re: VAR
|
Offside is offside though, isn’t it? They’ll go for you one week and against you the other. I’ve got absolutely no problem with that. It’s fair.
|
Darby_
5:09 Sun Sep 29
Re: VAR
|
So VAR’s being criticised because it’s too accurate now?
VAR is shit because it gets decisions wrong. VAR is shit because it gets decisions right. It should intentionally get them wrong to give the attacker the benefit of the doubt. Can you imagine cricket fans complaining because a batsman was given out when he was “only millimetres” outside his crease?
The real problem is that football fans, unlike cricket or rugger fans, can’t cope with change.
|
gph
5:18 Sun Sep 29
Re: VAR
|
I've no problem with Bournemouth's equaliser being given, or even of the amount of time it took, because their player was onside by about a pixel.
But there have been a huge number of cases where VAR hasn't been used where it should have been, has been used and got it wrong, or has taken an age to get to an obvious decision.
I'd be in favour of quick, fair VAR, but so far it's frequently been neither. And, as such, it's a load of bother for no improvement.
|
Mex Martillo
5:24 Sun Sep 29
Re: VAR
|
I like VAR
Gets things right, worth a little wait, right has to be good.
|
Vexed
5:29 Sun Sep 29
Re: VAR
|
It's shit. You just have to wait ages for your injustice from bent referees now rather than the instant disgraceful decisions of the past. It lets referees off the hook for terrible decisions. It's killed the joy of a goal being scored because you don't know if it's going to be chalked off for a minor incursion four phases ago, whatever fucking constitutes a phase this week. It's fucking shit.
They should publish stats on which refs have had most decisions overturned and then punish the ones below a certain percentage. The fuckin wasters.
|
Dan M
5:30 Sun Sep 29
Re: VAR
|
Bournemouth's equaliser decision was fine. The attacker was well behind the ball so it was immaterial where the defenders were.
The problem for me is when it IS by millimetres. The technology can detect tiny distances true, but it can't detect when the ball is kicked to the same level of accuracy - and that's the other (and equally important) half of the equation. "Clear and obvious" and "referees' call" need to be elements added into the mix for the really tight ones, just as with cricket.
|
Texas Iron
5:34 Sun Sep 29
Re: VAR
|
Agree with Dan M...
WHEN the ball is kicked is key to VAR offside decisions...
Hardly ever mentioned in VAR analyses...
|
Vexed
5:37 Sun Sep 29
Re: VAR
|
Yes, what this cunt says about clear and obvious is bang on. There should be a margin of error allowed for the decision to be overturned, these ones chalked off because someone's toenail is offside are bollocks.
A margin of error measured in distance for offsides when a goal is scored and a set time period you can go back to disallow a goal would improve the situation. Obviously having less shit refs would be a better option.
|
Haz
5:39 Sun Sep 29
Re: VAR
|
VAR, it's a load of old cock-dribble. The worst thing to happen to football since all-seater stadia.
|
Sven Roeder
5:59 Sun Sep 29
Re: VAR
|
Have ANY referees had decisions overturned?
Quite a few linesman have , sometimes by centimetres
Mike Riley admitted that 4 decisions should have been over turned in the first 50 games or so but think they were all different officials
|
| 
