VAR - What is it good for?

[Any Old Iron]

"Absolutely nothing. Say it again, yeah."

[El Scorchio]

"Exactly. Why bother delaying the flag when everyone can see it's clearly offside? No grumble about marginal ones, as long as they flag as soon as is appropriate."

[Ron Eff]

"Pretty sure Zouma did get injured last season during a phase of play where the flag was kept down. Maybe against Chelsea. That rule is fine apart from where a player is 2+ yards offside (or similarly obvious to the naked eye). Those ones just need to be flagged instantly. The marginal ones should be played on. As for the handball rule, it just needs to go back to intent. The game is being far too analysed now."

[,]

VAR over the weekend has caused controversy and the issue revolved around what constitutes a handball offence. Here once again it was not VAR causing a problem but the inconsistency in application of the rule. The hand ball rule in particular needs sorting out.

[Moncurs Putting Iron]

VAR is checking is checking for Offside. VAR is checking for Handball VAR is checking if the Scorer wiped their bum properly VAR is checking for any excuse not to award West Ham United a goal.

[El Scorchio]

The plus point of not flagging is that it eliminates stopping the game on a mistake when a goal could have been scored. So from that point it's definitely correct. The minus point is that something could happen to a player (injury) in that time where a flag could have been raised which wouldn't have happened if it was- and it WILL happen sooner or later if it hasn't already. And also they don't initially/quickly flag things we can all see are miles offside. That needs to change a little bit. Be a bit more flag happy unless it really is marginal.

[El Scorchio]

The plus point of not flagging is that it eliminates stopping the game on a mistake when a goal could have been scored. So from that point it's definitely correct. The minus point is that something could happen to a player (injury) in that time where a flag could have been raised which wouldn't have happened if it was- and it WILL happen sooner or later if it hasn't already. And also they don't initially/quickly flag things we can all see are miles offside. That needs to change a little bit. Be a bit more flag happy unless it really is marginal.

[angryprumphs]

"zebthecat 11:20 Sun Oct 9 I disagree with this completely, linesman not flagging is the one good thing to come from VAR. I think it was something like 18 goals last season which would have been wrongly disallowed if the lineman had flagged immediately. Not sure why commentators and some fans, have such a big issue with it."

[Fo the Communist]

I'd be happy to see each bench get two VAR challenges - like in cricket. Once they are gone that's it. At the moment it seems VAR is just looking for an excuse to disallow a goal (obvs not for the 'Big 6') which is a nonsense.

[PwoperNaughtyButNot]

"BRANDED 10:42 Sun Oct 9 Re: VAR - What is it good for? My brother said its just an opportunity to get mid game adverts in. Anyone kniw if they show add during long VAR interuptions? Astute observation. If you look at the number of US owners coming into the league, they are all followed by US TV interest and US TV means adverts. The football formula we have known for years is far too long for US tv networks. It’s probably true and it is very sad"

[fraser]

"Exactly that, if it's clear and obvious a bloke with a replay should see it straight away, if he needs to analyse it multiple times from multiple angles it clearly isn't obvious."

[Ron Eff]

"Agree, the Scamacca goal is everything that is bad about it. The players didn’t want to celebrate just in case, so the fans just assumed he knew there was something wrong with it, so we didn’t celebrate, and after 3 minutes of checking it, the moment of properly celebrating it has gone. We should have been celebrating a brilliant bit of skill, not waiting for it to be hyper analysed. Making the game so sterile for a supporter. Oh, and if it ever needs to take as long as it did to analyse it, it simply cannot be clear and obvious. Set a 60 second limit for reviews if nothing else."

[zebthecat]

jack flash 11:16 Thu Sep 15 FFS! The not flagging blatant offsides can piss off as well.

[BRANDED]

My brother said its just an opportunity to get mid game adverts in. Anyone kniw if they show add during long VAR interuptions?

[Mike Oxsaw]

"Fuck the game getting ""better""! Talking points is where it's at! Talking points. Oh, and this word from our sponsor."

[Mex Martillo]

"Crap enit? No celebration for our second goal. Game just stopped and everyone stood around for a few minutes waiting to see what happened. Players managed to celebrate when it was finally confirmed. I just had a feeling of relief, no moment of joy or celebration. Really crap, wish we could bin it. Good win today though, we will get better as well"

[jack flash]

You couldn't make it up could you? Guess who's on VAR for our upcoming game against Everton? You got it. Mike Dean ?üò°

[Lato]

"LiVARpool, Chelsea, both Manchester clubs and both North London clubs......that is all!"

[VirginiaHam]

I didn't realise there was no VAR until our penalty.

[Takashi Miike]

"VH, it's why I enjoyed last thursday so much"

[VirginiaHam]

"Takashi Miike 9:37 Wed Sep 14 As I thought about your question I asked myself if there were other officials in other sports with such a high profile as Mike Dean. There aren't, because officials in other sports get plenty of reliable support and consequently make the right decisions. Dean, on the other hand, despite all the available technology, continues to fuck up royally and deserves all the ridicule he gets. Anyway, we have a lovely experience ahead of us tomorrow night, because there is no VAR."

[Takashi Miike]

"VirginiaHam 9:14 Wed Sep 14 In what other sport would an official like Mike Dean, who he then courted controversy over the years and gave numerous dubious decisions season after season, he considered for a place on the VAR team?"

[Willtell]

Indeed VirginiaHam. One day the FA will get a wake up call when live audiences start to drop because they’ve had enough….

[VirginiaHam]

"Willtell 7:33 Wed Sep 14 My favourite gripe at the moments is that rugby and cricket have open mic discussions everyone can hear and see, and there's not a moment's debate afterwards about the video reviews. Why is football so secretive? It breeds accusations of cheating and corruption, and then the officials throw themselves under the bus as their incompetence is witnessed by vast TV audiences. You really would have thought that over time, VAR would have got better, but in fact it's got considerably worse. How is that possible?"

[Willtell]

The equivalent works fine in Rugby. It's open to fans and coaches and has sane and set rules for its application. None of that applies to football which is run by FA amateurs and the worst referees in Europe.

[Sven Roeder]

I was one who was hoping that VAR would take some of the howlers which always seemed to go for certain teams out of the game. If anything its made it worse DRS in cricket has been a positive and sometimes shows that what you imagined was out or not was just wrong. Obviously the two decisions (pen & Antonio 'offside' for goal 2) went FOR us v Steaua but there was what seemed like a massive release of pressure when it meant you could CELEBRATE a pen or a goal without worrying that some cսnt was going to piss on your chips. I'd be in favour of VAR being involved in goal line deciisions plus offside with the requirement being there had to be visible daylight between the attacker & defender. The rest is up to refs and they should appear post match to explain decisions.