VAR - What is it good for?

[Any Old Iron]

"Absolutely nothing. Say it again, yeah."

[El Scorchio]

"Cheers! Yeah it seems to me that could be a relatively simple and effective change for the better. 'I'm not sure of this- let's check it please.' I think there's too much fretting in football about presenting the refs as infallible which holds the game back. In rugby or to bring another sport into it, cricket, the officials can be and are wrong sometimes. They are only human. No-one thinks badly of cricket umpires or rugby officials when they get a marginal LBW or grounding call slightly wrong in real time. It's a hard job. Football officials are way too prideful. It almost seems now like it's a competition with VAR refs to spot something the ref hasn't seen so they can one up him. No coincidence it's other refs or former refs who still want to prove they are the bestest out of all of them. East- yeah the behaviour of the players is also difficult. I love how in rugby they respect the official and shut up when told to rather than whinging like petulant children. Maybe do something like the ref goes to the centre spot while conferring and no player whatsoever is allowed in the centre circle. Or there's a 10 yard exclusion zone round the monitor. Other issue is the crowd are right in the ref's face when they are at the monitor. The NFL officials go under a little hood or in a tent where no-one can influence them to make their call. But again in NFL the players are all disciplined enough to stay away. Why is it only football where the players are allowed to get away with so much shit toward officials? Every other sport sees them punished for it."

[Far Cough]

"Scorch, yeah I think you're right and for people saying yeah but Rugby has different rules, yes they do but the principle of VAR and TMO should be the same"

[easthammer]

El Scorchio just what I had been thinking I agree entirely. The only problem being can imaging how the players will be the ref's ear. That doesn't happen so much in rugby. IMO

[Far Cough]

"Any Old Iron 8:49 Sat Sep 3 VAR - What is it good for? Absolutely nothing. Say it again, yeah. This is all a bit Edwin Starr"

[El Scorchio]

"Thinking about VAR vs TMO again and how it works differently. In rugby, is it the case that TMO only comes into it when the ref asks for a replay to help him with something he's not sure of? That's not the case in football is it? VAR just sticks their beak in when they decide, rather than the ref actually asking for it. (Could be wrong- don't know) Also, the ref is far more in control of TMO than in VAR, right? The ref says 'have we got another angle? 'Slow it down' etc. As far as I know (because we don't know what they say in VAR) the official just 'presents their case' to the ref? That could very easily change to a more TMO based model and make it better instantly."

[Banjo]

Manuel 12:46 Mon Sep 5 I can't as Coffee has cornered the market on that fred.

[easthammer]

The problem with VAR is that it just gives a set of poor referees more decisions to make. Something they are not very good at.

[Helmut Shown]

VAR shows the refs up for what crooks they are. They would swear black was white and get away with it. You only have to look at Mike Dean’s performances over the last few years and the damage he has done to West Ham. The Souchek and the Feghouli incidents come to mind. And now they have put him I charge of VAR and suddenly there is an increase in contentious incidents. Seems a bit of a coincidence. The first thing Howard Webb should do is sack this Clive Thomas wannabe.

[Manuel]

"Banjo - I did say stick to the papers thread, mate."

[El Scorchio]

But I absolutely agree with you it shouldn't have been! Bowens non foul had no impact whatsoever on the goal. Mendy wasn't getting it even if he sprung right back up again.

[Banjo]

"El Scorchio 12:40 I think you are right mate, well spotted"

[El Scorchio]

"Banjo 12:28 Saturday would come under A, wouldn't it? I don't like it, but I think that's what it is. However, it was clearly just VAR sticking their noses in where it wasn't needed thanks to Mendy's playacting. I suppose you've got to give him credit for fooling the idiot in the bunker."

[El Scorchio]

"Hearing the conversation won't help. Yesterday's would have been 'Bowen catches/kicks him on the way through. I think it's a foul. Look at how hos foot goes into him.' etc. It'll just be the VAR official talking the ref into seeing what he thinks he's seen. Won't change any outcomes. However, I 100% agree they need to publicly talk the media through the decision making after the game. The officials are far too protected. What is a really big problem is that the VAR official selects the angle THEY want to present to the ref so they can just pick whatever angle best suits their argument and makes it look worst. I remember the Antonio 'foul' on the Forest defender. The ref was only given an angle from behind Antonio which looked so much more like a foul than any other angle. It was flat out manipulating the incident. They probably selected only the angle from behind Bowen on Saturday from which you can't see it's a mere graze of the arm. What can a ref do when the visuals of an incident are manipulated like that? As standard procedure, they should show any incident from 2-3 contrasting angles so the ref can actually get the full picture rather than what the person pushing for a decision one way chooses to show them. I reckon our ref on Saturday, bad as he was, was quite badly hung out to dry by the VAR official for that decision."

[dealcanvey]

If this new VAR system works well for offsides at the WC then I would say keep it for that and that alone. otherwise would be quite happy if it went back to how it was and we just accept that linesman and refs can and will make the odd wrong decision. It's not like VAR has stopped them. Sucked the joy of scoring a goal out of the game completely.

[Eerie Descent]

"Never wanted it, knew exactly what was going to happen. No good everyone moaning about it now, most people wanted it. Pointless judging it against Rugby, 2 different games with completely different rules, and they do make fuck ups, they just won't be heard about because not many people give a fuck. Sadly it won't be scrapped, but obviously the process needs to change."

[Banjo]

The issue for me on the Chelsea game was that it seemed that VAR were sticking their noses in where it was not required. The rules clearly state the following. VAR is used in the following situations: a. Goal/no goal b. Penalty/no penalty c. Direct red card (not second yellow card/caution) d. Mistaken identity (when the referee cautions or sends off the wrong player of the offending team) None of the above were in play when Bowen allegedly fouled Chelsea's goal keeper. That decision was way out of the VAR remit therefore what the fuck was going on and what is in play to prevent a reoccurrence.

[zico]

"""I think we have a lot to learn from rugby. Not only could we hear the conversation between ref and var official which may help although the decision still rests with the officials. Stopping the stadium clock for major stoppages (eg injuries and substitutions) would be amazing with every game finishing when the clock shows 45/90 minutes and not left for the ref to decide."" This - Said before they just close ranks with no explanation as to why a decision has been made. Personally I would shove them in front of the media afterwards to explain their decisions. Agree re the clock. Most of the new sub rules are timewasting tactics and it benefits the bigger clubs because they have better players to bring on. VAR decisions, subs, players feigning injury, timewasting then the Referee only adds say three minutes on!"

[GreenStreetPlayer]

"Could also be we would be horrified to hear what they were or were not discussing, missing this, missing that, it would be a red rag to a bull, and they know it!"

[GreenStreetPlayer]

"Could also be we would be horrified to hear what they were or were not discussing, missing this, missing that, it would be a red rag to a bull, and they know it!"

[JayeMPee]

"I hate it, having to wait for ages for a decision and often before celebrating a goal is a killer. I initially agreed with the 'clear and obvious' but then thought about the penalty awarded to the spuds which took best part of 5 minutes to resolve before it was ruled out. I think we have a lot to learn from rugby. Not only could we hear the conversation between ref and var official which may help although the decision still rests with the officials. Stopping the stadium clock for major stoppages (eg injuries and substitutions) would be amazing with every game finishing when the clock shows 45/90 minutes and not left for the ref to decide. 10 minutes in the bin instead of a yellow card would see the side 'sinned' against benefit and not some team further down the fixture list. Sadly none of this will happen even though it would reduce the possibility of corruption as raised on another post. VAR is here to stay but it needs improvement and records should be publicly kept to see which teams benefit most from its use."

[Mad Dog]

Read a while back that they can't put it on the big screens in premier league because 1 team doesn't have a big screen. That team is man u

[nerd]

"The team running var should be checking constantly always seems it lat minute. then once highlighted to the ref on the pitch they have 30 sec to make a decision , it ain't clear n obvious if they don't.get them doing there job quicker. Seems to work better in Europe especially the eufa tournaments."

[mallard]

A safeguard to ensure the Elite clubs don’t drop out of the Top Six

[BRANDED]

VAR is for the TV audience in general. Those cunts who cant be bothered to go or who pay for the whole charade in Thailand and China. Massive cunts the lot of them.

[Matthew Holmes]

It's VARsicle. I think the comparison with how rugby does it is very useful. Rugby also doesn't allow players to give the ref.sny backchat. Laudable.