Keep VAR by 19 to 1 votes. WTF!

[wils]

"How can that be? What's in it for the clubs? ""Premier League clubs have voted by 19-1 in favour of keeping video assistant referees (VAR) next season. Wolves triggered a vote on the use of VAR in the 2024-25 season after formally submitting a resolution to the Premier League in May. In order for VAR to be scrapped, 14 of the 20 Premier League clubs needed to vote in favour of doing so. However, BBC Sport understands Wolves failed to gain support at Thursday's annual general meeting."" https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/ck55eg44n1do"

[Haz]

"If they had asked, you know, the actual fans who attend or watch the matches, It would definitely have been kicked out. It would be good fucking riddance too. Still, what do us mere fans know about anything?"

[Alfs]

Argentina have has a goal ruled out by VAR 90 minutes after it was scored. I doubt that record will ever be beaten!

[Alfs]

"It's meant to correct 'clear and obvious' errors, so should not take more than 60 seconds."

[Mex Martillo]

"Just crap, takes so much enjoyment out of the game. The thing that fucks me off most is you cannot really celebrate a goal now. I guess this automated offside will help, but should scrap VAR."

[ray winstone]

Or a few cans of Surstr??mming…

[Far Cough]

"Good job they didn't all throw rancid Lutefisk, that stadium would have been cleared, double quick."

[,]

"Cannot understand why one club is out of step with the other nineteen. The officials, both at the game and remotely, need to be quicker over making a decision and consistent in their application of the Laws. The technology is not the problem and in the recent tournament the only significant var delay comprised an English ref and var official, say no more."

[Lee Trundle]

"""Top-flight football match in Norway abandoned after fans stage fishcake protest against VAR"" https://news.sky.com/story/top-flight-football-match-in-norway-abandoned-after-fans-stage-fishcake-protest-against-var-13183164 Good on them. But fishcakes? hahaha"

[cygnet]

"Re Stubbo 1: ""Handball...if it hits your hand for any reason, it's handball..."" Utter nonsense. 2: Offside...reversion away from the whole 'interfering with play' rubbish"" So, when Trevor Brooking is stood 20 yards away on the right edge of the penalty area in the FA Cup Semi Final you'd agree that Paul Allen's last minute winner should be ruled out for offside? Utter nonsense! 3--6 Yeah, good points."

[Mike Oxsaw]

"""Welcome to the Directors' Lounge (Sponsored by VAR)."""

[Lee Trundle]

"It's mental there's people who are still willing to give it a crack, and offering their ideas of a few tweaks here and there. Wils has it spot on. Anything that passes on a human judgement to another human's judgment is utterly pointless and a complete waste of time. It's foolish to think it will work."

[stubbo]

"In my view, if VAR is to be kept as an intrinsic part of the game, a number of the laws of Association Football need to be amended to be far less ambiguous, and make decision making more readily clearcut. 1. Handball...if it hits your hand for any reason, it's handball...player's prerogative to keep their hands out of the way. 2. Offside...reversion away from the whole 'interfering with play' rubbish. If you don't want to be given as offside, get yourself on side. 3. Sending Offs...in my view these should only be judged in real time, and by the onfield official. Slow-mo and freeze frame can take away context and unless you're making all contact a foul, then the foul needs viewing in the context of passage of play. That said: - Player tackling while not in contact with ground at all/jump tackling - sending off - Player leading with both feet into a tackle - sending off - Deliberately pulling a player down/fouling to stop a break away anywhere on the pitch - sending off 4. Holding, shirt pulling, grappling - instant foul (and in the case of in the box, penalty). If it looks like a 50:50...penalty. Once the defenders stop doing it, it will be straightforward to see if the attackers are doing it or not. 5. Catching a player without clear intent after winning (dispossessing) an opponent of the ball - no foul. It's a contact sport and sometimes a stray leg or follow through will contact someone. Forceful but well times tackles shouldn't be penalised. 6. Feigning a head injury - instant one match ban. The rule was brought in to protect players, not provide an advantage. Anyone seen claiming a head injury to stop the game where the contact was shown not to be with their head should be banned from the team's next match. The only way VAR can be successful is if the rules of the game are much more black and white. With interpretation comes inconsistency, ambiguity and frustration. If a rule isn't black and white, it shouldn't fall under the purview of VAR to offer an opinion on outcome. If a potentially serious incident has been potentially missed, the VAR should be able to ask the referee if he saw the incident and leave it at that. Whilst the VAR officials and the match officials are poor, the laws as they're written and have morphed over the years make it a difficult job as they're full of ambiguity and interpretation. Making as many rules as possible much more straightforward/simple, and putting it on the players to adapt to them would make the officials lives easier and make the role of VAR much more viable."

[wils]

For me it should the instant goal line technology stuff or nothing at all. Overriding human error with more human error at the expense of the enjoyment of the game is madness. I see that the 'semi' automated offside technology is coming in. That might be useful. But the rest of it can get in the bin.

[Ron Eff]

I’m not for VAR but am partially glad Wolves got rumbled here. Their spiky twat of a manager (who I quite liked here as a player) bleats on with some moan every week. The goal disallowed against us was clearly the correct decision and that formed a big part of their argument. They’d do well to study the rules before they throw their toys out of the pram next time.

[Fauxstralian]

Thought they would get some support but think the others have mainly said it should stay but needs to improve Still say there has to be a separate VAR panel different from the referees. Too much looking after your mates at the moment and imagining the roles might be reversed the next week. I would also say they need to get back to the clear and obvious error regime that was intended. VAR should have 3 looks at an incident at normal speed and a maximum of 2 mins. If you need more than that its not clear & obvious. Still say with those disallowed goals v Villa there was no clear evidence visible and they just guessed what they thought had happened after a ludicrous amount of time and numbers of looks.

[Coffee]

"Strange result. At the very least, you'd have expected more against even without a majority. This result just gives total approval for the status quo."

[Massive Attack]

"Fuck the other self-interested bottle job wankers and I still applaud Wolves for standing up for what I'd right. And I'm convinced that history will prove them to be right and on the right side of it when it inevitably gets pulled for being the game killing, anti-Football gimmicky yank piss-bag system that it is. Things that will NEVER be rectified satisfactorily for an English Football attending audience and that is... - The ridiculous amounts of time it takes to conclude issues. Not that I blame those in charge of it, as I totally appreciate how much pressure and things ride on games, they MUST take as long as they need to be certain in their minds they've not fucked up - even though its been proven they still fuck it up anyway I.e. Spurs Home match. - Subjectivity. Understandably 1 persons view on a situation can differ greatly to another person or interpretation of how something has happened. Also worse in the heat of the moment which is played at break neck speed, but expected with the utmost calm and level headed approach. It's just not realistic and their will always be subjectivity of a right/wrong outcome. It actually pissed me off when they wheel out bollocks about 94% (or whatever the figure) to prove it's right, when I know plenty of incidences where I and many others still disagree with what is apparently the ""correct"" decision. - Now these cunts are calling for MORE communication like a cringeworthy NFL match official telling everyone on a tannoy effectively how thick they are about to be and what pathetic review needs to happen whilst I cock the trigger to a gun I've just placed in my mouth in agonising time wasting. What's worse is it's been suggested they may flash up on the big screens judt so everyone can then go absolutely apeshit at what they just saw and it kicks off with a bad atmosphere - not that every Stadium has it, so that's not on a fair equal League basis anyway (Hello, the FA Cup when not feasible for Lower League Teams to have VARce, lucky them.. It'll always be far too lengthy, infuriatingly fun-sapping, controversial and questionable, no matter how many times they try and tweak the cսnt out of it. It's been tinkered and experimented with for 5 tortuous years as it is and it's only got worse. Where probably almost 90% (anecdotally but it's probably not far off) of Football attending Fans despise it and only the half interested tourist or occasional armchair wanker that pretends to like it which reflects the total reverse of how the Clubs just voted and goes to show just how out of touch most of the Clubs are, apart from good old Wolves who stood up to be counted alone and said, stick your VAR up your arse! ?üëè Gives us our game back you idiotic meddling shitcunts....."

[Manuel]

"Wolves were wasting their time, they were never scraping it. I'd get rid of it, when you have a bloke sitting miles away in a room reffing the game and looking for every possible reason to chalk off a goal, with his cock in his hand, it's a nonsense and just totally goes against what the game is all about."

[Sydney_Iron]

"Im not against VAR but do think they need to tweak it, particularly the time it takes sometimes, wasn't it after all supposed to be for the clear the obvious? Yet at times they spend a good portion of time trawling through footage again and again to decide the tightest or margins like a big toe was offside or not. My suggestion would be if you can't categorically decide a decision within say 30 or 45 seconds then it's not clear and obvious and whatever the onfield ref has decided is upheld."

[Sir Alf]

causes conscious bias :-).

[Sir Alf]

causes conscious bias :-).

[Sir Alf]

causes conscious bias :-).

[Sir Alf]

I reckon the refs and VAR bods at Stockley Park just have this image of a Russian Dwarf sitting on the knee of his tranny wife and it causes a consq we

[RM10]

"Like it or not 98% decisions were correct. It’s the time it takes ,offside too clinical and handballs are not consistent and var should only comment on clear decisions, ref rules!"

[Mike Oxsaw]

"Strictly limit it's use to requests by each team's captain, no matter who - or how loud - the pundits/commentators scream. 2 referrals permitted per half; failed referral reduces that count, successful referral does not. Leave the option of use with the people who really matter - the players."