West Ham Online

Interesting:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/ar ... grx8ml7m0o

SurfaceAgentX2Zero wrote: ↑17 Jan 2026, 18:22

El Scorchio" wrote: ↑17 Jan 2026, 17:46

SurfaceAgentX2Zero wrote: ↑14 Jan 2026, 23:02

I literally just did.

No you didnt. You just said 'margin of error'. That could mean at least two different things. A measurement either side of the point where offside occurs, or a grey area where the officials can use their judgement. Either one just has the same problems that already occur.

Yes I did, you're just too thick or obtuse to see that.

Now, this has been going on for a week. Fuck off you weird obsessive. You make H&P look well-adjusted.

El Scorchio" wrote: ↑17 Jan 2026, 17:46

SurfaceAgentX2Zero wrote: ↑14 Jan 2026, 23:02

El Scorchio" wrote: ↑14 Jan 2026, 11:39

 

Please explain how you envision your new VAR?

I literally just did.

No you didnt. You just said 'margin of error'. That could mean at least two different things. A measurement either side of the point where offside occurs, or a grey area where the officials can use their judgement. Either one just has the same problems that already occur.

SurfaceAgentX2Zero wrote: ↑14 Jan 2026, 23:02

El Scorchio" wrote: ↑14 Jan 2026, 11:39

SurfaceAgentX2Zero wrote: ↑13 Jan 2026, 21:32

 

No sorry, you're wrong. If the margin of error is a clearly stated 'x', there is no credibility at all in complaining, 'oh, yes he WAS offside but only by 'x' minus a tiny bit'. The complainer would be laughed at. Even now, the gripes against 'toes-length' offsides are no longer taken seriously.

 

Please explain how you envision your new VAR?

I literally just did.

All Wenger's suggestions regarding football are shit.

onsideman wrote: ↑15 Jan 2026, 15:43 ,

Because the semi automated VAR wasn't working due to Haaland and Thiaw being too close together, but they persevered with it - astonishingly without recognising that it was wrong to be looking at those 2 players anyway because the Pope was ahead of them both - so once they gave up on the SAOT and drew the lines, they realised that Pope was the second last player and the lines showed Haaland was like 8" offside

That was the cause of the delay

Once they'd realised he was well offside they looked at the incident and determined that Haaland was interfering so recommended an on field review

The people in the stadium would've been clueless as they always are. Those watching at home were just misinformed by the cunts on commentary

Far Cough UKunt" wrote: ↑15 Jan 2026, 15:47 The Peup?

The Peup?

,

Because the semi automated VAR wasn't working due to Haaland and Thiaw being too close together, but they persevered with it - astonishingly without recognising that it was wrong to be looking at those 2 players anyway because the Pope was ahead of them both - so once they gave up on the SAOT and drew the lines, they realised that Pope was the second last player and the lines showed Haaland was like 8" offside

That was the cause of the delay

Once they'd realised he was well offside they looked at the incident and determined that Haaland was interfering so recommended an on field review

The people in the stadium would've been clueless as they always are. Those watching at home were just misinformed by the cunts on commentary

Manuel wrote: ↑15 Jan 2026, 01:58

only1billybonds wrote: ↑14 Jan 2026, 21:56 The whole system has to go apart from goal line technology. If up to 5 minutes are taken to reach a final decision then surely that can't be conclusive.
The introduction of the system was supposed to guarantee conclusively and if its faiiing in that area then it has to be binned.

Being pedantic (who me) goal line technology is separate from VAR so doesn't need to even get a mention in the same convo.

How about only use it for offsides? I wouldn't be totally against that.

The bafflement, of the fans at the stadium, and others watching on tv arose because it took several minutes for a decision to be made. 

As an aside I just read that the panel voted overwhelmingly that VAR should have intervened for the foul on Soucek at Wolves and should have recommended a penalty.

We were 3-0 down at the time so it wouldn't have made any difference, but the incident was barely mentioned in the game and not at all subsequently 

Nope. Sorry

It was disallowed for offside. Categorically not a foul regardless of your assumption

Because Haaland made no attempt to play the ball, it's a subjective offside

No one has said anything about obstructing anyone's view. Those are your words and again that's your incorrect assumption

The question they would have asked was 'would the defender and/or the keeper (or even Semenyo, for that matter) have acted any differently had Haaland not been in an obviously offside position'?

Their conclusion was yes.

I'm baffled as to why this has caused so much debate and consternation - although as I said before a lot of that is due to the fact that the commentator and the silly bint on co-commentary were so desperately clueless 

The position of Haaland was quite clearly not obscuring anyone’s view so I can only conclude that he was deemed to be committing a foul by blocking the keeper and defender. And that decision should hold good regardless of whether or not Haaland was in an offside position or Newcastle had a defender or two elsewhere on the goal line.

, wrote: ↑15 Jan 2026, 09:55

FWIW in my view from the other night what went on between Haaland and Thiago was six of one and half a dozen of the other and as such the goal should have stood.

Manuel wrote: ↑15 Jan 2026, 10:08

, wrote: ↑15 Jan 2026, 09:55 It matters not what the criteria for offside are deemed to be because it is the delay in making a decision that causes the problem.


 

That's true enough, but if we can assume it won't be scrapped then at least Wenger's idea will see more goals and surely that's a good thing.

Isn't Semi-Automated Offside Technology now speeding offsides calls up? 

, wrote: ↑15 Jan 2026, 09:55 It matters not what the criteria for offside are deemed to be because it is the delay in making a decision that causes the problem.

 

VAR will only ever work if there is an algorithm applied to every decision so that the same factors and conclusions are drawn every time. It's still down to interpretation and human thoughts way too much. 

Asking the officials that needed help in the first place to then make decisions in a room instead of on the pitch was always going to be a shitshow. 

The time delay has ruined the entertainment and viewing experience both in the ground and at home. That combined with the fact it's getting many decisions incorrect and not improving the game the only answer for me is to get rid. 

The other thing I do not get is why Sky seem to have more camera angles available than VAR and why it isn't used for things like goal kicks given instead of a corner etc. When watching on the box within 3 seconds the replay is shown as to what it should have been. Why don't ref's get told what the correct decision should of been then? 

Much better to go back to ref's reffing the game, and not some bloke in a room. There will still be incorrect calls, but the game will be improved. 

It matters not what the criteria for offside are deemed to be because it is the delay in making a decision that causes the problem.

So how about, when the var shows it is too close to call, giving the benefit of doubt to the attacker. And where the concern is whether or not an attacker is interfering with play force the var team to make a decision within thirty seconds.

FWIW in my view from the other night what went on between Haaland and Thiago was six of one and half a dozen of the other and as such the goal should have stood.

Is Wenger's proposal using the torso and not hands or feet?

If so people like Razor Ruddock and Benni McCarthy will be at a serious disadvantage. 

Council Scum" wrote: ↑15 Jan 2026, 08:48 I like what Wenger is trying to do, it's taken 6 years but it is being discussed, but it would be great if his ruling was used 

"A growing number of competitions that do not have the money or resources for full VAR technology are introducing pilot runs for the system that has been described as "cost-effective and scalable" by Fifa."


LOL

Threesixty strikes again...

threesixty wrote: ↑15 Jan 2026, 07:12

Eerie Decent" wrote: ↑15 Jan 2026, 06:46 It's not going away, but at least we confirmed your idea is absolutely ludicrous.

 

Of course it’s absolutely ludicrous. 
Which is why they’ve been officially trialing the concept

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/ar ... yk11nlzxyo

because they’re in the habit of trialling really really stupid ideas.

toddler…

I like what Wenger is trying to do, it's taken 6 years but it is being discussed, but it would be great if his ruling was used 

threesixty wrote: ↑15 Jan 2026, 04:45

Eerie Decent" wrote: ↑14 Jan 2026, 21:09

threesixty wrote: ↑14 Jan 2026, 14:58

 

 

Yes a call you SUSPECT to be incorrect in the 90th cant be challenged because you've used up all your challenges.  At least it's better than going all game where you've lost 2 goals already because the ref is shit and you couldn't do anything about it at all. Which is what you are proposing by removing VAR altogether. And more importantly it's up to you as a team whether you challenge rather than a group of ref's that adhere to the big 6 clubs that won't even bother if it doesn't suit them. 

So you want an unfair system, to replace the current shit system?

A team could make 2 wrong 'calls', the other team 2 'right' calls, but they could still get fucked over, and in the end, it's still all just interpretation that could be wrong.

Absolutely fucking ridiculous, like most of your wacky ideas.

The whole thing needs scrapping.

 

It’s like talking to a toddler. 
Yes you can scrap it but the problem of multi million pound decisions being made by one person with no hindsight is still a thing. If u had a business that was a crap obvious decision away from earning millions I’m sure you’d want something in place to help with that.

so unless u want to remove the money and reward from the game I don’t think Var is going away. 

This is boring now. 

Eerie Decent" wrote: ↑15 Jan 2026, 06:46 It's not going away, but at least we confirmed your idea is absolutely ludicrous.