The VAR Thread

[warlock]

1 minute ago, Icelander83 said:

Which is why anyone with even a modicum of sense will be advocating for a 2x30 match with stop clock.

Was just googling for in-game stats for this thread and spotted a news story last year that said 'football authorities' were considering just that. But there didn't seem to be a follow-up. But definitely makes sense to me.

[daylight]

Just now, warlock said:

I think it's been that way for a while, but it seems to me - old bloke, memory etc - that things have got much worse in recent years. Keepers didn't take minutes lining up the wall for free kicks; players didn't always argue every decision; corner takers didn't have to precisely position the ball by the millimetre for corners, etc, etc. 

You forgot the players running around making TV signals with their fingers.

[Mr Wallin]

2 minutes ago, Icelander83 said:

Which is why anyone with even a modicum of sense will be advocating for a 2x30 match with stop clock.

Agreed, if they do it then 2x30 has to be the choice.

[warlock]

Just now, daylight said:

You forgot the players running around making TV signals with their fingers.

Oh yeah. Told you... old bloke, memory. I can remember stuff from the 70s as if it were yesterday. I've forgotten stuff from yesterday as if it were the 70s .

[daylight]

Just now, warlock said:

Oh yeah. Told you... old bloke, memory. I can remember stuff from the 70s as if it were yesterday. I've forgotten stuff from yesterday as if it were the 70s .

I meant players today now running around making TV signals so the ref will look at VAR.   

[warlock]

2 minutes ago, daylight said:

I meant players today now running around making TV signals so the ref will look at VAR.   

You mean like in this World Cup? Oh yeah, I remember that!

[Nordan]

There is a world cup?? Oh yeah, I remember now.

[scott MUFC]

VAR told ref to look at a red card offence, then gave a yellow? erm

[YouReds]

Serious question, the Portugal-Iran and Spain-Morocco games last night both had VAR decisions being made at the same time. Are these decisions being made by the same group of VAR refs in the same room? Or is there two separate rooms? 

[Razzler]

Each match has it's own 'VAR Room' with refs assigned to it, 4 of them.

They show them to you before each game when they're running through the teams

[YouReds]

Thanks Razzler, I missed the start of game so missed all of that

[Paul Bacon]

14 hours ago, FaceCrusher said:

I support VAR but some of these refs (both on the pitch and VAR truck) clearly haven't got used to these things yet.

In the Portuguese league it is used much less, mainly on situations like offside goals where you can't have two ways about it. It either is, or isn't. Yet here at the WC it's being called up all the time for any dubious shenanigans in some matches, yet in others not even used for clear penalties (looking at you Germany-Sweden).

I'm sure after most leagues adopt it, it will start to normalize. No wonder these Paraguayans and whatnot are having a though time dealing with the pressure.

It should never have been used at the WC. Let refs get used to it before giving them relatively new tech on the worlds biggest stage

[dllu]

It is completely ridiculous and in my opinion is not adding anything positive whatsoever to the game - or taking away anything negative, for that matter.

( And no, I am not just saying that because I'm Danish and bitter about the incorrect penalty in the Australia game.  ) 

I don't want the "human factor" to be eliminated. I want referees to make errors from time to time. That's just part of the game - and the key word here is "game". It is also a big part of what makes it entertaining and what makes us talk about it for hours on end.

[Bliss Seeker]

There's been incidents where it's worked really well and has hardly held up the game.  If they can bottle that process and ensure that happens all the time, then great. 

I think it should have been used in the wc, but only for black or white decisions.  Wrong identity bookings, offside goals, whether a foul was in the penalty or not etc.  But calling play back for a suspected elbow the ref might have missed, or looking a tumble in the area minutes after the play has continued and suspending play to review incidents zaps the football out the game.   It's obviously not ready, and some of the ref's have no experience in using it, so it should never have been rolled out as extensively as it has. 

 

 

[git2thachoppa]

2 hours ago, dllu said:

It is completely ridiculous and in my opinion is not adding anything positive whatsoever to the game - or taking away anything negative, for that matter.

( And no, I am not just saying that because I'm Danish and bitter about the incorrect penalty in the Australia game.  ) 

I don't want the "human factor" to be eliminated. I want referees to make errors from time to time. That's just part of the game - and the key word here is "game". It is also a big part of what makes it entertaining and what makes us talk about it for hours on end.

If you're giving the final decision (to review let alone to punish) to the ref it seems to not affect the human element. People are still debating VAR decisions.

It's just that we're far less likely to get insanity like the Hand of God or Neymar's dives leading to penalties.

[Paul Bacon]

I dont think the ref watching it back in slow motion helps. Everything look worse in slow motion

[dllu]

31 minutes ago, git2thachoppa said:

If you're giving the final decision (to review let alone to punish) to the ref it seems to not affect the human element. People are still debating VAR decisions.

True, but all the lengthy interruptions completely  ruin the flow of the game. Might as well watch an American football game.

Quote

It's just that we're far less likely to get insanity like the Hand of God or Neymar's dives leading to penalties.

I honestly have no problem with Maradona's "hand of God" or the like being part of the game. The fact that we are still talking about it 32 years later means it's part of football lore.

[Icelander83]

4 hours ago, dllu said:

It is completely ridiculous and in my opinion is not adding anything positive whatsoever to the game - or taking away anything negative, for that matter.

( And no, I am not just saying that because I'm Danish and bitter about the incorrect penalty in the Australia game.  ) 

I don't want the "human factor" to be eliminated. I want referees to make errors from time to time. That's just part of the game - and the key word here is "game". It is also a big part of what makes it entertaining and what makes us talk about it for hours on end.

Human factor is still the single biggest factor in football. Just ask players missing sitters.

We don't need referee mistakes that unfairly affect the outcome of games. It's nonsensical to maintain that it's integral to the game. It shouldn't factor into the game at all

[georginho_juventusygr]

The only good thing VAR has done is correctly telling the referee that Neymar dived.

[dllu]

1 hour ago, Icelander83 said:

We don't need referee mistakes that unfairly affect the outcome of games. It's nonsensical to maintain that it's integral to the game. It shouldn't factor into the game at all

It's not an "integral" part of the game and I claimed no such thing. It's just a part of the game. And a big part of its charm. Always has been. And as the non-penalty in the DEN-AUS game shows, VAR doesn't guarantee correct decisions. What it does guarantee are unnecessary interruptions.

[Icelander83]

1 minute ago, dllu said:

It's not an "integral" part of the game and I claimed no such thing. It's just a part of the game. And a big part of its charm. Always has been. And as the non-penalty in the DEN-AUS game shows, VAR doesn't guarantee correct decisions. What it does guarantee are unnecessary interruptions.

So the times it got the decisions right, it's unnecessary? Jog on mate, you're spouting nonsense

[git2thachoppa]

3 minutes ago, dllu said:

It's not an "integral" part of the game. It's just a part of the game. And a big part of its charm. Always has been. And as the non-penalty in the DEN-AUS game shows, VAR doesn't guarantee correct decisions. What it does guarantee are unnecessary interruptions.

It's easy to remember the interruptions because they're so few and far between. We've had 2 matches and 24 minutes of 2 more so far today and there have been no interruptions I remember.

The Iran/Portugal match had bad refs not following the guidelines and bottling it. Take that ref out, I can't tell you off the top of my head any matches that were stop-start due to big interruptions and waiting times.

[dllu]

1 minute ago, Icelander83 said:

So the times it got the decisions right, it's unnecessary? Jog on mate, you're spouting nonsense

The point is, VAR doesn't in any way guarantee correct decisions if the refereee has the final call anyway. All it does is give the referee the chance to interrupt the game and ruin the flow. So it is pointless.

If you want an example that doesn't involve "my" team, take the yellow card to Ronaldo yesterday. There were two options in that situation: A red card or no card. The referee chose the yellow card because he was too cowardly to dismiss the biggest name of the tournament .

[Icelander83]

Just now, dllu said:

The point is, VAR doesn't in any way guarantee correct decisions if the refereee has the final call anyway. All it does is give the referee the chance to interrupt the game and ruin the flow. So it is pointless.

If you want an example that doesn't involve "my" team, take the yellow card to Ronaldo yesterday. There were two options in that situation: A red card or no card. The referee chose the yellow card because he was too cowardly to dismiss the biggest name of the tournament .

So because refs can still mess things up, we shouldn't make things better? You honestly can't see how much nonsense you are talking, can you?

[dllu]

3 minutes ago, git2thachoppa said:

It's easy to remember the interruptions because they're so few and far between. We've had 2 matches and 24 minutes of 2 more so far today and there have been no interruptions I remember.

The Iran/Portugal match had bad refs not following the guidelines and bottling it. Take that ref out, I can't tell you off the top of my head any matches that were stop-start due to big interruptions and waiting times.

OK, so let me put it another way: At this point we have already had far more penalties than in any other World Cup. Even if we accept that most of the penalties awarded after VAR decisions were technically correct, can you honestly tell me that you think this is an improvement for the game?

[git2thachoppa]

1 minute ago, Icelander83 said:

You honestly can't see how much nonsense you are talking, can you?

Settle down there.

[Icelander83]

1 minute ago, dllu said:

OK, so let me put it another way: At this point we have already had far more penalties than in any other World Cup. Even if we accept that most of the penalties awarded after VAR decisions were technically correct, can you honestly tell me that you think this is an improvement for the game?

More correct decisions = better

It really is exactly that simple

[dllu]

3 minutes ago, Icelander83 said:

So because refs can still mess things up, we shouldn't make things better? You honestly can't see how much nonsense you are talking, can you?

And you obviously can't see how condescending you sound, can you? You're welcome to disagree with me, but at least do so in a decent tone of voice.

Just now, Icelander83 said:

More correct decisions = better

It really is exactly that simple

No, it's not, actually.

The bottom line is, football is entertainment first and foremost. The occasional referee mistake doesn't make it any less entertaining for me. VAR does. A lot.

[git2thachoppa]

5 minutes ago, dllu said:

OK, so let me put it another way: At this point we have already had far more penalties than in any other World Cup. Even if we accept that most of the penalties awarded after VAR decisions were technically correct, can you honestly tell me that you think this is an improvement for the game?

At the moment yes, but I was thinking about this. I think VAR is imperative, it makes the sport a joke to outsiders and its own fans without it, but they'll have to alter the rules to integrate it properly. I doubt they'll be making the area smaller, but maybe something like allowing pushing/shoving/barging (but still no grappling).

The main reason really there are so many penalties is because we've just introduced VAR and we're in a transitional phase where players (who aren't known for intelligence) don't get that if they foul in the box now, they WILL get caught. They're still used to getting away with it. There's no penalties if they stop sodding fouling, which they should do over time.

[Icelander83]

Football is a competition first and foremost. It's not there for your entertainment, that's a side effect of it being a great competition.

And I will be exactly as condescending as I damn well please, really

[chopra_hill]

Did they just not fancy reviewing the Nigeria pen?

[enigmatic]

From an entertainment perspective, it's difficult to argue that 30 seconds of arguing followed by 10 seconds of jogging followed by 30 seconds of replays is anything like as painful to watch as 90 minutes of Denmark.

[VamPook]

Having more correct penalty decisions is bad because what?

[m_fenton]

3 hours ago, dllu said:

OK, so let me put it another way: At this point we have already had far more penalties than in any other World Cup. Even if we accept that most of the penalties awarded after VAR decisions were technically correct, can you honestly tell me that you think this is an improvement for the game?

The defenders who know that there are 5,678,670,936 cameras pointed at them but STILL wrestle people to the ground in the box are the ones you should be directing your anger towards. A game where those are penalties, instead of ignored, is a much better game.

[JD nawrat]

5 hours ago, VamPook said:

Having more correct penalty decisions is bad because what?

The argument is probably "I don't want to see loads of penalties!"

But loads of penalties > loads of 0-0s. 

[JD nawrat]

I've only seen maybe about 75% of the games at this WC and even I agree with you @D_LO_ that it doesn't interrupt the flow. 

As I said either in here or in another thread, the average number of times the referee goes to the side to check the VAR monitor at this world cup probably averages at <1/game. It really doesn't feel like it has been used much. Certainly where it has it hasn't interrupted a game with great flow. 

[Cedrik]

So it seems that John Obi Mikel was a little bit pissed after Nigeria's game against Argentina. He felt the situation with Rojo should have been a penalty and also compared it to the penalty given to Iran in the match with Portugal. I did not even think about that to be honest, but it makes me indeed wonder a bit, what is the difference between the two? Personally I felt when re-watching both situations, that no penalty should be awarded, I feel their is no deliberate contact with the ball, but still ... in one situation a penalty is given in the other not. 

[Sons FC]

Has anyone looked at the games yet where VAR made a decisive outcome and worked out what would have resulted without VAR?

[themadsheep2001]

VAR is a tool, it's basically a set replays. It doesn't actually do anything. So when you're getting mad at VAR, you're actually getting mad at people making mistakes. I have no idea why so much of football  in general, can't seem to think beyond black and white, but the aim of VAR is not eradicate mistakes (because that is impossible), but to help the referees make decision with added tools, to try and maximise the chances of the right call. Of course it's still open to interpretation, have people read most of the rules of football lately? They're so woolly in their definitions that the referees have to interpret them

[themadsheep2001]

2 hours ago, Cedrik said:

So it seems that John Obi Mikel was a little bit pissed after Nigeria's game against Argentina. He felt the situation with Rojo should have been a penalty and also compared it to the penalty given to Iran in the match with Portugal. I did not even think about that to be honest, but it makes me indeed wonder a bit, what is the difference between the two? Personally I felt when re-watching both situations, that no penalty should be awarded, I feel their is no deliberate contact with the ball, but still ... in one situation a penalty is given in the other not. 

This goes to the point I just made. That's not an issue with VAR, that's an issue with the rules of handball, and how they are interpreted

[Astafjevs]

Did Cédric head the ball onto his own arm? Don't think he did. The Iranian player headed it onto him, so situations aren't the same

[enigmatic]

 

 

[Razzler]

15 hours ago, georginho_juventusygr said:

The only good thing VAR has done is correctly telling the referee that Neymar dived.

Ref still bottled booking him though

[Nordan]

I think VAR has worked well. What annoys me now is obvious situations the ref isn't told to investigate.

[Mark H]

Wasn't a fan of VAR but I actually like it more now.

The best thing is the pushing in the box, it's creating a bit of a farce at the moment, but the outcome is totally correct. Fouls from corners/free kicks have been a shambles for ages.

What VAR will hopefully do is train players not to break the rules. So no more pushing, no more diving etc. As players learn what they can and can't get away with they will eventually stop doing what they shouldn't and VAR will be used a lot less....

That's what I'm taking from it anyway

[georginho_juventusygr]

3 hours ago, Razzler said:

Ref still bottled booking him though

True. It was Kuipers, I think? Bottler. Big time.

[ArsenalFan7]

The people finally seeing VAR in all its glory for that SK goal  

[scott MUFC]

both of them

 

[Andyh21]

Yes VAR is a very good thing for football

[andyinuk]

On 26/06/2018 at 16:39, dllu said:

True, but all the lengthy interruptions completely  ruin the flow of the game. Might as well watch an American football game.

I honestly have no problem with Maradona's "hand of God" or the like being part of the game. The fact that we are still talking about it 32 years later means it's part of football lore.

Don't be a diva. There are dozens or other things that stop the flow of the game already.  Treating injured players takes even longer and caused more interruptions. why don't we just leave them laying on the pitch then for the sake of the "flow". Players takes drink break in a exceptionally hot day too. Maybe we should stop that and let them die of dehydration too.