Jump to content

The Game's Gone


NurembergVillan

Recommended Posts

To me it's the same as goalline technology. In terms of people appealing. When that first came in players and the crowd were still appealing goalline decisions as if it would make a difference.

Now they've got use to the fact that it doesn't matter how much they shout at the ref, his watch tells him if the ball went in. he's not going to overrule that. So now when there's a goalline decision there's barely ever an appeal. And if there is it's just instinctive because they know the ref has made the right decision.

 

Players and fans will still appeal decisions with VAR because they're not black and white. But I think appealing for the use of VAR will disappear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Zatman said:

Are you Danny Murphy? 😛

LOL!! Gosh, the amount of times I grumble under my breath when I see or hear him speak on BBC. Proper cynic he is... I'm just a little old fashioned. Something needs to happen... the quality of referees, particularly at our level seems like a caravan of ineptitude at times. However, I can imagine that it's a difficult job. I just don't see VAR being the magic elixir it is being heralded as in football circles. Danny Effing Murphy... FFS!! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

BBC's punditry last night was a great example of 'the games gone'. There's very clear and well defined rules in football around the offside rule. You are either offside or you are onside, it's really very black and white.  However the BBC guys seemed to think that this rule should be ignored in 'very marginal' cases because 'we all want to see goals'. They're just utter dunderheads.

Yes... I used to find that Andy Gray on Sky used to change his interpretation of the offside rule every week depending on which team was playing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Stevo985 said:

Obviously I disagree entirely.

I posted the stats in the VAR thread. At the world cup VAR caused an average of 30 seconds delay per game. Waiting for Throw Ins to be taken causes an avaerage of 7 minutes delay per game. Waiting for free kicks averages something like 12 minutes per game. That's about 13% of the game spent waiting for free kicks. VAR is negligible in comparison.
Also, half the delay caused by VAR is players getting involved and appealing and arguing with the ref when it's just down to VAR. Once that falls away the delay will be even less.

 

I don't have any stats, it may be impossible to get them, but at the world cup the majority of decisions made by VAR were right. The only ones I had a problem with, and most other people, were the handballs for penalties. I think there is an issue there and I've said before I felt like the refs were under pressure to give those once VAR had said they needed to review them. That's definitely an improvement.

Overall I don't see how people can say it will lead to wrong decisions. It gives the referees a chance to review the decision from multiple angles and make his mind up. If they are still making a wrong decision then that's the ref's fault, not VAR.

Fair play to you for investing time to do all of that research. Semantics I know, but you do not 'disagree entirely' with what I wrote. You referenced some similar angst to me about certain VAR decisions at the World Cup. The system isn't perfect because there is still the interpretation of what somebody sees in a slow motion replay some time after the incident has happened. Is a boot lace or an unfortunate long nose offside? Is a 'ball to hand' a handball or not? Technically, it is... VAR gave some of those. I thought the Russia World Cup was one of the best World Cups in my living memory (maybe slightly edging Italia 90) in terms of actual entertaining games. But I thought the VAR input became a bit of a glitzy, melodramatic sideshow, complete with a cast of half a dozen 'full kit rocket polishers' in the VAR box waving to the viewers overseeing the 'Townsend Tactics Truck.'

Happy to accept that things can, and probably will become more efficient in terms of deliberating over decisions and wasted time on the pitch. I still have reservations as to how robust, and consistently enforced the outcome of a decision will be. Happy to bet 50p that the 'top clubs' will see more iffy decisions go their way. As is believed to happen now. I wonder if there are any stats on that. 👍

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

BBC's punditry last night was a great example of 'the games gone'. There's very clear and well defined rules in football around the offside rule. You are either offside or you are onside, it's really very black and white.  However the BBC guys seemed to think that this rule should be ignored in 'very marginal' cases because 'we all want to see goals'. They're just utter dunderheads.

or it gives them a story to talk about during commentary and post game making their life a whole lot easier, football thrives on controversy and faux outrage, its easier to discuss and talk bullshit about an offside decision and VAR than it is trying to give tactical analysis of what you are watching

there is a fair chunk of katie hopkinsisms in football, people talk shit they dont really think or believe in an attempt to at least have something to say

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

or it gives them a story to talk about during commentary and post game making their life a whole lot easier, football thrives on controversy and faux outrage, its easier to discuss and talk bullshit about an offside decision and VAR than it is trying to give tactical analysis of what you are watching

there is a fair chunk of katie hopkinsisms in football, people talk shit they dont really think or believe in an attempt to at least have something to say

Slaven Bilic was having none of it in summer, cant remember the game maybe was Brazil and the host wanted to bang on about VAR and controversy. He just said I want to watch and talk about the great goal that was scored

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 17/01/2019 at 10:56, Dr_Pangloss said:

BBC's punditry last night was a great example of 'the games gone'. There's very clear and well defined rules in football around the offside rule. You are either offside or you are onside, it's really very black and white.  However the BBC guys seemed to think that this rule should be ignored in 'very marginal' cases because 'we all want to see goals'. They're just utter dunderheads.

I think there's an argument for it, if you look at the original intention of the offside rule, which was to prevent attackers standing miles behind the last defender. If the offside is so close that it's imperceptible in real time, and needs to be analysed in freeze frame from multiple angles, then that's obviously not what's going on.

The game has changed since when the rule was introduced though, and the contest between attackers trying to time their runs and defenders trying to sprint offside traps has added a whole extra layer of strategy to the sport.

Now that we can reliably tell precisely when someone is offside, it seems worth using, but I can see why some people would want to just let the game flow if it's not an clear breach of the spirit of the rule.

Edited by Davkaus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently Saudi Arabia are pushing FIFA to have a 48 team World Cup in Qatar knowing they cant host a 48 team World Cup and it will be moved instead to Saudi Arabia and UAE combined. 

Qatar might be the lesser of 2 evils here. As for Infantino he is a scumbag

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zatman said:

Apparently Saudi Arabia are pushing FIFA to have a 48 team World Cup in Qatar knowing they cant host a 48 team World Cup and it will be moved instead to Saudi Arabia and UAE combined. 

Qatar might be the lesser of 2 evils here. As for Infantino he is a scumbag

It should've been stripped from Qatar and given to the US or Japan/South Korea years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 19/01/2019 at 12:21, Zatman said:

Apparently Saudi Arabia are pushing FIFA

I assume pushing here means offering them several caterpillar 797F sized wads of cash.

Edited by villa89
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not dodgy at all (if true)

Quote

The young Japanese, who plays in Portugal's Portimonense, will reach the Al Duhail of Qatar for 35 million euros, a club that also belongs to the Qatari sheikh as PSG.

The last PSG maneuver to get around the financial Fair Play has to do with Shoya Nakajima. The young Japanese, 24, is the star of Portuguese Portimonense and the Japanese team, although he lost the Asian Cup at the last minute due to injury. Several great clubs are interested in him, from Porto to the best of the Premier.However, the one who will finally take him to the winter market will be the amazing Al Duhail of Qatar , leader of the modest Qatari league, which will pay no more than 35 million for him. An eccentricity

It is without discussion the most expensive signing of Qatari football and leaves the option of PSG being behind the operation on the horizon. Al Duhail, like the Parisian team, belongs to the Qatari royal family, so it would not be surprising if the signing was aimed at strengthening the PSG with Nakajima in the near future.The obstacles that the French box finds with the financial Fair Play mean that it can not assume large expenses without first making sales that balance its accounts.

Using a satellite club like Al Duhail could find a loophole in which to continue strengthening the PSG with the best players, as is the case of Nakajima. This is already happening today with clubs from the same owners as City and Girona or Watford and Udinese.

https://as.com/futbol/2019/01/29/internacional/1548758600_213316.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â