The Video Assistant Referee (VAR)

[Wainy316]

**** this not fit for purpose incompetently implemented sack of shit out of the game we love(d)!

Edited December 3, 2023 by Wainy316

[Tommo_b]

1 hour ago, rjw63 said:

Shouldn’t even be looked at unless the Lino has flagged 

Agree with this.

[bobzy]

4 hours ago, villa4europe said:

I think today we saw another side of the VAR problem, don't get me wrong we weren't battering them but we had a bit of momentum, we're the better team, scored the second, OK it was offside but the 5 minute break completely killed us, we went flatter than a witches tit

Completwly changed the game 

They seem to have "the tech" (or a better offside system, where they do that graphic of the players etc) in major tournaments and other leagues, and it seems to work a treat i.e: nice and quick.

[villa4europe]

1 minute ago, bobzy said:

They seem to have "the tech" (or a better offside system, where they do that graphic of the players etc) in major tournaments and other leagues, and it seems to work a treat i.e: nice and quick.

The 3D one that fifa and UEFA use? 

Yep, 100% needed here too

[bobzy]

Just now, villa4europe said:

The 3D one that fifa and UEFA use? 

Yep, 100% needed here too

Yeah.  I mean, it's just massively, massively superior to the crock of shit we have.

I'm not fussed about the decision timing; they're trying to get it right and it seemingly takes forever.  But that image system is like, BOOM, look, a toenail offside - give it off.  20 seconds, done.

[sharkyvilla]

Again there was one in midweek where basically a player's ear was offside, it was that tight.  It took about 30 seconds with the automated system.  Our disallowed one took about 4 minutes and I could tell from the cut of the pitch, at least half of Digne's foot was offside.  The answer is there right in front of them, I know they'll say it can't be done until next season but just do it now ffs.

[Brumstopdogs]

 

 

[NoelVilla]

1 hour ago, Brumstopdogs said:

 

 

A lot of "blind" Arsenal-fans among the comments.

[Brumstopdogs]

Howard Webb further explaining the decision here:

 

[kurtsimonw]

I can't believe how many pundits are complaining about VAR with this decision. Lets completely ignore the fact that the decision is correct anyway... it wasn't made by VAR. In a VAR-less World, the decision is handball because the referee has give handball.

It's actuall a textbook example of perfect use and maybe its a cultural thing, but if people can't understand this decision then they'll never understand VAR. As an NFL fan, I'm used to their video replay system and unless they can prove that 100% the on field call is wrong, they don't change it. With this VAR, people expect them to just completely change this decision because of what, they don't think the handball was 'enough of a handball'? Even still, it's not a 100% wrong decision.

[Stevo985]

Just now, kurtsimonw said:

I can't believe how many pundits are complaining about VAR with this decision. Lets completely ignore the fact that the decision is correct anyway... it wasn't made by VAR. In a VAR-less World, the decision is handball because the referee has give handball.

It's actuall a textbook example of perfect use and maybe its a cultural thing, but if people can't understand this decision then they'll never understand VAR. As an NFL fan, I'm used to their video replay system and unless they can prove that 100% the on field call is wrong, they don't change it. With this VAR, people expect them to just completely change this decision because of what, they don't think the handball was 'enough of a handball'? Even still, it's not a 100% wrong decision.

Yeah the only issue with this one was the time it took. Although when you can hear them talking it doesn't seem so long. It's not like they're wasting time.

The problem with that decision is the rules. Not VAR. VAR did it's job

[kurtsimonw]

I can accept that people don't like the rules.

Though I appreciate I am very much in the minority regarding handballs. I still find it insane people think players should be able to use their hands and go unpunished. The only part of the rules I don't agree with, using Livramento v PSG as an example, is that a penalty is too harsh and indirect free kicks need to be introduced.

I see the use of the word 'accidental' a lot, but most fouls are accidental too and we shouldn't just play on when it happens.

Edited December 14, 2023 by kurtsimonw

[ThunderPower_14]

10 hours ago, kurtsimonw said:

I can accept that people don't like the rules.

Though I appreciate I am very much in the minority regarding handballs. I still find it insane people think players should be able to use their hands and go unpunished. The only part of the rules I don't agree with, using Livramento v PSG as an example, is that a penalty is too harsh and indirect free kicks need to be introduced.

I see the use of the word 'accidental' a lot, but most fouls are accidental too and we shouldn't just play on when it happens.

 

Agree with this. Everyone wants the rule changed until they're on the wrong end of a 95th minute winner where an opponent has a massively fortunate bounce off of an accidental handball. I think the current system is actually ideal despite it resulting in a different set of rules at each end of the ground.

Nobody wants to see penalties given away for incidental, accidental arm contact, but nobody wants to see goals scored because of arm contact either.

I'd absolutely support indirect frees for accidental (under the existing definition) arm contact in the box, with penalties only being awarded if the arm contact blocked a direct shot.

[The_Steve]

 

Stupid rules around a free kick going back to the original taker without another player touching the ball is honestly against the spirit of the game. It's a stupid rule that honestly we could do without. 

[kurtsimonw]

I suppose the rule exits as a technicality to stop players shifting a free kick themselves and hitting it or just running with the ball and not making a pass for a quick free kick.

Maybe it needs to treat hitting the woodwork as a 'player'.

[Zatman]

1 hour ago, The_Steve said:

 

Stupid rules around a free kick going back to the original taker without another player touching the ball is honestly against the spirit of the game. It's a stupid rule that honestly we could do without. 

Not really as people be taking two touch free kicks. Its the same with a penalty or a corner

[bobzy]

3 hours ago, The_Steve said:

 

Stupid rules around a free kick going back to the original taker without another player touching the ball is honestly against the spirit of the game. It's a stupid rule that honestly we could do without. 

Nothing wrong with that rule at all. Incredibly good pick up to disallow the goal - player just got massively, massively unlucky.

[MrBlack]

6 minutes ago, bobzy said:

Nothing wrong with that rule at all. Incredibly good pick up to disallow the goal - player just got massively, massively unlucky.

The rule isn't intended to protect against that situation though. It's clearly to stop a player running with the ball from the free kick. 

They could easily update it for a free kick. Maybe not a penalty though as a striker hitting the post shouldn't be able to get a head start on anyone else touching the ball for taking a rubbish penalty

[StefanAVFC]

So far this week we've had

VAR is bad because it correctly upheld on correct on-field decision for handball and correctly spotted a very niche and rare infringement.

I'm one of the biggest critics of it, but in these cases it's worked perfectly.

[bobzy]

1 hour ago, MrBlack said:

The rule isn't intended to protect against that situation though. It's clearly to stop a player running with the ball from the free kick. 

They could easily update it for a free kick. Maybe not a penalty though as a striker hitting the post shouldn't be able to get a head start on anyone else touching the ball for taking a rubbish penalty

Completely correct - in the same way that offside was introduced to avoid "easy" goals being scored.  Everything comes down to fine margins.

I doubt there have been many instances at all of a free kick striking the woodwork and then coming directly back to the free kick taker.  He got incredibly unlucky, but there's nothing wrong with the rule.