The Video Assistant Referee (VAR)

[bannedfromHandV]

2 hours ago, Keyblade said:

If a goal can still be ruled out without VAR, then by your logic you shouldn't celebrate either because it could be offside or whatever. You are just splitting hairs about the length of time it take to make the decision, which I think is irrelevant. 

There were instances where you had to wait before VAR too, like when the linesman sees some sort of foul play leading up to a goal and the ref walks over to them and discusses it for a minute or 2 before ruling out a goal. Keep in mind, only 6% of all goals are ruled out, so if you're letting 6% change the way you celebrate goals then that's on you I'm afraid.

If VAR was implemented better, it shouldn't  reallytake long for the ref to run over to the monitor and look at a couple of angles and make a decision. This has the benefit of not being hearsay (like with the linesman), and it would be their own decision.

The problem with VAR is you have to first wait for some blokes in a completely different building to look at it first for a minute or 2, then tell the ref to look at it, he then looks at 1 angle for 2 or 3 minutes, and then sometimes still makes the wrong decision. All of that is a failing of the officials. Without VAR, you'd just get that (more frequently) incorrect decision quicker. There's still a problem.

The previous instances you mention were rare, the old method of celebration was simple, quick glance at the linesman whilst erupting, that was it. Yes goals have always been ruled out by officials but 99% of them were instant.

Everyone will respond to this differently but i think the majority of people have adapted their celebrations, from fans to players and staff.

[bannedfromHandV]

It goes beyond the celebration factor and dubious calls too, it affects the fabric of the game, it disrupts the flow for the team on top and it takes minutes out of matches, you get a situation like ours on the weekend - we were massively on top, limited time remaining and it all got broken up with a big delay, and we know they don’t account for VAR breaks accordingly in the time added on (took 4mins 20 seconds to sort out the McGinn ‘goal’ against Arsenal, they added on 3 minutes in total at the end of the half).

It just doesn’t feel like the football I’ve grown up knowing, maybe I’m just getting older and cantankerous but I don’t think I’m alone in this. It’s becoming far too clinical. 
 

We have the so called big clubs asking for privileges and threatening to break away if they don’t get what they want, those same clubs now asking for (and seemingly likely to get) their additional two substitutions each match and now a focus on reducing heading in football.

I really worry for where football is going to end up in 20 years.

[Keyblade]

11 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

The previous instances you mention were rare, the old method of celebration was simple, quick glance at the linesman whilst erupting, that was it. Yes goals have always been ruled out by officials but 99% of them were instant.

Everyone will respond to this differently but i think the majority of people have adapted their celebrations, from fans to players and staff.

It's also rare right now, just not quite as rare. Even with the checks, the average VAR check is 20 seconds and most of that is done in the background while the game is still flowing. The average time lost due to VAR (in over 800 sampled games) is less than 1% of playing time. It's not quite as instantaneous, but it's still very quick.

We're still seeing wild celebrations and nobody is second guessing anything on the pitch if they're not for dubious goals (like Mings' against United for example). Jack's goal against West Ham, Konsa's against Watford, Trezeguet against Leicester (that match had VAR), all our goals against Liverpool. Lanzin's goal vs Spurs, it was bedlam. Nobody stopped to think "hmm Trez looked offside when Elmo crossed it there, let me wait to see what VAR says" or "Soucek looked like he was in Lloris' line of sight there, muted celebrations for now until it' confirmed". 

If VAR finds something then it finds something but I'd be surprised if players and staff have changed how they celebrate apart from certain rare occasions. Everything looks the same to me when I'm watching football. The only thing that changed is that there's extra scrutiny so now you're seeing players who are skeptical about their goal (they might have handled it, or pushed a defender or something) not really celebrate, but I welcome that in all honesty. I'm not worried about that when it comes to VAR. I'm worried about how often they get the decisions wrong even with the benefit of technology. It's unacceptable really.

[bannedfromHandV]

30 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

It's also rare right now, just not quite as rare. Even with the checks, the average VAR check is 20 seconds and most of that is done in the background while the game is still flowing. The average time lost due to VAR (in over 800 sampled games) is less than 1% of playing time. It's not quite as instantaneous, but it's still very quick.

We're still seeing wild celebrations and nobody is second guessing anything on the pitch if they're not for dubious goals (like Mings' against United for example). Jack's goal against West Ham, Konsa's against Watford, Trezeguet against Leicester (that match had VAR), all our goals against Liverpool. Lanzin's goal vs Spurs, it was bedlam. Nobody stopped to think "hmm Trez looked offside when Elmo crossed it there, let me wait to see what VAR says" or "Soucek looked like he was in Lloris' line of sight there, muted celebrations for now until it' confirmed". 

If VAR finds something then it finds something but I'd be surprised if players and staff have changed how they celebrate apart from certain rare occasions. Everything looks the same to me when I'm watching football. The only thing that changed is that there's extra scrutiny so now you're seeing players who are skeptical about their goal (they might have handled it, or pushed a defender or something) not really celebrate, but I welcome that in all honesty. I'm not worried about that when it comes to VAR. I'm worried about how often they get the decisions wrong even with the benefit of technology. It's unacceptable really.

I fully believe VAR has negatively impacted the sport of football, you don’t. I don’t see any middle ground to settle on so nowhere to go on this one.

[Keyblade]

14 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

I fully believe VAR has negatively impacted the sport of football, you don’t. I don’t see any middle ground to settle on so nowhere to go on this one.

I think it's also negatively impacted it, but for different reasons.

[Mantis]

2 hours ago, Keyblade said:

I'd need to read the study to see what's included.

What's interesting is that the median time for VAR only decisions is 15 seconds and the ones involving an on-field ref consultation 62 seconds which doesn't seem that long at all.

Also we say that we don't care about marginal offsides, but I still see Villa fans complain about Van Persie's hattrick against us for example being offside til this day. The famous one especially, his heel was like 1 cm offside. Excuse the poor picture. 

Look at the reaction thread to that match where every other post was complaining about offside. It wasn't that big of a deal because we were shit at the time, but I imagine things would be much more vitriolic if a close game was separated by some marginal offside calls like that.

My big problem with VAR is that there's a pretty decent chance that had this exact scenario taken place today, they'd spend a couple of minutes looking at the goal and drawing lines before still deciding the goal would stand.

[Keyblade]

13 minutes ago, Mantis said:

My big problem with VAR is that there's a pretty decent chance that had this exact scenario taken place today, they'd spend a couple of minutes looking at the goal and drawing lines before still deciding the goal would stand.

Exactly, that's my main gripe with VAR. It's not worth the extra hassle if you're still coming to the wrong decision. That's due to an issue deeper than VAR though. It's a shit sandwich all around.

[colhint]

do it like cricket, if the captain thinks it's VAR then go for it. 2 reviews a game

[Keyblade]

14 minutes ago, colhint said:

do it like cricket, if the captain thinks it's VAR then go for it. 2 reviews a game

American sports seemed to have figured it out too. Watch the NBA, it's seamless. The dedicated video team are quick. Coaches also get 2 challenges per game. It works because the refs are pretty good for the most part. The most contentious calls are usually for perceived fouls that aren't reviewed or called. In my years watching the game, I've never seen anyone have a problem with the video reviews, because when given time, the refs typically make the right call.

[markc]

[PussEKatt]

IMHO this is how VAR should be used.

First off,get rid of the R.We already have a ref ( he is the guy in the middle wearing black )

Second if the ref is sure its a goal or whatever he awards it ( just like before VAR ) and his decision stands

Third and most important.The ref only calls for VAR if he is undecided or if one of the managers requests it.

This way we go back to the old way of refeering and VAR is only used to settle indicision.

[Wainy316]

If you have to draw lines then it shouldn’t be enough to overturn a given goal with offside.  The striker will have gained no advantage.

[a-k]

I guess "being level" doesn't exist anymore, but I suppose that should be expected when you have people who aren't level-headed running this farce.

[sne]

I liked the rule we used to have in Sweden where in every offside situation that was too close to call the ref should give the advantage to the attacker. We want to see goals, these micrometre offsides found by using iffy drawn lines are sapping the joy out of the game. For me at least.

Should add I've not seen this latest one in the Plop game.

[a-k]

13 minutes ago, sne said:

I liked the rule we used to have in Sweden where in every offside situation that was too close to call the ref should give the advantage to the attacker. We want to see goals, these micrometre offsides found by using iffy drawn lines are sapping the joy out of the game. For me at least.

Should add I've not seen this latest one in the Plop game.

Unless it's some sort of optical illusion, is VAR seriously saying that the inside of a perfectly balanced, upright defender's right foot is outside his left shoulder???

 

[fightoffyour]

Draw all the lines you want, if that’s offside then the rule is wrong in my opinion.

[The_Steve]

Like with penalties, this isn't about correcting obvious errors, but reducing the game to such minute details the naked eye could never perceive. By any metric, he's onside. It's unclear, confusing, and doesn't demonstrate that he's offside in any meaningful way. It's absurd and a total farce.

[tomav84]

On 27/11/2020 at 12:53, slowandlow said:

there was a game last season at VP (maybe brighton at home) where we equalised, it was chalked off through VAR, then we scored shortly afterwards anyway (not chalked off)

the celebration for the 'second' equaliser was muted - in my view because of the recent experience of VAR. So i think it can definitely have a wider impact on the extent to which a goal is celebrated.

and i'll be honest there is always something ticking around the back of my mind whenever we score now. It was easy to glance over to see if the lino had his flag up before, now i'm to some extent on edge about whether the goal will stand until play has resumed. Might say more about me and my personality than anything else, but out of the lads i go with its a fairly common position.

 

 

for the equaliser i was in the queue for a pint as was just before half time, so can't comment on that

it was also the same game where targett scored a stoppage time winner...the scenes were up there with the best i've ever experienced at VP. maybe it was because the jack equaliser was just after the disallowed one as to why celebrations might have been muted, but the targett goal was absolute carnage

[tomav84]

55 minutes ago, sne said:

I liked the rule we used to have in Sweden where in every offside situation that was too close to call the ref should give the advantage to the attacker. We want to see goals, these micrometre offsides found by using iffy drawn lines are sapping the joy out of the game. For me at least.

Should add I've not seen this latest one in the Plop game.

herein lies the fundamental problem that they need to go back to the drawing board on. the powers that be want fewer goals now. why? only they can answer that. it's like "lets look for a reason to disallow this" rather than "is there a clear reason why this should not stand?"

personally i think a big step forward would be to abolish the lines altogether. the naked eye makes the decision. if you need lines, then no advantage has been gained either way

[a-k]

That's exactly how VAR should be used. Quick check, obviously offside, no lines needed, move on.