The Video Assistant Referee (VAR)

[bannedfromHandV]

3 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

**** hell mate. it was a joke. Hence the wink.

it's my opinion. I'm not being arrogant I'm just backing up my opinion. What's arrogant about that?

Why is it arrogant for me to defend my point but not arrogant for you to defend yours?

I'm not being aggressive - it's possible to use the word arrogant without it becoming a bun fight.

I think you're very closed off to any conversation that doesn't entirely support VAR - which for me is an arrogance as I don't think I've once seen you even acknowledge the downsides of it.

[Stevo985]

8 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

I'm not being aggressive - it's possible to use the word arrogant without it becoming a bun fight.

I think you're very closed off to any conversation that doesn't entirely support VAR - which for me is an arrogance as I don't think I've once seen you even acknowledge the downsides of it.

You haven't looked close enough then. I've acknowledged them plenty of times, particularly around the pressure put on referees to overturn decisions because they're being told to review them by VAR, the increase in handballs being given that probably aren't handballs, the general use of "clear and obvious" and the time taken currently to make some decisions. There are plenty in this thread and others.

I just think MOST of them are down to poor implementation which I think will improve over time. I think the technology itself is a good thing.

 

My overall opinion is it has its drawbacks but it's worth it for the positives. Your opinion is the other way round, that the negative outweigh the positive.

That's fine. You are entitled to that opinion and to defend it, as I am to mine. Don't call me arrogant just because you don't agree with my opinion.

 

 

Edited June 25, 2019 by Stevo985

[bannedfromHandV]

Just now, Stevo985 said:

You haven't looked close enough then. I've acknowledged them plenty of times, particularly around the pressure put on referees to overturn decisions because they're being told to review them by VAR, the increase in handballs being given that probably aren't handballs, the general use of "clear and obvious" and the time taken currently to make some decisions. There are plenty in this thread.

I just think MOST of them are down to poor implementation which I think will improve over time. I think the technology itself is a good thing.

 

My overall opinion is it has its drawbacks but it's worth it for the positives. Your opinion is the other way round, that the negative outweigh the positive.

That's fine. You are entitled to that opinion and to defend it, as I am to mine. Don't call me arrogant just because you don't agree with my opinion.

 

 

As mentioned - I hadn't seen any of those omissions myself, if I'm wrong then I'm wrong and I'll retract it but I've seen nothing that isn't wholly supportive of VAR and wholly dismissive of any drawbacks, and to be fair it's not just you but I'd say you're most prominent, to me at least anyway - so I'm not citing arrogance solely because it contradicts my opinion thank you.

 

[Stevo985]

8 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

As mentioned - I hadn't seen any of those omissions myself, if I'm wrong then I'm wrong and I'll retract it but I've seen nothing that isn't wholly supportive of VAR and wholly dismissive of any drawbacks

 

Here's a few from the past couple of months. There'll be some in the women's world cup thread and certainly during the world cup last year but I can't be bothered to go back that far.

On 10/06/2019 at 15:30, Stevo985 said:

 

It's a bit slow at the moment

 

On 06/06/2019 at 08:47, Stevo985 said:

I feel like the referees feel under too much pressure to reverse their decision when it's referred to VAR. because of this "clear and obvious error" shit. 

If something is referred because VAR thinks it's a clear and obvious mistake then of course the ref is going to think he should overturn it. 

 

I think it should just be VAR that makes the decision. If they're a qualified ref then why not. That's what happens in other sports. Rugby for example, the ref refers to the video ref and takes his word for it.
There can still be some scenarios where VAR can say they're unsure and the on field ref needs to review it. But I think this "clear and obvious" stuff puts pressure on the officials to change their mind

 

On 10/04/2019 at 09:02, Stevo985 said:

I think what's happening with handballs is two fold. I think firstly slowed down replays of handballs make them look much worse than they actually are.

Secondly I think referees are feeling under pressure, partly because of what i mentioned above with the "clear and obvious" stuff, to overturn decisions when they're referred to VAR. I think refs need to feel more free to review the decision and give their own interpretation instead of thinking "well VAR have asked me to look at it so I must be wrong!"

 

On 10/04/2019 at 09:12, Stevo985 said:

If the rule is that it only gets referred when a clear and obvious error HAS been made, then just let VAR make the decision. Don't have the pantomime of the ref reviewing it. That clear and obvious rule means the ref is thinking "well if they all think this is a clear and obvious error then I have to overturn it"

 

If the ref has the authority to review it then don't say it's a clear and obvious error. Frame it as something that needs the ref to review and let him review it.

 

I'm a big advocate of VAR, but I think that's one of the main issues. I think generally VAR is improving decisions, but handballs I think are the one thing it's hindering right now.

 

On 09/04/2019 at 22:04, Stevo985 said:

For me VAR has to ditch the "clear and obvious error" stuff. It's just so often misunderstood or misused.

Why does it have to be defined like that? Just make it that it refers incidents that VAR thinks needs to be reviewed.

 

[Genie]

1 hour ago, Stevo985 said:

Well it's continuing to be rolled out across other leagues. So it can't have been a disaster. That's how I measure it.

All these people saying it will be a disaster and will get binned. I think if it was going to get binned it would have happened by now.

Are you talking about VAR, or the World Cup in Qatar?  

(point being, we can't trust UEFA/FIFA not to do something just because its a bad idea)

Edited June 25, 2019 by Genie

[Dr_Pangloss]

The implementation of VAR is everything and until that's right it won't be fit for purpose.

[bannedfromHandV]

40 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

Here's a few from the past couple of months. There'll be some in the women's world cup thread and certainly during the world cup last year but I can't be bothered to go back that far.

 

 

 

 

 

Well, fair enough, obviously I'm wrong.

Though in my small defence those examples are of teething issues with its implementation as opposed to the damage it might cause to the overall experience of football....not that it's important.

 

[Stevo985]

10 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

Well, fair enough, obviously I'm wrong.

Though in my small defence those examples are of teething issues with its implementation as opposed to the damage it might cause to the overall experience of football....not that it's important.

 

I'm not sure what difference that makes. 

I don't believe that it will (massively) damage the overall experience of football. So why would I have any posts that say the opposite? I acknowledge the opinion that it will, but I don't agree with it. That doesn't make me arrogant.

 

Your original accusation was that I was "closed off to any conversation that doesn't entirely support VAR", which is demonstrably not true.

Edited June 25, 2019 by Stevo985

[Mic09]

38 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

Well, fair enough, obviously I'm wrong.

Though in my small defence those examples are of teething issues with its implementation as opposed to the damage it might cause to the overall experience of football....not that it's important.

 

Experience is very subjective.

My experience is that I didn't enjoy the JRod handball when we played baggies. There was 2/3 mins of discussion after that.

If we had Var, I would have enjoyed it more, and it would have taken the exact same 2/3 minutes.

I think it's either more or less fair - and to me, fairer is better

[bannedfromHandV]

39 minutes ago, Mic09 said:

Experience is very subjective.

My experience is that I didn't enjoy the JRod handball when we played baggies. There was 2/3 mins of discussion after that.

If we had Var, I would have enjoyed it more, and it would have taken the exact same 2/3 minutes.

I think it's either more or less fair - and to me, fairer is better

Okay, that’s a very specific situation that rarely comes up versus the plethora of possible fouls, handballs, offsides etc per game but I know I’m fighting a losing battle in trying to make a point on this, i think it’s fair to assume I’ve said all I can say now.

Edited June 25, 2019 by bannedfromHandV

[kurtsimonw]

The only issue with VAR IMO is the time it takes sometimes, but that's simply down to FIFA/UEFA/whoever wanting to still have referees making the big decisions. Ideally those in the VAR room would be given authority to make a decision, but it won't happen, at least for a while, because they don't want to undermine referees authority.

As for time, big decisions often end up with a bit of time wasted anyway. We waited ages for Milner's penalty against small heath with their players arguing, VAR would've only taken the same time.

As for excitement, VAR adds to it if anything.

[sne]

FIFA and their referee committee has had their emergency meeting now and according to chief ref Pierluigi Collina VAR is working  fantastic in the women's WC and the ref's are doing a fantastic job. His words.

The only little issue has been the goalies stepping over the line at pens.

Hate to see the day when VAR is not working 100% if this is as good as it gets.

[Genie]

4 hours ago, sne said:

FIFA and their referee committee has had their emergency meeting now and according to chief ref Pierluigi Collina VAR is working  fantastic in the women's WC and the ref's are doing a fantastic job. His words.

The only little issue has been the goalies stepping over the line at pens.

Hate to see the day when VAR is not working 100% if this is as good as it gets.

They obviously had a discussion and options were to either cancel it completely, or say how fantastic its going. 

Why have an emergency meeting only to say everything is going perfectly? Classic FIFA transparency. 

[Junxs]

My gripe with VAR is how it gets obvious decisions wrong.

Its not a teething issue, its a putting a decision maker without a clue in charge of overruling or deciding the outcome. Get retired referees in the box (maybe they already are, I don't know).

Either that or clear up the handball rule, it seems not everyone is on the same page when deciding. If the arms are in a natural position and no intentional movement has been made towards the ball then its not a penalty.

I just hope the premier league is not going to be like the world cup where there was a penalty in pretty much every game otherwise Milivojević is going to be near the top of the scoring charts. 

[kurtsimonw]

3 hours ago, Junxs said:

My gripe with VAR is how it gets obvious decisions wrong.

Can you give an example? 

[Junxs]

7 hours ago, kurtsimonw said:

Can you give an example? 

Japan last night

PSG v man yoo

[MrDuck]

 

[Stevo985]

On 27/06/2019 at 06:27, Junxs said:

My gripe with VAR is how it gets obvious decisions wrong.

Its not a teething issue, its a putting a decision maker without a clue in charge of overruling or deciding the outcome. Get retired referees in the box (maybe they already are, I don't know).

It's a qualified referee. 

[Junxs]

1 hour ago, Stevo985 said:

It's a qualified referee. 

Guess I'm not surprised, but you'd still expect them to get things right.

Hasnt affected Villa yet, but when the day comes i'll be fuming when we concede a penalty that was never handball through VAR.

Don't know if its true but people at work were saying to eliminate inconsistency they have decided all hand balls will be penalties regardless of intent. I really hope thats not true. Players will just be flicking the ball up all the time trying to force hand contact with the ball

edit - read the rule change, think they are getting confused from an attacking sense:

HANDBALL
If a player handling the ball leads to a chance or a goal, they will be penalised even if accidental. A foul will also be given where a player’s arms have been raised above shoulder-height (unless it has touched their hand/arm after being deliberately played) or if they have made their body ‘unnaturally’ bigger. 

Edited June 28, 2019 by Junxs

[Stevo985]

5 minutes ago, Junxs said:

Guess I'm not surprised, but you'd still expect them to get things right.

Hasnt affected Villa yet, but when the day comes i'll be fuming when we concede a penalty that was never handball through VAR.

Don't know if its true but people at work were saying to eliminate inconsistency they have decided all hand balls will be penalties regardless of intent. I really hope thats not true. Players will just be flicking the ball up all the time trying to force hand contact with the ball

edit - read the rule change, think they are getting confused from an attacking sense:

HANDBALL
If a player handling the ball leads to a chance or a goal, they will be penalised even if accidental. A foul will also be given where a player’s arms have been raised above shoulder-height (unless it has touched their hand/arm after being deliberately played) or if they have made their body ‘unnaturally’ bigger. 

Handballs seem to be a major issue with VAR at the moment.

 

I think the issue is two fold. The slow motion replays make handballs look far more obvious.
And secondly like I've discussed on here before, I think the "clear and obvious" crap puts pressure on a ref to overturn their decision. "If VAR thinks it's clear and obvious then I must be wrong"

 

To be honest, and it's not a VAR specific thing, I think I agree that the rule should be if the ball hits your hand it's a handball. It would take any discretion out of it. There's downsides, it might lead to some gamesmanship in deliberately trying to hit players' arms but I think it would be worth it for more consistent decisions.