The Video Assistant Referee (VAR)

[a m ole]

2 hours ago, Ingram85 said:

So what’s the score with it? When and when doesn’t it get used? Is it the refs call? Assistants call? Is it all games now or just some games?

Why wasn’t it used for Swansea? Southampton?

Teams should get one review per half in my opinion.

it’s still being tested and only used in some league cup games.

Its the referees call if he wants to speak to the tv refs to check something or take their advice to look again.

It gets used for penalties, red cards, goals and cases of mistaken identity.

[a m ole]

Also I despise the ‘challenge’ system. It would only create problems. There can also be more than one refereeing mistake and we should not be giving any control to managers to referee the game.

The ability for the ref to consult someone with a better view or be made aware of a clear mistake to make the right call is what it is for.

Edited January 14, 2018 by a m ole

[Stevo985]

2 hours ago, Ingram85 said:

So what’s the score with it? When and when doesn’t it get used? Is it the refs call? Assistants call? Is it all games now or just some games?

Why wasn’t it used for Swansea? Southampton?

Teams should get one review per half in my opinion.

It’s only being trialled. 

It will be the ref’s call whether he wants to have a proper review of the video. Or the VAR May alert the ref that he should review something. 

It wont always be a full review. The VAR can advise the ref based on what he’s seen. 

[Stevo985]

2 hours ago, Ingram85 said:

So what’s the score with it? When and when doesn’t it get used? Is it the refs call? Assistants call? Is it all games now or just some games?

Why wasn’t it used for Swansea? Southampton?

Teams should get one review per half in my opinion.

It’s only being trialled. 

It will be the ref’s call whether he wants to have a proper review of the video. Or the VAR May alert the ref that he should review something. 

It wont always be a full review. The VAR can advise the ref based on what he’s seen. 

[a m ole]

It worked pretty seamlessly last night!

[PaulC]

Yes I agree it was good last night

[fightoffyour]

On 1/12/2018 at 04:48, MrDuck said:

I can't stand the way they use DRS in the cricket. It doesn't get rid of all errors, just a handful of selected errors, and it makes it no fairer. On top of which it slows down an already slow game. The more I see it, the more I think bugger it, let the umpires/referees make the odd mistake just like the players do. It's become an issue because tv cameras scrutinise to the nth degree, and because of the pressure of the money involved in the game. Sure, it's not always fair, but neither is life. #istandwithhumanerror!

Exception - in football I would like to see goal-line technology, and in cricket review the run outs.

Cricket is an example of where it works incredibly well in my opinion, probably second only to tennis, as there are so many natural breaks in play. It's good that in LBW decisions the umpire's original call has an impact, making them still important. Also the limited number of appeals in both sports minimizes disruption as they have to be used effectively and not just to waste time etc.

Not sure if an appeals system could work in football. Probably they have the right idea already to correct those 4 major incident types, with the VAR constantly observing and able to assist in an obvious error - it will just take some time to get it working smoothly.

Edited January 17, 2018 by fightoffyour

[ThunderPower_14]

I'm fine with it, but i'd only use it to overturn really obvious errors with penalties and red cards. If there is a little bit of contact and someone goes down and a penalty is waved away, I don't want that sort of thing being overturned, just the absolute howlers, or dives.

 

The nature of what constitutes a foul in football is a lot less clear cut than decisions video refs are making in Cricket or in the NFL. Unless it's a clearcut unquestionable error, leave it to the ref on the field.

[tonyh29]

Not watching but Will I an just got booked for diving .. and was asking ref to look at the VAR , which he refused

sky are suggesting it was a pen 

so what’s the criteria for the ref using VAR or the point of it if he isn’t being told you got it wrong ? 

[Mark Albrighton]

3 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

Not watching but Will I an just got booked for diving .. and was asking ref to look at the VAR , which he refused

sky are suggesting it was a pen 

so what’s the criteria for the ref using VAR or the point of it if he isn’t being told you got it wrong ? 

The bbc commentary said that the VAR team felt that the referee’s decision not to give a penalty was not a clear and obvious error. 

Which I took to mean they aren’t 100% sure it was a penalty.

Edited January 17, 2018 by Shropshire Lad

[sharkyvilla]

I thought it was a penalty but I guess umpire's call was fair enough.  I'm getting fed up with all the sarcastic comments from all the pundits about it all.  They're all a bunch of ignorant clearings in the woods.

[a m ole]

The important thing to note is that decision would have been made without VAR.

So even if it’s a bad call and VAR hasn’t helped it doesn’t mean it’s not still a good thing.

[a m ole]

Also if VAR was used to overturn that kind of call, you’d get players doing that trick where they kick a defenders leg to get a penalty a hell of a lot more often.

[Mark Albrighton]

1 minute ago, sharkyvilla said:

I thought it was a penalty but I guess umpire's call was fair enough.  I'm getting fed up with all the sarcastic comments from all the pundits about it all.  They're all a bunch of ignorant clearings in the woods.

Yes, Shearer annoyed me then. “You’ve got five professional players who all say that’s a penalty.” 

Professional referees make the decisions, Alan. 

That wasn’t an example of VAR not working, it was an example of you disagreeing with the verdict.

[Demitri_C]

Have no idea how those fools didn't think that was a pen.  It great tomorrow all the papers will be talking about var as opposed to the game 

[ismail-villa]

5 minutes ago, Shropshire Lad said:

Yes, Shearer annoyed me then. “You’ve got five professional players who all say that’s a penalty.” 

Professional referees make the decisions, Alan. 

That wasn’t an example of VAR not working, it was an example of you disagreeing with the verdict.

Yeah he annoyed me with that, the only thing i can think was that Willian actually fell BEFORE the contact which he knew was coming. 

[Mark Albrighton]

Just now, ismail-villa said:

Yeah he annoyed me with that, the only thing i can think was that Willian actually fell BEFORE the contact which he knew was coming. 

I think that’s exactly what the VAR has decided (along with the referee on the pitch).

Now I don’t know if it is a penalty, but the pundits seem oblivious to the fact that with or without VAR, that penalty would not have been given.

But it’s a “farce” according to Shearer.

[a m ole]

He’s spot on there with Morata.

[andym]

Shearer being a hypocrite. In the Liverpool Everton FA cup match the other week Lallana went down after he made sure he ran into the Everton defenders arm and he was saying it was soft and shouldn't be a penalty.

Willian drags his feet to ensure contact with a leg planted by a defender and he says its a definite penalty.

I hate the idea of 'he's entitled to go down' that all these pundits seem to bang on about.

And fair play to the ref for finally booking a player for dissent/abuse even if it meant a second yellow and red.

Edited January 17, 2018 by andym

[JoshVilla]

I'm 100% all for the VAR and think it should've been implemented a long time ago.

I'm a big Rugby fan, so I suppose you could say that I'm used to it, but the breaks in play don't really bother me when you know the right decision is hopefully going to be called. There's plenty of times where I've celebrated a try, and then have the TMO overturn it. It happens, and it doesn't spoil the game at all for me. If anything, it adds suspense. Yes, you're going to get the decisions go against you, but if you potentially lose a game on a dodgy goal, act of cheating or otherwise, it just reinforces how much we need it IMO. It's going to take some time to get it working as effectively as it does in Rugby, but it's trial and error and I'm sure it'll be smoothed out in time.

As a side note, I really think that the clock should be stopped in Football if a player is injured and there's a break in play. It would certainly stop players faking injury in added time to try and run the clock down, which is infuriating if you're chasing the game.