Jump to content

The Video Assistant Referee (VAR)


Stevo985

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, imavillan said:

This may have been said before but in my opinion this VAR bull shit needs a complete overhaul.

Ditch the checking of every goal, ditch the referee checking whatever and just give the two teams 2 or 3 appeals per match. As they do in cricket.

Simple as that.

I agree, and I feel it is the best compromise between keeping the natural flow of the game and making use of technology. One challenge per half, per head coach, with the challenge being retained if proved correct. The bench informs the fourth official, who holds up a board to inform the crowd, and an independent VAR team goes through the motions (without the "must back my mate" crap we are seeing right now). Would there be situations where you had already wasted your challenge and a dodgy goal then stood? Yep, but that's already an accepted part of cricket, tennis, NFL etc. The challenge is a tactical option and using it correctly becomes a skill in its own right. This way at least everyone has clarity. VAR is a dog's dinner right now.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, bobzy said:

But this can't be right, can it?  If there's an elbow off the ball that the ref doesn't see and the game carries on, his whistle will inevitably blow at some point and the incident would still be reviewed - surely?

But that's different, isn't it? 

If players stop playing because of a refs whistle, and a goal is scored, surely you can't review it and give the goal? 

Completely different to an elbow or foul. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kurtsimonw said:

But that's different, isn't it? 

If players stop playing because of a refs whistle, and a goal is scored, surely you can't review it and give the goal? 

Completely different to an elbow or foul. 

No, I get that. I just the whole “whistle blown so cant be reviewed” thing doesn’t make sense. 

Could also apply common sense on if play stopped, really. I mean, it obviously didn’t with us... but that could open another can of worms. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Mic09 said:

Why?

It's called Video Assistant Referee. Therefore, it is supposed to be assisting the referee. If there are able-bodied people sat in front of a screen watching Grealish lay the ball off to Lansbury and him scoring, how did they not assist the referee straight away by telling him he's made an error and the goal should stand? 

Against Spurs, McGinn gets flattened by a failed attempt to get to the ball by the Spurs defender. Why didn't the VAR folks assist the referee by telling him immediately what happened in their view and that it should be a penalty? 

Against Bournemouth, why didn't they remind the ref that Billing had already been carded and had gone on to make at least two more fouls that could have resulted in a second yellow? 

The linesmen are now called referee's assistants. They assist the ref by identifying that a foul has been committed in their area of the pitch and the ref goes with them. So, the same should be happening with VAR but in the three incidents above it didn't happen. So, what is the point of it? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Villarocker said:

It's called Video Assistant Referee. Therefore, it is supposed to be assisting the referee. If there are able-bodied people sat in front of a screen watching Grealish lay the ball off to Lansbury and him scoring, how did they not assist the referee straight away by telling him he's made an error and the goal should stand? 

Against Spurs, McGinn gets flattened by a failed attempt to get to the ball by the Spurs defender. Why didn't the VAR folks assist the referee by telling him immediately what happened in their view and that it should be a penalty? 

Against Bournemouth, why didn't they remind the ref that Billing had already been carded and had gone on to make at least two more fouls that could have resulted in a second yellow? 

The linesmen are now called referee's assistants. They assist the ref by identifying that a foul has been committed in their area of the pitch and the ref goes with them. So, the same should be happening with VAR but in the three incidents above it didn't happen. So, what is the point of it? 

So you have quoted examples where a review would be useful to bring a fairer result to the game.

So you are not against VAR, actually, you wished that VAR was used to rectify these.

VAR is a video replay. It's neither good or bad.

It's the interpretation and use of it that's been crap in the Premier League so far. I hope that changes and VAR is used properly. So far, I only have PremierLeague to blame, and referees to a certain extent.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Mic09 said:

So you have quoted examples where a review would be useful to bring a fairer result to the game.

So you are not against VAR, actually, you wished that VAR was used to rectify these.

VAR is a video replay. It's neither good or bad.

It's the interpretation and use of it that's been crap in the Premier League so far. I hope that changes and VAR is used properly. So far, I only have PremierLeague to blame, and referees to a certain extent.

 

My point is valid. If they aren't using it, what's the point of having it? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Villarocker said:

The linesmen are now called referee's assistants. They assist the ref by identifying that a foul has been committed in their area of the pitch and the ref goes with them. So, the same should be happening with VAR but in the three incidents above it didn't happen. So, what is the point of it? 

But like the VAR officials, they get things wrong. So are you suggesting we should scrap assistant referees too? 

A lack of clarity means we don't even really know half the time. I've read that VAR wasn't consulted, and that VAR was consulted and agreed with Friend. Which is it?

The technology should absolutely be used. Unfortunately the human element is still crap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, kurtsimonw said:

I didn't watch MotD - but apparently it showed that he didn't blow the whistle?

There was a sound that was a bit like a whistle just as the ball got to Lansbury's foot, but the ref was out of shot for about a half second. Lineker queried how he could have moved his hand from his side, blown the whistle, and then stuck his arm out to the right in that timeframe, and I have to say it did seem unlikely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lichfield Dean said:

There was a sound that was a bit like a whistle just as the ball got to Lansbury's foot, but the ref was out of shot for about a half second. Lineker queried how he could have moved his hand from his side, blown the whistle, and then stuck his arm out to the right in that timeframe, and I have to say it did seem unlikely.

 

1 hour ago, Zatman said:

On Sky you can hear the whistle as Lansbury shoots

 

1 hour ago, kurtsimonw said:

Crowd, apparently

I had this very debate with @Davkaus. This is the still image from a Vlog that proved I was wrong in the end. Kevin Friend did indeed have time to put the whistle to his mouth...

image.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good point about Zaha. And why is Gary Cahill sprawled in a heap on the ground if there was no contact with Grealish?? Does Kevin Friend think he suddenly needed a nap?

Keith Hackett was asked on TalkSport if he agreed with ex-ref Bobby Madley's call for sympathy for Friend.

"No."

He also said he thought VAR should have awarded Villa a penalty for a Cahill foul on Grealish.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â