VAR

[chrisw1]

I know it was Albion but that decision against Liverpool to disallow a goal the other night because a player was standing offside and deemed to be in front of the goalkeeper was an absolute shocker as it would have gone in if there had been two goalkeepers. It was the wrong interpretation and has probably cost Leicester a place in the champions league.

Don't you remember we had one exactly the same as that and ours was disallowed too?

[Brend'Watkins]

I know it was Albion but that decision against Liverpool to disallow a goal the other night because a player was standing offside and deemed to be in front of the goalkeeper was an absolute shocker as it would have gone in if there had been two goalkeepers. It was the wrong interpretation and has probably cost Leicester a place in the champions league.

Don't you remember we had one exactly the same as that and ours was disallowed too?

Yes, A McGinn belter which was in from the moment it left his boot regardless of Barkley blocking the keeper’s view.  He could have had an hour meeting before hand telling him what McGinn was going to do with Barkley nowhere in sight and he still wouldn’t have had a sniff. We still went on to win and as galling as it was I accepted the decision.

[Ad@m]

The problem as I see it, is that VAR is great in matters of 'fact'.  Was he offside/onside,

You have seen the dozens of absolutely farcical VAR offside decisions haven't you?!

[Smithy]

The problem as I see it, is that VAR is great in matters of 'fact'.  Was he offside/onside,

You have seen the dozens of absolutely farcical VAR offside decisions haven't you?!

Of course, but they're still matters of fact, i.e. this tiny part of his body is fractionally ahead of that tiny part of HIS body.  Someone being offside by the width of a toe is ridiculous, but, it's still a matter of fact, not opinion or interpretation.

When I said VAR is "great" at those decisions, perhaps I should have been clearer, I don't mean great as in "thumbs up, everything is fine", I mean that it's a tool that is obviously designed for THOSE sorts of decisions, where part of someone's body is ahead, or not, of someone else.  I don't like waiting two minutes to see if a goal is disallowed because the forward's nose is longer than the defender's, but as a tool, it WILL definitively show if someone is offside, or not (in 99% of the cases).

[Ian.]

Smithy is quite right, the law needs adapting if we are to carry on. The offside rule is to prevent goal hanging so we need to have some kind of tolerance. Either a very thick line or it needs to be a the whole foot over the line. A bit like on the goal line with the ball.

Hand ball is another which really needs fixing. It’s always been down to description of it was ball to hand or not. To be honest I haven’t got a clue what the rule is anymore. It seems different rules apply to different players positions and where you are on the pitch. It’s a mess and generally believe the officials and players haven’t got a clue what the rule is.

These incidents with simulation is tough, we’ve been caught a cropper a few times which have been wrong in my book. Jack last season was booked, Ollie this season was trying to get out the way from a high foot. Neither were a dive.

That incident with Ollie at Spurs was ridiculous. Who cares if the ball was going out. If the keeper would have run out and punched him, it would have been a penalty. He clearly took him out.

[sickbeggar]

The whole offside thing is farcical. Who cares if someone is offside by the width of a knat's arse. 0.00001% of an advantage is not an advantage when the reality is the pace or direction of the defenders/attackers involved will be a much more important advantage. if they are as near as dammit inline then a simple rule to bring back some sort of sanity to the situation would be which way the last man was facing. Facing away from goal and with the attacker facing forward then its offside. Both players facing towards the goal and its not. They'd still have their  ESL box-office suspense to get excited about.

[Brend'Watkins]

The problem as I see it, is that VAR is great in matters of 'fact'.  Was he offside/onside,

You have seen the dozens of absolutely farcical VAR offside decisions haven't you?!

Of course, but they're still matters of fact, i.e. this tiny part of his body is fractionally ahead of that tiny part of HIS body.  Someone being offside by the width of a toe is ridiculous, but, it's still a matter of fact, not opinion or interpretation.

When I said VAR is "great" at those decisions, perhaps I should have been clearer, I don't mean great as in "thumbs up, everything is fine", I mean that it's a tool that is obviously designed for THOSE sorts of decisions, where part of someone's body is ahead, or not, of someone else.  I don't like waiting two minutes to see if a goal is disallowed because the forward's nose is longer than the defender's, but as a tool, it WILL definitively show if someone is offside, or not (in 99% of the cases).

They are most certainly not matters of fact.  The technology as it is isn’t accurate enough to adjudge a toenail offside or the precise moment a ball is kicked in an offside incident. Until we have that technology facts are not present in such decisions and with that being the case there has to be a tolerance for error. 

[Ad@m]

The problem as I see it, is that VAR is great in matters of 'fact'.  Was he offside/onside,

You have seen the dozens of absolutely farcical VAR offside decisions haven't you?!

Of course, but they're still matters of fact, i.e. this tiny part of his body is fractionally ahead of that tiny part of HIS body.  Someone being offside by the width of a toe is ridiculous, but, it's still a matter of fact, not opinion or interpretation.

When I said VAR is "great" at those decisions, perhaps I should have been clearer, I don't mean great as in "thumbs up, everything is fine", I mean that it's a tool that is obviously designed for THOSE sorts of decisions, where part of someone's body is ahead, or not, of someone else.  I don't like waiting two minutes to see if a goal is disallowed because the forward's nose is longer than the defender's, but as a tool, it WILL definitively show if someone is offside, or not (in 99% of the cases).

They are most certainly not matters of fact.  The technology as it is isn’t accurate enough to adjudge a toenail offside or the precise moment a ball is kicked in an offside incident. Until we have that technology facts are not present in such decisions and with that being the case there has to be a tolerance for error. 

This.

Drawing silly lines implies a degree of accuracy the technology isn't capable of. So until it is, offside is still a subjective decision.

And I'm all for VAR helping to make subjective decisions - that's how it's used in cricket and rugby to great effect. But it works in those sports because it's quick and transparent - two factors football are failing miserably on.

Mic the refs up and share the audio. Then have a cap on decisions of 20 seconds with the burden of proof being to overturn the onfield decision. If they can't prove the onfield decision was clearly wrong within 20 seconds the decision stands.

It's no more difficult than that.

[GordonCowansisthegreatest]

The trouble is, onfield decisions aren't being made. They're waiting to see what happens then turning a blind eye if it suits.
How many times do they not flag for close but obvious off sides, the ball goes out for a corner, instead of giving the free kick they allow the corner and it results in a goal. It should not happen.

[Ad@m]

The trouble is, onfield decisions aren't being made. They're waiting to see what happens then turning a blind eye if it suits.
How many times do they not flag for close but obvious off sides, the ball goes out for a corner, instead of giving the free kick they allow the corner and it results in a goal. It should not happen.

But that's because the onfield refs have been told to do that.

Tell them they're back in charge but VAR is there to help if they've dropped a bollock, just like it is in rugby.

It's not too late to fix VAR but if they carry on with the clusterfuck it currently is, fans will lose faith in it.

I'm certainly not looking forward to not being able to celebrate a goal tomorrow because we don't know if VAR will decide Ollie's penis was marginally offside.

[GordonCowansisthegreatest]

Too many incompetent referees around at the present! Including at Stockley park!

[N'ZMAV]

if the referees and linesmen had been good at their jobs over the years we wouldn't have needed VAR.

[GordonCowansisthegreatest]

Then have VAR as back up.

[Lastfootstamper]

As football fans, it's not cutting out the things that I think its proponents hoped it would. Diving, still happening. Rolling around on the floor, still happening. Debatable decisions given, fuck me, they're off the fucking chart now. Ball smashing back off a stanchion and not being given, sorted by something else entirely.

Keep tweaking it, lads, you'll get it right in the end*.


*will they bollocks.

[AllanW]

Every suggestion in the last 3 pages or so which 'will improve it because it's done in other sports far better' are all things they could and should have been doing for the last 2 years of this monstrous experiment. They haven't done them.

Time to face some stark facts;
They don't want to do them.
They are not aiming to have a fair system, just one they like for themselves and which the owners/FA accept.
They will keep going with the awful, damaging and disastrous way they officiate at the moment until someone stops them because they can't stop themselves. They don't know how to.
They aren't listening to us.
They don't care about us; if they did they'd have stopped being so bad years ago.
Unless we the fans unite and demand it the only people who can do somethihng about this disaster are the club owners.