VAR

[Nev]

It doesn't work. It never will because it's subjective, hence the continuing controversy. We are in no better a position than we were before being reliant on the ref.

[chrisw1]

It doesn't work. It never will because it's subjective, hence the continuing controversy. We are in no better a position than we were before being reliant on the ref.

I disagree.

It can work and work extremely well.  I'd say it's now working well for offsides other than the no flag thing that needs looking at.  For open play, it's just the current way it is being used that is at fault and this could be swiftly sorted if some common sense was brought in. 

[Ad@m]

We know it can work because you don't see fans clamouring for the removal of technology from rugby, cricket and tennis.

Unfortunately, for it to work, it relies on FIFA and the FA to sort their shit out, neither of which I have any confidence in.

[Pat Mustard]

It doesn't work. It never will because it's subjective, hence the continuing controversy. We are in no better a position than we were before being reliant on the ref.

I completely agree - it has replaced one set of subjective decisions with another, and as we saw at the weekend these all seem to continue going in the favour of the bigger teams.  If it isn't making decision any fairer, then all it does is ruin the spectacle for match-going fans in favour of creating more controversies for those watching on TV.  I absolutely hate that my first reaction now to a goal going in is to be concerned it's going to get ruled out for some minor infringement that may or may not have occurred in the build-up.

Also, don't get me started on the sheer physical impossibility of accurately measuring when a player is offside from static images!

[Brend'Watkins]

It doesn't work. It never will because it's subjective, hence the continuing controversy. We are in no better a position than we were before being reliant on the ref.

I completely agree - it has replaced one set of subjective decisions with another, and as we saw at the weekend these all seem to continue going in the favour of the bigger teams.  If it isn't making decision any fairer, then all it does is ruin the spectacle for match-going fans in favour of creating more controversies for those watching on TV.  I absolutely hate that my first reaction now to a goal going in is to be concerned it's going to get ruled out for some minor infringement that may or may not have occurred in the build-up.

Also, don't get me started on the sheer physical impossibility of accurately measuring when a player is offside from static images!

the offside issue has largely been sorted in that they've increased the width of the imaginary lines.  This will slightly benefit the attacking team in very tight decisions.

[German James]

... The bigger issue was the ref deciding not to use VAR for the Ollie/Evans incident.

Why didn't they ask Evans?

He would have been a dumb witness.

[Lastfootstamper]

Was going to be shit, was shit, is shit, will remain shit. Can a proponent, if there still is such a thing, indicate how this has in any tiny way made the game not even better, just not worse?

[Pat Mustard]

It doesn't work. It never will because it's subjective, hence the continuing controversy. We are in no better a position than we were before being reliant on the ref.

I completely agree - it has replaced one set of subjective decisions with another, and as we saw at the weekend these all seem to continue going in the favour of the bigger teams.  If it isn't making decision any fairer, then all it does is ruin the spectacle for match-going fans in favour of creating more controversies for those watching on TV.  I absolutely hate that my first reaction now to a goal going in is to be concerned it's going to get ruled out for some minor infringement that may or may not have occurred in the build-up.

Also, don't get me started on the sheer physical impossibility of accurately measuring when a player is offside from static images!

the offside issue has largely been sorted in that they've increased the width of the imaginary lines.  This will slightly benefit the attacking team in very tight decisions.

The width of the lines still can't address 2 fundamental issues, however. 

Firstly, it is impossible to tell from a 2D image exactly at what point the ball is kicked and whether that coincides with the player being offside.  Secondly, how do you judge the moment when the ball is kicked?  Is it when the foot makes contact with the ball, or when it has left the foot - the contact distance between foot and ball for a long pass, for instance, is measured in centimetres rather than millimetres, and with players running at full speed that translates into a margin of error that the lines are simply not equipped to deal with.  To have true tolerance, the lines would need to be about half a metre wide, which id patently not the case.

I just can't see how the system will ever make decisions that much more accurate that it is worth the sacrifice of what has been lost.  Innovations should make the match-going experience better, but VAR has categorically made it worse.

[London Villan]

It was invented to stop the Maradona and Henry type handballs... not goals like Ramsey's last weekend.

[Lastfootstamper]

You either check everything or you check nothing. The powers that be have spent the entirety of the thing's existence tying themselves in knots attempting to define a middle ground between those two positions.

[Risso]

The width of the lines still can't address 2 fundamental issues, however. 

Firstly, it is impossible to tell from a 2D image exactly at what point the ball is kicked and whether that coincides with the player being offside.  Secondly, how do you judge the moment when the ball is kicked?  Is it when the foot makes contact with the ball, or when it has left the foot - the contact distance between foot and ball for a long pass, for instance, is measured in centimetres rather than millimetres, and with players running at full speed that translates into a margin of error that the lines are simply not equipped to deal with.  To have true tolerance, the lines would need to be about half a metre wide, which id patently not the case.

I just can't see how the system will ever make decisions that much more accurate that it is worth the sacrifice of what has been lost.  Innovations should make the match-going experience better, but VAR has categorically made it worse.

Exactly right. They've gone with the "clear and obvious" error for everything else, but on offsides have then tried to get it millimetre perfect, which is impossible for the reasons you say. If they'd applied the clear and obvious rule for offside as well, and left it at say, a 30cm gap, then that would have allowed for the tolerances you mention, and kept more to the spirit of football. Scoring a goal when somebody is 3 foot offside because the linesman has missed it isn't acceptable, but then nobody asked for the width of an imaginary toenail to be the answer to the problem.

[Pat Mustard]

Goal-line technology is fine as it is easily implemented, and the decision is black and white (with one or two notable exceptions!).  Everything else should go back to how it was, as you say you either check nothing or check everything, and checking everything isn't working.

[The Edge]

It doesn't work. It never will because it's subjective, hence the continuing controversy. We are in no better a position than we were before being reliant on the ref.

I completely agree - it has replaced one set of subjective decisions with another, and as we saw at the weekend these all seem to continue going in the favour of the bigger teams.  If it isn't making decision any fairer, then all it does is ruin the spectacle for match-going fans in favour of creating more controversies for those watching on TV.  I absolutely hate that my first reaction now to a goal going in is to be concerned it's going to get ruled out for some minor infringement that may or may not have occurred in the build-up.

Also, don't get me started on the sheer physical impossibility of accurately measuring when a player is offside from static images!

the offside issue has largely been sorted in that they've increased the width of the imaginary lines.  This will slightly benefit the attacking team in very tight decisions.

The width of the lines still can't address 2 fundamental issues, however. 

Firstly, it is impossible to tell from a 2D image exactly at what point the ball is kicked and whether that coincides with the player being offside.  Secondly, how do you judge the moment when the ball is kicked?  Is it when the foot makes contact with the ball, or when it has left the foot - the contact distance between foot and ball for a long pass, for instance, is measured in centimetres rather than millimetres, and with players running at full speed that translates into a margin of error that the lines are simply not equipped to deal with.  To have true tolerance, the lines would need to be about half a metre wide, which id patently not the case.

I just can't see how the system will ever make decisions that much more accurate that it is worth the sacrifice of what has been lost.  Innovations should make the match-going experience better, but VAR has categorically made it worse.

I've been saying exactly this ever since I first clapped eyes on VAR. As you pointed out what's the actual rule on when the ball is deemed to have been passed? Is it the first contact with the ball or is it the precise moment it loses contact with the passers boot? We're talking tiny margins but a professional footballer will have moved quite a distance in that split second and that's the difference between offside and onside. Maybe tracking technology in the players boots and the ball could fix this because until they can solve that problem offsides are still subject to interpretation.

[eamonn]

Apparently "our Cas", Tony Cascarino, has written in his Times article today, suggesting a new type of penalty for soft ones/fouls in the box that don't directly prevent a goalscoring chance.

In this case (I think he cites Rudiger going down from a tap to the ankle on the edge of the box, facing away from goal , Chelsea v Leeds on Saturday) he recommends a penalty from 18 yards! And only the stonewaller ones to be taken from 12 yards. What d'yer reckon - does Tone have a point or is he away with the fairies/bookies ?

[sickbeggar]

Normal distance, but it can't be given to your penalty taker but someone designated beforehand who's crap at it so for us you'd have Davis and then Martinez