VAR

[aldridgeboy]

Had a brainwave or perhaps it is a brain fart. To do with time wasting which happens in a lot of games. Not exactly VAR but it is a breach of the game.

If a referee considers a team is deliberately time wasting, they should give the captain a warning. If it happens again, the captain should get booked regardless of which player in his team is guilty of the crime. If it happens again, red card for the captain.

It would certainly cut out a lot of time wasting!!

Teams will try and manipulate this, change captain per match etc but if so, their intent is even more clear.

In cricket and on occasion, a captain is held responsible for the conduct of his team and appropriate penalties imposed upon the captain. Perhaps it is time a captain becomes more accountable for his team in football.

Just a thought on a quiet Monday.

Not a bad shout. One big change Id make , is just let the trainers on if a player goes down injured. Play carries on. Professional footballers should be able to play around that. With the caveat that a clear “ really bad injury , such as head clash/leg break “ would see the game stopped, it would stop no end of time wasting.

[ChicagoLion]

Had a brainwave or perhaps it is a brain fart. To do with time wasting which happens in a lot of games. Not exactly VAR but it is a breach of the game.

If a referee considers a team is deliberately time wasting, they should give the captain a warning. If it happens again, the captain should get booked regardless of which player in his team is guilty of the crime. If it happens again, red card for the captain.

It would certainly cut out a lot of time wasting!!

Teams will try and manipulate this, change captain per match etc but if so, their intent is even more clear.

In cricket and on occasion, a captain is held responsible for the conduct of his team and appropriate penalties imposed upon the captain. Perhaps it is time a captain becomes more accountable for his team in football.

Just a thought on a quiet Monday.

Not a bad shout. One big change Id make , is just let the trainers on if a player goes down injured. Play carries on. Professional footballers should be able to play around that. With the caveat that a clear “ really bad injury , such as head clash/leg break “ would see the game stopped, it would stop no end of time wasting.

I agree if Rugby can continue then why not.

[Bad English]

At the rugby league last Saturday you had all sorts of people hi-viz coats on the pitch during play: coaches, water carriers, ball-holder carriers. They might as well have someone wandering around selling Cornettos or the Evening Mail

[Drummond]

At the rugby league last Saturday you had all sorts of people hi-viz coats on the pitch during play: coaches, water carriers, ball-holder carriers. They might as well have someone wandering around selling Cornettos or the Evening Mail

Le Courrier du Soir?

[Virgil Caine]

At the rugby league last Saturday you had all sorts of people hi-viz coats on the pitch during play: coaches, water carriers, ball-holder carriers. They might as well have someone wandering around selling Cornettos or the Evening Mail

Le Courrier du Soir?

Non, La 'ce qui signifie le mal' peut-etre?

BE- how close is that to The Meaning Evil?

[curiousorange]

I'm not a fan of the idea of reviews for captains or whoever. If you're trying to get the right decision, then it ought to be up to the officials.

VAR and its use reminds me of when I used to have a boss who micromanaged everything I did. They undermined me, expected everything to be perfect, got pissy when any mistake was spotted and destroyed any confidence I had in my own ability. To top that off, I had to help fix any mistake in their own practice.

[lovejoy]

Change the match time to 60 minutes but make it ball in play. The time wasting is therefore not effective anymore.

[curiousorange]

Change the match time to 60 minutes but make it ball in play. The time wasting is therefore not effective anymore.

They've more or less decided to do the opposite, haven't they? I think I read they're adopting the added time approach as seen at the World Cup.

[chrisw1]

You can't tweak subjective opinion, two people might share opposing views of an incident but if one happens to be the VAR official, what are you supposed to do?

All the wailing and moaning about the decisions over the weekend were precisely what VAR was bought in to stop. It didn't, it doesn't and it never will.

The simple answer is the ref should lead any VAR review (other than offside) and look at the monitor himself to check any potential big decisions, not wait 5 mins for VAR to do so and be called over like a naughty schoolboy.  If they have 6 monitors around the ground, the ref taking a few seconds to double check something shouldn't be a problem.

[Somniloquism]

You do have to wonder how "fast" the reviews are happening. For example the non-penalty given with Brighton. The stamp on the foot is hard to spot on initial viewing. It does look like a bundle together which could go either way. However on a couple of reviews it should have been obvious, but play is continuing. They are supposed to be in contact with the referee to see why he came to the conclusion he did and find out if he saw that part of the incident. I doubt that they are disracting him from other incidents happening. It seems to me it is very rare for a penalty to be overturned if play continues so again, I wonder if there is an unwritten rule that if play continues, side with the ref. (Unless it is a top 6 team.....)

[Risso]

There was that time Man U got to take a penalty after the final whistle had blown!

[paul_e]

Time is definitely the biggest problem with VAR right now but it would really help if it wasn't just empty minutes with fans in the ground getting no feedback at all and TV only having guesswork from commentators about what is happening. I go on about the system in other sports far too often but in the rugby and cricket the TV viewers get to listen in to the discussions and the fans in the ground get big screens showing replays and can get comms to listen in on top.

Sometimes there are controversial decisions in those sports but everyone has the opportunity to hear why the decision has been made as it is and there is never the situation when even hours later people have no idea how a decisions has been reached. If PGMOL think they're doing a good job and are getting things right more often than not then they should be a lot more transparent. By hiding the decision making process in the way they do it does feel like they have a reason to hide it, which creates a lot of the distrust fans have towards them.

[chrisw1]

Time is definitely the biggest problem with VAR right now but it would really help if it wasn't just empty minutes with fans in the ground getting no feedback at all and TV only having guesswork from commentators about what is happening. I go on about the system in other sports far too often but in the rugby and cricket the TV viewers get to listen in to the discussions and the fans in the ground get big screens showing replays and can get comms to listen in on top.

Sometimes there are controversial decisions in those sports but everyone has the opportunity to hear why the decision has been made as it is and there is never the situation when even hours later people have no idea how a decisions has been reached. If PGMOL think they're doing a good job and are getting things right more often than not then they should be a lot more transparent. By hiding the decision making process in the way they do it does feel like they have a reason to hide it, which creates a lot of the distrust fans have towards them.

Whilst many may think it insulting, I understand why the authorities don't trust football fans to sit through detailed replays of controversial incidents.  It could just be too incendiary in an already hostile atmosphere.  There's also more chance of the ref being influenced by the crowd - tbh I think you even see this in rugby sometimes with cards for high tackles etc.  The pressure would be worse at football.

But certainly, the communication could and should be much better.  Also, for transparency, the decision-making process could be broadcast on live TV but not at the ground.

[dave shelley]

There was that time Man U got to take a penalty after the final whistle had blown!

Remind me of that one Martin as I genuinely can't remember it. 

[Somniloquism]

There was that time Man U got to take a penalty after the final whistle had blown!

Remind me of that one Martin as I genuinely can't remember it.

https://www.espn.co.uk/football/manchester-united/story/4192046/how-did-man-uniteds-bruno-fernandes-score-winner-vs-brighton-after-full-time-whistle-was-blown