VAR

[kevinref]

think its ruining football down south,would hate it up here,

makes you wonder what scores and points have been won/lost through VAR

[The Internet]

On 30/12/2019 at 15:29, Mauricio Pinilla said:

Pukki's is the worst yet but I feel like I say that every week. Just absolute shite all the time. 

 

^

Just switch the name for whatever player it cheats out of a goal this week. 

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

I’m not trying to defend this but how on earth to you define offside in a way which doesn’t involve some sort of marginal judgement? It’s impossible, which is why VAR was pointless in this respect.

 

 

[Shanks]

6 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

I’m not trying to defend this but how on earth to you define offside in a way which doesn’t involve some sort of marginal judgement? It’s impossible, which is why VAR was pointless in this respect.

 

 

 

Correct.

 

The technology is just not good enough to match the level of detail they are trying to make decisions. 

 

You cannot call offside by a millimetre when they are using the grainy pixilated shit frame rates that they have, it's impossible. 

 

VAR should be used when the offside is CLEAR AND OBVIOUS. 

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

1 hour ago, kevinref said:

think its ruining football down south,would hate it up here,

makes you wonder what scores and points have been won/lost through VAR

Funnily enough, Scotland needs it more than anywhere else. The difference up here is that refs actively bottle decisions, particularly where the old firm are involved. There’s no comeback at present

[The Internet]

Won't happen but I feel like there needs to be some kind of protest against it down there now, a week where fans don't celebrate goals at all or something. 

[TheOak88]

I would like to see goal line technology up here. But feck VAR. I think it is useful in some circumstances, but I think they need to agree to stop using it for offsides. Use it so the referee can see potential hand ball decisions, shirt pulling at corners, off the ball incidents etc. 

[kila]

Come Feb there’ll be more details on the next gen tech for VAR.

 

Hopefully major improvements to make this stuff instantaneous. The main issue with VAR is the time it takes. If an offside can be detected right away then great but until that happens the technology needs benched.

[Paolo]

1 hour ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

Funnily enough, Scotland needs it more than anywhere else. The difference up here is that refs actively bottle decisions, particularly where the old firm are involved. There’s no comeback at present

It will make no difference.  It will be the same officials making the decision.  
 

 

[Francis Albert]

1 hour ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

I’m not trying to defend this but how on earth to you define offside in a way which doesn’t involve some sort of marginal judgement? It’s impossible, which is why VAR was pointless in this respect.

 

 

Wasn't the benefit of the doubt traditionally given to the attacking side? seemed fine to me especially with sides using offside traps.

 

A possible solution (other than abandoning the whole idea) would be to use replays without slow motion or freeze frame, with judgement based on a "reasonable doubt" basis. Would correct obvious errors  while avoiding ludicrously close calls which the technology simply can't justify.

 

 

[Francis Albert]

31 minutes ago, Paolo said:

It will make no difference.  It will be the same officials making the decision.  
 

 

Indeed. Only difference is the officials will have two goes at getting the "right" decision. So make things worse.

[DETTY29]

2 hours ago, Longshanks said:

 

Correct.

 

The technology is just not good enough to match the level of detail they are trying to make decisions. 

 

You cannot call offside by a millimetre when they are using the grainy pixilated shit frame rates that they have, it's impossible. 

 

VAR should be used when the offside is CLEAR AND OBVIOUS. 

Apparently they are not. (Para 2)

 

It's clear in the ref rooms and not pixilated, but by time it hits tv it is pixelated.

 

Agree with your para 3 wholehearted and again apparently, the EPL are not using  VAR as instructed by IFAB for clear and obvious errors.

 

I'd do away with the lines, get the ref to review screen (the pixelated one) which would be the margin of error with benefit of doubt to attacking team.

 

However, how long before the tv stations access and publish the precise decisions that should have been made and have a go at the officials?

 

 Oh and fans too if decisions go against their team.

Edited January 1, 2020 by DETTY29

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

1 hour ago, Francis Albert said:

Wasn't the benefit of the doubt traditionally given to the attacking side? seemed fine to me especially with sides using offside traps.

 

A possible solution (other than abandoning the whole idea) would be to use replays without slow motion or freeze frame, with judgement based on a "reasonable doubt" basis. Would correct obvious errors  while avoiding ludicrously close calls which the technology simply can't justify.

 

 

I think that’s what they’ll have to do — and rely on fans not losing their shit about it

[neilnunb]

Get it up ye Moyes 🤣🤣🤣

 

 

 

Mind you, Carragher's rants are equally as funny 

Edited January 10, 2020 by neilnunb

[The Internet]

If I supported an english team i wouldn't bother celebrating goals.

[Footballfirst]

19 minutes ago, Mauricio Pinilla said:

If I supported an english team i wouldn't bother celebrating goals.

 

I don't have an issue with tonight's decision. Without the handball he probably loses control of the ball and there is no scoring pass.

 

Even without the change in the rules and VAR checks, I would be annoyed if a similar handball occurred and wasn't given in the lead up to an opposition goal.

[VALDOS']

The EPL has done a fine job in the argument over the best league in Europe, they've opted out of the running by making themselves an utter mickey mouse outfit. 

Honestly what ****ing joke they are

Edited January 10, 2020 by VALDOS'

[The Internet]

9 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

 

I don't have an issue with tonight's decision. Without the handball he probably loses control of the ball and there is no scoring pass.

 

Even without the change in the rules and VAR checks, I would be annoyed if a similar handball occurred and wasn't given in the lead up to an opposition goal.

 

Tough one. I don't think it was a var fault either way (for a change) but I don't like the rule tbh. It's been headed onto his hand from inches away, as a neutral I don't want to see goals disallowed for that when it's so far back in the build up. 

[Ernie Eskilsson]

20 minutes ago, Mauricio Pinilla said:

 

Tough one. I don't think it was a var fault either way (for a change) but I don't like the rule tbh. It's been headed onto his hand from inches away, as a neutral I don't want to see goals disallowed for that when it's so far back in the build up. 

I think it’s the handball rule to blame rather than VAR. For me if the attacker is running normally and the defender heads it against his hand then it’s the defenders fault and it’s not a foul. 

[DETTY29]

If we had a Corinthian spirit, Rice would have put his 'hand' up and admitted he had infringed.

 

Especially as under VAR he would get caught out.

 

That is if Rice as a professional player even knows about the revised law that any handball leading to a goal will be chalked off.

 

That said, I'm far from convinced on the amended law.

 

 

[Paolo]

9 hours ago, Ernie Eskilsson said:

I think it’s the handball rule to blame rather than VAR. For me if the attacker is running normally and the defender heads it against his hand then it’s the defenders fault and it’s not a foul. 

VAR, however, was meant only for clear and obvious errors.  If we are saying it was an error, it was neither clear or obvious. 

[Taffin]

This could be how they do it at Stockley Park anyway (I'm not sure) but I'd like to it to be used only if one of the VAR see something in real time that the on pitch referee has missed. So if none of them saw the handball whilst watching it through first time they don't review it.

 

Instead I get the sense that after a goal they are sitting watching it in slow motion to try and find some infringement.

 

I'd give the captain 1 challenge per half so if one of them saw Rice handball it and it is reviewed then the goal would be correctly disallowed and he keeps his challenge.

 

 

The only issue with this for me is that you may as well have just stuck with the on pitch referee as errors and acts of 'cheating' will go unnoticed but I think it's preferable to the current setup.

[Tommy Brown]

9 hours ago, DETTY29 said:

If we had a Corinthian spirit, Rice would have put his 'hand' up and admitted he had infringed.

 

Especially as under VAR he would get caught out.

 

That is if Rice as a professional player even knows about the revised law that any handball leading to a goal will be chalked off.

 

That said, I'm far from convinced on the amended law.

 

 

 

As a retired official, I am glad to see the rule.

Before, as a ref, you were deciding if was "deliberate" of "played off him", it was the biggest grey area in football rules (laws, for the pedantics)

This in a split second. 

 

Back then, playing devil's advocate, I would say, if the defender had offended, would I feel comfortable giving a penalty?

So, why should I penalise the attacker for the same type of incident.

 

Now, you have a distinct rule to follow and consistency will follow.

Unfortunately, it's football, VAR should catch these. But if there is no VAR, some will not be caught.

The rule will appear severely harsh on many occassions,  but it's required for a reason.

 

[Debut 4]

Biggest farce early in the season was Man City’s late, chalked off goal v Spurs. 

 

A Spurs and a City player challenge for an incoming cross, which neither win ,but the ball brushes the hand of the City player behind his back as they both miss the ball trying to header it. 

 

Play goes on for a few seconds until Jesus puts it in.  

 

There’s not a chance the City player intended to use his hand and he didn’t know where the ball was. Don’t like VAR, plain and simple. 

 

Its been brought in because of money, simple as that. You could say everyone benefits but they also say it’s swings and roundabouts with ref decisions alone over a season too.  

 

 

[RudiHMFC]

25 minutes ago, Taffin said:

This could be how they do it at Stockley Park anyway (I'm not sure) but I'd like to it to be used only if one of the VAR see something in real time that the on pitch referee has missed. So if none of them saw the handball whilst watching it through first time they don't review it.

 

Instead I get the sense that after a goal they are sitting watching it in slow motion to try and find some infringement.

 

I'd give the captain 1 challenge per half so if one of them saw Rice handball it and it is reviewed then the goal would be correctly disallowed and he keeps his challenge.

 

 

The only issue with this for me is that you may as well have just stuck with the on pitch referee as errors and acts of 'cheating' will go unnoticed but I think it's preferable to the current setup.

 

I would scrap it altogether, it's the worst thing to happen to football. If it got introduced up here I would really struggle to continue watching football.

 

I actually think it's quite sad the state of the game in the EPL now with VAR.

[upgotheheads]

7 minutes ago, RudiHMFC said:

 

I would scrap it altogether, it's the worst thing to happen to football. If it got introduced up here I would really struggle to continue watching football.

 

I actually think it's quite sad the state of the game in the EPL now with VAR.

 

The greatest feeling in football is when your team scores. Apparently now in English games where VAR is involved the fans hardly dare to cheer because they're waiting for  VAR to confirm the goal.

 

How to ruin a game of football: introduce VAR.

[babywhalo]

54 minutes ago, Paolo said:

VAR, however, was meant only for clear and obvious errors.  If we are saying it was an error, it was neither clear or obvious. 

Not a huge fan of VAR, but Rice's handball was both clear and obvious. I don't think anyone is debating that it hit his hand, are they? It clearly did.

Edited January 11, 2020 by babywhalo

[upgotheheads]

2 minutes ago, babywhalo said:

Not a huge fan of VAR, but Rice's handball was both clear and obvious. I don't think anyone is debating that it hit his hand, are they? It clearly did.

 

Haven't seen the incident but there's loads of occasions where the ref can say that hands and arms are in a natural position, so it's ball to and not hand to ball.

[babywhalo]

1 minute ago, upgotheheads said:

 

Haven't seen the incident but there's loads of occasions where the ref can say that hands and arms are in a natural position, so it's ball to and not hand to ball.

Not when the guy goes onto create a goal though. In that case, it doesnt matter if it's natural position ot ball to hand. 

[RudiHMFC]

Just now, babywhalo said:

Not when the guy goes onto create a goal though. In that case, it doesnt matter if it's natural position ot ball to hand. 

 

Do you think if VAR wasn't a thing people would have even looked at that and do you think Sheffield United would be complaining about the goal? No they wouldn't, their players and manager after the game looked a little bit embarrassed and even borderline pissed off about it, I don't know how anybody who actually likes football can think this is good.

 

If a team got a goal disallowed like that against hearts I'd be raging, the bigger picture is it's ruining football.

[Debut 4]

I don’t like VAR but I’ve just saw footage of the West Ham goal for first time. 
 

I actually think that is a foul. The Sheff Utd player is trying to head it away but Rice stops the ball(even though unintentional) and gains an unfair advantage.  
 

Again, it’s ref interpretation for me. If the ref hasn’t seen it , or if he has, let him make the decision.

[colinmaroon]

39 minutes ago, upgotheheads said:

 

The greatest feeling in football is when your team scores. Apparently now in English games where VAR is involved the fans hardly dare to cheer because they're waiting for  VAR to confirm the goal.

 

How to ruin a game of football: introduce VAR.

 

On the basis of your last sentence,  guaranteed that SP will adopt it.

 

SFA and SPFL ruining Scottish football for decades.

 

 

[Tommy Brown]

41 minutes ago, RudiHMFC said:

 

Do you think if VAR wasn't a thing people would have even looked at that and do you think Sheffield United would be complaining about the goal? No they wouldn't, their players and manager after the game looked a little bit embarrassed and even borderline pissed off about it, I don't know how anybody who actually likes football can think this is good.

 

If a team got a goal disallowed like that against hearts I'd be raging, the bigger picture is it's ruining football.

 

30 minutes ago, Debut 4 said:

I don’t like VAR but I’ve just saw footage of the West Ham goal for first time. 
 

I actually think that is a foul. The Sheff Utd player is trying to head it away but Rice stops the ball(even though unintentional) and gains an unfair advantage.  
 

Again, it’s ref interpretation for me. If the ref hasn’t seen it , or if he has, let him make the decision.

 

I don't understand why you be raging?

I would raging to lose a goal like that, clear advantage by Rice in the ball hitting his hand.

 

When I first seen the thread, I thought it would be a really debatable, it's not.

[jock _turd]

As soon as I saw the ball touch the forwards hand I knew it was going to be disallowed... It was totally accidental he never controlled the ball intentionally and  a really great moment for the travelling fans was destroyed. It is just my opinion but VAR could be a useful tool when an obvious error has been made but the tool is not being used properly. It is being used in an almost forensic manner to make retrospective decisions which I personally do not like. The football referee's and the FA need to sit down and definitively set out a set of rules for the use of VAR because as it is being used at the moment football fans are losing out.

[Tommy Brown]

3 minutes ago, jock _turd said:

As soon as I saw the ball touch the forwards hand I knew it was going to be disallowed... It was totally accidental he never controlled the ball intentionally and  a really great moment for the travelling fans was destroyed. It is just my opinion but VAR could be a useful tool when an obvious error has been made but the tool is not being used properly. It is being used in an almost forensic manner to make retrospective decisions which I personally do not like. The football referee's and the FA need to sit down and definitively set out a set of rules for the use of VAR because as it is being used at the moment football fans are losing out.

As I posted earlier this morning, laws were changed to get a consistency.

Whether you think it is harsh or not., a line in the sand needed drawn.

VAR actually done it proper job in this case.

 

HANDLING THE BALL

It is an offence if a player: 

• deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, including moving the hand/arm towards the ball
• gains possession/control of the ball after it has touched their hand/arm and then:
  • scores in the opponents’ goal
  • creates a goal-scoring opportunity
• scores in the opponents’ goal directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper

It is usually an offence if a player:

• touches the ball with their hand/arm when:
  • the hand/arm has made their body unnaturally bigger
  • the hand/arm is above/beyond their shoulder level (unless the player deliberately plays the ball which then touches their hand/arm)

The above offences apply even if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close.

Except for the above offences, it is not usually an offence if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm:

• directly from the player’s own head or body (including the foot)
• directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close
• if the hand/arm is close to the body and does not make the body unnaturally bigger
• when a player falls and the hand/arm is between the body and the ground to support the body, but not extended laterally or vertically away from the body

The goalkeeper has the same restrictions on handling the ball as any other player outside the penalty area. If the goalkeeper handles the ball inside their
penalty area when not permitted to do so, an indirect free kick is awarded but there is no disciplinary sanction. 

[RudiHMFC]

I don't give a shit what the rules are, saying "aye well that's the rules" doesn't make VAR good, it makes watching games shit and takes away goals for the most petty of things. It can't be stressed enough how ****ing terrible it is. The thought of having it in Scotland scares me, I can just about stomach it in England as I don't support any team but I used to enjoy watching games, I turn a lot of them off now as soon as they start with the VAR shite.

[ArcticJambo]

1 hour ago, Tommy Brown said:

 

As a retired official, I am glad to see the rule.

Before, as a ref, you were deciding if was "deliberate" of "played off him", it was the biggest grey area in football rules (laws, for the pedantics)

This in a split second. 

 

Back then, playing devil's advocate, I would say, if the defender had offended, would I feel comfortable giving a penalty?

So, why should I penalise the attacker for the same type of incident.

 

Now, you have a distinct rule to follow and consistency will follow.

Unfortunately, it's football, VAR should catch these. But if there is no VAR, some will not be caught.

The rule will appear severely harsh on many occassions,  but it's required for a reason.

 

Intentional acts are very easy to spot in football but footballers being footballers, in my experience, are inherently dishonest.  :ohhwell:

[Tommy Brown]

14 minutes ago, RudiHMFC said:

I don't give a shit what the rules are, saying "aye well that's the rules" doesn't make VAR good, it makes watching games shit and takes away goals for the most petty of things. It can't be stressed enough how ****ing terrible it is. The thought of having it in Scotland scares me, I can just about stomach it in England as I don't support any team but I used to enjoy watching games, I turn a lot of them off now as soon as they start with the VAR shite.

 

No probs Rudi.

You just dont want VAR and that is understandable.

But, I do suspect you would be on here slaughtering Collum for missing missing last night's incident and allowing one OF to get a late goal against us.

At SPL level, i dont want VAR either , at EPL, ECL, WC etc, I do.

 

But please accept the law change regarding hanball, it was neccessary.

[RudiHMFC]

7 minutes ago, Tommy Brown said:

 

No probs Rudi.

You just dont want VAR and that is understandable.

But, I do suspect you would be on here slaughtering Collum for missing missing last night's incident and allowing one OF to get a late goal against us.

At SPL level, i dont want VAR either , at EPL, ECL, WC etc, I do.

 

But please accept the law change regarding hanball, it was neccessary.

 

Nope, I don't go in to conspiracy theories about the OF getting this and that while we get nothing, I don't tend to blame referees for losses or that either because it is almost always used as an excuse for a bad performance.

 

There will be times when a decision is made that is wrong by a referee and you may be annoyed about it but that's the way it is, you take it on the chin and move on  we're all human and football is played by humans and should be refereed by a human.

 

Stopping games to look at potential red cards for minor incidents, offsides where you're looking at pixels to determine if it's offside or not, ludicrous handball decisions etc. Goals getting celebrated like they should be only to be chalked off minutes later. 

 

This is not what football should be, it's actually sad.

[hueyview]

I like VAR...  It shuts up the Trumpets on Match if the Day......... 

 

[Debut 4]

1 hour ago, Tommy Brown said:

As I posted earlier this morning, laws were changed to get a consistency.

Whether you think it is harsh or not., a line in the sand needed drawn.

VAR actually done it proper job in this case.

 

HANDLING THE BALL

It is an offence if a player: 

• deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, including moving the hand/arm towards the ball
• gains possession/control of the ball after it has touched their hand/arm and then:
  • scores in the opponents’ goal
  • creates a goal-scoring opportunity
• scores in the opponents’ goal directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper

It is usually an offence if a player:

• touches the ball with their hand/arm when:
  • the hand/arm has made their body unnaturally bigger
  • the hand/arm is above/beyond their shoulder level (unless the player deliberately plays the ball which then touches their hand/arm)

The above offences apply even if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close.

Except for the above offences, it is not usually an offence if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm:

• directly from the player’s own head or body (including the foot)
• directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close
• if the hand/arm is close to the body and does not make the body unnaturally bigger
• when a player falls and the hand/arm is between the body and the ground to support the body, but not extended laterally or vertically away from the body

The goalkeeper has the same restrictions on handling the ball as any other player outside the penalty area. If the goalkeeper handles the ball inside their
penalty area when not permitted to do so, an indirect free kick is awarded but there is no disciplinary sanction. 

TB, you are correctly pointing out the rules but I think most people are coming from the angle of the nature of the game. 
 

Rules are being changed all the time but it doesn’t necessarily mean they are true or in line with how the game has been interpreted for decades and decades. 
 

In many ways they are a guideline and it then comes down to the referee to impose the rule or interpret his way from experience.
 

You can go back decades. Money has slowly put everyone under pressure.  Years ago refs could interact with players easier, talk and explain, have a bit banter as long as there was respect.  Now it’s all serious, over officious and lacking the personal touch between players and refs.   

[Phil Dunphy]

1 hour ago, Tommy Brown said:

As I posted earlier this morning, laws were changed to get a consistency.

 

There is no consistency, though. 

 

 

A goal was scored directly after these three incidents, but only one was disallowed. Where is the consistency?

[milky_26]

3 minutes ago, Phil Dunphy said:

 

There is no consistency, though. 

 

 

A goal was scored directly after these three incidents, but only one was disallowed. Where is the consistency?

i agree consistency is key. i saw ref wacth on ssn about the van dijk one. dermot gallagher said the van dijk one was not hand ball as the assist was not his. he passed to lallana? then onto the scorer. I disagree with that but that was from a ref

[H2]

On 24/06/2019 at 10:14, ArcticJambo said:

And those honest mistakes are often down to cheating by players.  Get serious about retrospective punishment and the 10% will drop further.

 

On 24/06/2019 at 11:55, The White Cockade said:

Correct mate

teams can’t complain if their players are cheating 

hammer them for diving retrospectively if missed during game 

 

VAR was supposed to ease contention, FACT - it doesn't.

If players (and managers) were honest there would be no need at all for VAR and refs jobs would be much easier.

 

I'm in the camp for retrospective reviews, after the game. The thread mentions the tennis Hawkeye system. I'd like to see that used retrospectively , with the managers or coaches submitting their complaints within a couple of days. No it won't change penalty or offside decisions, but it will inhibit cheating. Clubs could be given 3 claims a season, and if upheld (like in tennis) they don;t close a claim.

 

VAR is too slow, still open to interpretation, and contentious. Still a long way to go to get it right if it is to be used. I don't want to sit at a game in a freezing February waiting 5 mins for a VAR decision, it's bad enough freezing for 15 minutes at half time.

 

 

[The Internet]

12 minutes ago, Phil Dunphy said:

 

There is no consistency, though. 

 

 

A goal was scored directly after these three incidents, but only one was disallowed. Where is the consistency?

 

You're forgetting the livarpool factor. 

[Phil Dunphy]

1 minute ago, Mauricio Pinilla said:

 

You're forgetting the livarpool factor. 

 

Remember how VAR was going to stop the bg teams getting all the decisions?  

 

Remember how people said that?

[gashauskis9]

I don’t doubt the handball rule, it’s written in the laws of the game.  It’s the inconsistency of how it’s being operated that bothers me.  For example, if you watch the replay of last night’s WH goal, it looks another Sheff Utd player handballs a few seconds before Rice handles it.  Is the point of VAR to contest the goal or to help make football decisions in general, because if it’s the latter, then the Sheff Utd handball should have been verified first to see if West Ham should have had a free kick.  
 

You simplify the use of VAR massively be using it like Hawkeye in Tennis.  Each team gets 5 challenges in a game.  The only use from a referees perspective should be to confirm their penalty decisions and any violent conduct.  The use of it for offsides has been laughable tbh.

[The Internet]

1 minute ago, Phil Dunphy said:

 

Remember how VAR was going to stop the bg teams getting all the decisions?  

 

Remember how people said that?

 

Tbf it seems to shaft man city more than anyone ridiculous when it comes to Liverpool though. 

 

Get it in the bin. Was better when we could just argue over on field ref decisions and not have it ruled by robots. 

 

[babywhalo]

20 minutes ago, Phil Dunphy said:

 

There is no consistency, though. 

 

 

A goal was scored directly after these three incidents, but only one was disallowed. Where is the consistency?

They were all consistently implemented in line with the rules. 

 

Only the West Ham goal was scored directly after a handball (ie the last pass before the goal)

[babywhalo]

24 minutes ago, Phil Dunphy said:

 

 

 

Edited January 11, 2020 by babywhalo
Quadruple post! Dont know what happened to my mobile internet there...