Video Assistant Referee.

lucy4

With the new season kicking off tonight VAR will be used for the first time in the Premier League. I'm still to be convinced that it is actually a good move. I agree with the goal line technology but not so much with VAR. I accept it for blatant decisions missed by the officials,like a player a yard offside which is missed by the referee/linesman but to call offside when a players big toe or knee happens to be judged offside is a bit extreme. I think VAR is going to cause more problems than it solves and result in more arguments/debates than before. It's certainly going to make the games more interesting for the viewer.

lucy4

https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/1163831/Liverpool-news-Premier-League-title-VAR-full-table

goldon

In Cricket it works well ..... a nic is out / no sound in...... lbw ,,,, catch of the floor .... so on ..... got to be fairer given we are all fallible.
In Football time will tell.
It will stop ref's getting attacked or losing their job because Manager complaint about dodgy decision resulting in teams going out. Think the pluses outweigh the minuses and the fans accept the outcome better, plus seats don't get torn up thrown on the pitch, local shops don't get their windows smashed. jus sayin.

hhyftrftdr

lucy4 said:

https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/1163831/Liverpool-news-Premier-League-title-VAR-full-table

Hmm I'm pretty sure Wolves' handball goal in our 1-1 draw at their gaff last August woulda been ruled out under VAR, so we'd have still won the title.

A very lol article anyway, the media love clutching at Liverpool based straws.

HENDRIK62

hhyftrftdr said:

lucy4 said:

https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/1163831/Liverpool-news-Premier-League-title-VAR-full-table

Hmm I'm pretty sure Wolves' handball goal in our 1-1 draw at their gaff last August woulda been ruled out under VAR, so we'd have still won the title.

A very lol article anyway, the media love clutching at Liverpool based straws.

VAR only turned historic decisions therefore city would have no chance

lucy4

Two weeks in and nothing I've seen has altered my opinion,the only thing that has changed is its now all down to individual opinions at Stockley Park.Which in my eyes is no further forward than letting the match officials make the decision in the first place.

waller02

lucy4 said:

Two weeks in and nothing I've seen has altered my opinion,the only thing that has changed is its now all down to individual opinions at Stockley Park.Which in my eyes is no further forward than letting the match officials make the decision in the first place.

City were robbed with that decision. You have to let goals stand unless there is a clear cut and obvious reason not to. That certainly wasn't one.

Tikay10

lucy4 said:

Two weeks in and nothing I've seen has altered my opinion,the only thing that has changed is its now all down to individual opinions at Stockley Park.Which in my eyes is no further forward than letting the match officials make the decision in the first place.

To be fair, VAR allows them to look at the action with the benefit of TV Replays including slow-motion, which reveals much more than the referee can see. It has to be a better way of doing it.

waller02

Tikay10 said:

lucy4 said:

Two weeks in and nothing I've seen has altered my opinion,the only thing that has changed is its now all down to individual opinions at Stockley Park.Which in my eyes is no further forward than letting the match officials make the decision in the first place.

To be fair, VAR allows them to look at the action with the benefit of TV Replays including slow-motion, which reveals much more than the referee can see. It has to be a better way of doing it.

Yes but they still need to get the decision right.

Tikay10

waller02 said:

Tikay10 said:

lucy4 said:

Two weeks in and nothing I've seen has altered my opinion,the only thing that has changed is its now all down to individual opinions at Stockley Park.Which in my eyes is no further forward than letting the match officials make the decision in the first place.

To be fair, VAR allows them to look at the action with the benefit of TV Replays including slow-motion, which reveals much more than the referee can see. It has to be a better way of doing it.

Yes but they still need to get the decision right.

Agreed - but according to the Laws of the game, they DID get it right.

waller02

Tikay10 said:

waller02 said:

Tikay10 said:

lucy4 said:

Two weeks in and nothing I've seen has altered my opinion,the only thing that has changed is its now all down to individual opinions at Stockley Park.Which in my eyes is no further forward than letting the match officials make the decision in the first place.

To be fair, VAR allows them to look at the action with the benefit of TV Replays including slow-motion, which reveals much more than the referee can see. It has to be a better way of doing it.

Yes but they still need to get the decision right.

Agreed - but according to the Laws of the game, they DID get it right.

I just think you should always give the benefit of the doubt to the attacking team. Was the handball deliberate? Did the handball deflect the path of the ball? If it did then you have a case, but it didn't, no advantage was gained from it. Literally skimmed past his arm.

You need to apply a bit of common sense or the game will become a joke.

Tikay10

waller02 said:

Tikay10 said:

waller02 said:

Tikay10 said:

lucy4 said:

Two weeks in and nothing I've seen has altered my opinion,the only thing that has changed is its now all down to individual opinions at Stockley Park.Which in my eyes is no further forward than letting the match officials make the decision in the first place.

To be fair, VAR allows them to look at the action with the benefit of TV Replays including slow-motion, which reveals much more than the referee can see. It has to be a better way of doing it.

Yes but they still need to get the decision right.

Agreed - but according to the Laws of the game, they DID get it right.

I just think you should always give the benefit of the doubt to the attacking team. Was the handball deliberate? Did the handball deflect the path of the ball? If it did then you have a case, but it didn't, no advantage was gained from it. Literally skimmed past his arm.

You need to apply a bit of common sense or the game will become a joke.

Agreed, but the problem there is once you apply common-sense, it makes a mockery of the Rules.

There was a far clearer decision in the 1st half when a City player was bundled over in the box. The wrestling, pushing & shoving in the penalty area is a far bigger problem than a few "maybe" hand-ball decisions imo. And yet that never goes to VAR. It really should.

waller02

Tikay10 said:

waller02 said:

Tikay10 said:

waller02 said:

Tikay10 said:

lucy4 said:

Two weeks in and nothing I've seen has altered my opinion,the only thing that has changed is its now all down to individual opinions at Stockley Park.Which in my eyes is no further forward than letting the match officials make the decision in the first place.

To be fair, VAR allows them to look at the action with the benefit of TV Replays including slow-motion, which reveals much more than the referee can see. It has to be a better way of doing it.

Yes but they still need to get the decision right.

Agreed - but according to the Laws of the game, they DID get it right.

I just think you should always give the benefit of the doubt to the attacking team. Was the handball deliberate? Did the handball deflect the path of the ball? If it did then you have a case, but it didn't, no advantage was gained from it. Literally skimmed past his arm.

You need to apply a bit of common sense or the game will become a joke.

Agreed, but the problem there is once you apply common-sense, it makes a mockery of the Rules.

There was a far clearer decision in the 1st half when a City player was bundled over in the box. The wrestling, pushing & shoving in the penalty area is a far bigger problem than a few "maybe" hand-ball decisions imo. And yet that never goes to VAR. It really should.

I suppose for VAR to be fair then you DO have to stick to the letter of the law. As long as those decisions are consistent throughout the season then nobody can have any arguments. Disallowing that goal in today's game and then allowing a similar goal a few weeks down the line would really make a mockery of having VAR.

goldon

Tikay10

waller02 said:

Tikay10 said:

waller02 said:

Tikay10 said:

waller02 said:

Tikay10 said:

lucy4 said:

Two weeks in and nothing I've seen has altered my opinion,the only thing that has changed is its now all down to individual opinions at Stockley Park.Which in my eyes is no further forward than letting the match officials make the decision in the first place.

To be fair, VAR allows them to look at the action with the benefit of TV Replays including slow-motion, which reveals much more than the referee can see. It has to be a better way of doing it.

Yes but they still need to get the decision right.

Agreed - but according to the Laws of the game, they DID get it right.

I just think you should always give the benefit of the doubt to the attacking team. Was the handball deliberate? Did the handball deflect the path of the ball? If it did then you have a case, but it didn't, no advantage was gained from it. Literally skimmed past his arm.

You need to apply a bit of common sense or the game will become a joke.

Agreed, but the problem there is once you apply common-sense, it makes a mockery of the Rules.

There was a far clearer decision in the 1st half when a City player was bundled over in the box. The wrestling, pushing & shoving in the penalty area is a far bigger problem than a few "maybe" hand-ball decisions imo. And yet that never goes to VAR. It really should.

I suppose for VAR to be fair then you DO have to stick to the letter of the law. As long as those decisions are consistent throughout the season then nobody can have any arguments. Disallowing that goal in today's game and then allowing a similar goal a few weeks down the line would really make a mockery of having VAR.

100% agree.

lucy4

Tikay10 said:

waller02 said:

Tikay10 said:

waller02 said:

Tikay10 said:

lucy4 said:

Two weeks in and nothing I've seen has altered my opinion,the only thing that has changed is its now all down to individual opinions at Stockley Park.Which in my eyes is no further forward than letting the match officials make the decision in the first place.

To be fair, VAR allows them to look at the action with the benefit of TV Replays including slow-motion, which reveals much more than the referee can see. It has to be a better way of doing it.

Yes but they still need to get the decision right.

Agreed - but according to the Laws of the game, they DID get it right.

I just think you should always give the benefit of the doubt to the attacking team. Was the handball deliberate? Did the handball deflect the path of the ball? If it did then you have a case, but it didn't, no advantage was gained from it. Literally skimmed past his arm.

You need to apply a bit of common sense or the game will become a joke.

Agreed, but the problem there is once you apply common-sense, it makes a mockery of the Rules.

There was a far clearer decision in the 1st half when a City player was bundled over in the box. The wrestling, pushing & shoving in the penalty area is a far bigger problem than a few "maybe" hand-ball decisions imo. And yet that never goes to VAR. It really should.

That is exactly what I'm talking about,everyone agrees that it should've been a penalty but for some reason it wasn't awarded. Consistency is all that's asked for but yet again it seems to be lacking.

goldon

Or go to the Crowd.........

lucy4

I will lay odds that the VAR rules/laws will be reviewed/changed next season.

hhyftrftdr

I'm not a fan of VAR in it's current form whatsoever.
It is utterly pointless celebrating a goal now until the other team have kicked off now.

I don't watch football (be that down the pub or in the stadium) to have to wait 2 minutes to know if a goal is legit. Only 2 rounds of fixtures in and it's sapping the life out of the game already.

The 'handball' goal was in theory correctly chalked off due to this new rule introduced (another new rule which I think is flawed), but the decision not to give a penalty in the first half was a joke.

The Sterling goal ruled out for offside last week was also a joke and a farce.
Andy Gray might be a m0r0n but he explained perfectly why it should have stood;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIsrzV2hatA&t=2s

VAR could be the worst thing to happen to football.

goldnballz

My 2 penneth worth...

VAR is an absolute joke!(in its current format)

How on earth Jesus's goal was ruled out & Sterling's was allowed to stand (last weekend vs WHU) I don't think I'll ever get my head around.

& ruling out Jesus's winner yesterday... utterly bonkers!

What if the ball had hit a defender on the arm?... do you think VAR would have ruled a penalty? No.

The advantage should ALWAYS be given to the attacking team, IMO.

STOP looking for pathetic reasons to rule out goals...unless you want NIL NIL after NIL NIL.

VAR out!!!

Essexphil

goldnballz said:

My 2 penneth worth...

VAR is an absolute joke!(in its current format)

How on earth Jesus's goal was ruled out & Sterling's was allowed to stand (last weekend vs WHU) I don't think I'll ever get my head around.

& ruling out Jesus's winner yesterday... utterly bonkers!

What if the ball had hit a defender on the arm?... do you think VAR would have ruled a penalty? No.

The advantage should ALWAYS be given to the attacking team, IMO.

STOP looking for pathetic reasons to rule out goals...unless you want NIL NIL after NIL NIL.

VAR out!!!

My opinion is totally the opposite.

VAR provides a level of accuracy that surpasses what has gone on before.
It is not VAR's fault that the law has changed concerning what amounts to a handball-personally, I think this balances the new "unnatural position" rule for defenders' arms, but I accept that many people dislike 1 or both of these changes. Can't blame VAR (or refs) for correctly interpreting the rules as they are now.

People need to realise and accept that players are much more cunning in their cheating these days. Personally, I thought the Jesus goal was correctly ruled out, but it was a 50/50 call as to whether Citeh should have had a Penalty.

Classless for Guardiola to be willing to "accept" the ref's decision. Refs don't tell him how to do HIS job, nor do they get £millions for doing so...