|
Post by tuum on Nov 6, 2023 11:20:05 GMT
I would make it even more stringent. 30secs is plenty. If you can't spot an obvious error in 30 secs then the original decision stands. Not going to happen though. Once you give people technology they tend to over-analyse. Doesn't matter. The moment is still ruined with 30 seconds. I agree.
|
|
|
Post by SamB_SCFC on Nov 6, 2023 11:33:19 GMT
Maybe introduce a review system, similar to cricket ? Don’t agree with a decision, use as review to have it viewed upstairs as the game continues. Should those upstairs agree, then they bring it back. Time limit on decision making, if it’s not clear after a 30 second review, then foul/offside etc not given. I reckon the VAR genie is out of the bottle. You can't put it back now. The first time a goal is scored which was self evidently from the TV cameras a yard offside World War 3 would break out. I mean that's how it came about. The TV audience, which is most of the audience, could see blatant mistakes in super slo-mo. No way can it be put back. Modified or limited in scope perhaps. My opinion has always been a review system like cricket and tennis. Maybe have one review per half allowed for each team that can be used whenever they want to call it, with the review being retained if it's successful. That way teams will be reluctant to throw their reviews away for speculative or tight decisions and we won't have delays after practically every goal. It should prevent most of the biggest howlers, if there was an obvious offside missed or a handball etc then the teams will use their review. Or an obviously harsh red card, or red card missed etc. But it should hopefully stop all this combing through every goal with a fine toothed comb looking for fractional offsides. And leaves the teams in control of when VAR kicks in so if they waste their review desperately trying to get a goal disallowed, then some genuine injustice happens later in the half that they're unable to overturn, then it's their fault for wasting it.
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Nov 6, 2023 11:33:28 GMT
set a time limit. if the VAR official can't clear it up after 90 seconds, it's not a clear and obvious error so stick with the on field officials decision. I would make it even more stringent. 30secs is plenty. If you can't spot an obvious error in 30 secs then the original decision stands. Not going to happen though. Once you give people technology they tend to over-analyse. But all that will do is make it more controversial and prone to error - what’s the protocol for those 30 seconds? What does “obvious error” mean? What if it takes 10 seconds longer than normal to get the replay up and running for some reason? Imagine the fan or manager or pundit who sees one replay, thinks it’s clear as day that there was an obvious error but the VAR is looking at another angle which sheds a different light on it and can’t make a decision in the time available… think of the uproar after that.. it really wouldn’t solve anything. In fact if that released audio taught us anything it’s that the officials should *not* be rushed into making hasty decisions in the name of keeping the game flowing. It just leads to more mistakes.
|
|
|
Post by wakefieldstokie on Nov 6, 2023 11:55:03 GMT
VAR hasn't really made things any better. Apart from goal-line decisions.
It's laughable really, decisions taking an age and still getting decisions wrong, leave it to the ref and work on campaigns to respect the ref's (to the level Rugby refs get)
|
|
|
Post by scfcnicholas on Nov 6, 2023 12:02:43 GMT
Massively improved decision accuracy and its factual the stats back it up. Proving people will moan their absolute tits off regardless and is why half the criticisms should be taken with a pinch of a salt. There’s always a crisis going on according to some wankers. Pundits don’t help the nonsense either . Implementation of it needs improving though Obviously it improves decision accuracy but I am not arsed about that. I like the emotion of football. Part of being a football fan is losing 5-0 at home and sitting in the pub afterwards moaning that the 4th goal was offside and the player who scored the 5th shouldn't even have been on the pitch.. the dirty, clogging ******! That’s fair enough as you’re saying you don’t believe the big accuracy improvement is worth the emotion that’s being sacrificed I get that. It’s the constant false sensationalist insinuation that keeps being banded about by sky, pundits, and even the public in the form of disinformation that there’s a crisis and incorrect decisions are worse than they’ve ever been when they’re not, it’s completely on the contrary.
|
|
|
Post by skip on Nov 6, 2023 12:12:29 GMT
Somewhat ironic that in the Premier League, its recorded from every conceivable angle but they still can't tell whether the ball went out of play as it led to a goal. Mind you, a personal grip I have with The Modern Game, is this nonsense about the ball being totally out of play. If they're going to let players take corner kicks and spot kicks where the ball is barely giving the touchline, penalty spot or corner quadrant little more than a peck on the cheek, then it's hardly any wonder the accuracy of officiating is hit and miss.
Goal line technology and sod the rest of it off. ...and make them take the corner kick from inside the quadrant. Annoying little twats who place the ball a micro-millimetre on the edge as if it gives them in advantage.
|
|
|
Post by wakefieldstokie on Nov 6, 2023 12:43:31 GMT
Obviously it improves decision accuracy but I am not arsed about that. I like the emotion of football. Part of being a football fan is losing 5-0 at home and sitting in the pub afterwards moaning that the 4th goal was offside and the player who scored the 5th shouldn't even have been on the pitch.. the dirty, clogging ******! That’s fair enough as you’re saying you don’t believe the big accuracy improvement is worth the emotion that’s being sacrificed I get that. It’s the constant false sensationalist insinuation that keeps being banded about by sky, pundits, and even the public in the form of disinformation that there’s a crisis and incorrect decisions are worse than they’ve ever been when they’re not, it’s completely on the contrary. So they got it right at Newcastle? and the 3/4 a week that happen every week. Where are the accuracy stats, to me it seems as though the moaning about decisions is just as bad as it was before VAR. Plus the game, the emotion etc has changed massively for it. Nothing like waiting 3 minutes to celebrate a goal, or celebrating a goal that isnt then a goal.
|
|
|
Post by scfcnicholas on Nov 6, 2023 13:35:33 GMT
That’s fair enough as you’re saying you don’t believe the big accuracy improvement is worth the emotion that’s being sacrificed I get that. It’s the constant false sensationalist insinuation that keeps being banded about by sky, pundits, and even the public in the form of disinformation that there’s a crisis and incorrect decisions are worse than they’ve ever been when they’re not, it’s completely on the contrary. So they got it right at Newcastle? and the 3/4 a week that happen every week. Where are the accuracy stats, to me it seems as though the moaning about decisions is just as bad as it was before VAR. Plus the game, the emotion etc has changed massively for it. Nothing like waiting 3 minutes to celebrate a goal, or celebrating a goal that isnt then a goal. “Decision accuracy before & after VAR (study of 972 games worldwide) Accuracy before VAR 93 per cent Accuracy after VAR 98.8 per cent” That’s a worldwide stat done a few years ago, I recall last season it being referred to by Howard Webb stating the premier league was in the high 90’s post var and was in the 80’s pre. There is lots of stats and data that back it up. Think it’s had a bad couple of months VAR in the premier league, undoubtedly being blown out of all proportion and false insinuations like I say. Over all decision accuracy has vastly improved.
|
|
|
Post by J-Roar on Nov 6, 2023 13:40:32 GMT
There's no transparency which allows the suspicion of bias to certain clubs to fester.
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Nov 6, 2023 13:53:32 GMT
I think that VAR is fine but it shouldn't take so long. If the VAR ref can't decide after seeing an incident from various angles and slowed down then you go with the decision by the ref on the field. It can't be that wrong. I think the thing I found wrong at Newcastle was the comment that they couldn't make a decision from the angles they had but on the balance of probability... That is rubbish. You make a decision on what you can see. I also don't like that they give penalties which change games for something which is looks very minor or unintentional when the fouled player is going away from goal or at an impossible angle from which to score. Also some of the sending off are so split second that they look far worse on slow mo than at real speed so very harsh.
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Nov 6, 2023 13:58:40 GMT
So they ditch VAR this morning and this afternoon the ref mistakenly disallows for offside what would have been Spurs winner against Chelsea to send them top of the league and a global TV audience can see the scorer was in fact comfortably onside.I can't see folks will just suck it up. There will be whining but there always will be. We’ve shown VAR doesn’t work. It was a bad experiment and the results are in. Fuck it off. They make it work abroad. It's the idiots in the English game running it that are the issue. Our referees are terrible so no wonder the VAR is - it's the same blokes running it. I would never have brought it in other than goal line technology. It isn't going anywhere, we're stuck with it.
|
|
|
Post by Laughing Gravy on Nov 6, 2023 14:18:23 GMT
Isn’t there some sort of automated system (might have been used in the World Cup) which effectively eliminates human error which is what is making VAR so terrible? The refs and especially linos in the Premier League are generally very good (unlike the EFL). VAR is supposed to help them but it is simply making things worse. There is way more controversy over VAR than there ever was over incorrect refereeing decisions and they’re still getting it wrong. So it’s obviously not working. Time to try something else. PS I wish we’d got it in the Championship though. We’d be about 5 points better of this season at least.
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Nov 6, 2023 14:30:25 GMT
There will be whining but there always will be. We’ve shown VAR doesn’t work. It was a bad experiment and the results are in. Fuck it off. They make it work abroad. It's the idiots in the English game running it that are the issue. Our referees are terrible so no wonder the VAR is - it's the same blokes running it. I would never have brought it in other than goal line technology. It isn't going anywhere, we're stuck with it. Dunna be daft, you think these same debates and complaints aren’t being made everywhere in the world? We’re no different. Madrid fans call their rivals VARcelona
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Nov 6, 2023 14:31:33 GMT
Isn’t there some sort of automated system (might have been used in the World Cup) which effectively eliminates human error which is what is making VAR so terrible? The refs and especially linos in the Premier League are generally very good (unlike the EFL). VAR is supposed to help them but it is simply making things worse. There is way more controversy over VAR than there ever was over incorrect refereeing decisions and they’re still getting it wrong. So it’s obviously not working. Time to try something else. PS I wish we’d got it in the Championship though. We’d be about 5 points better of this season at least. We’d have had a few pennos at least. Not convinced that would mean we’d have any more points though 😆
|
|
|
Post by wakefieldstokie on Nov 6, 2023 14:42:08 GMT
So they got it right at Newcastle? and the 3/4 a week that happen every week. Where are the accuracy stats, to me it seems as though the moaning about decisions is just as bad as it was before VAR. Plus the game, the emotion etc has changed massively for it. Nothing like waiting 3 minutes to celebrate a goal, or celebrating a goal that isnt then a goal. “Decision accuracy before & after VAR (study of 972 games worldwide) Accuracy before VAR 93 per cent Accuracy after VAR 98.8 per cent” That’s a worldwide stat done a few years ago, I recall last season it being referred to by Howard Webb stating the premier league was in the high 90’s post var and was in the 80’s pre. There is lots of stats and data that back it up. Think it’s had a bad couple of months VAR in the premier league, undoubtedly being blown out of all proportion and false insinuations like I say. Over all decision accuracy has vastly improved. I think 93% by refs is impressive, 5% more by technology- meh. Especially given the negative impact it's had on 'a fans game experience' and given that two thirds of fans aren't in favour of VAR. Also its still getting the big decisions wrong which is what most fans assumed would improve.
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Nov 6, 2023 14:48:09 GMT
“Decision accuracy before & after VAR (study of 972 games worldwide) Accuracy before VAR 93 per cent Accuracy after VAR 98.8 per cent” That’s a worldwide stat done a few years ago, I recall last season it being referred to by Howard Webb stating the premier league was in the high 90’s post var and was in the 80’s pre. There is lots of stats and data that back it up. Think it’s had a bad couple of months VAR in the premier league, undoubtedly being blown out of all proportion and false insinuations like I say. Over all decision accuracy has vastly improved. I think 93% by refs is impressive, 5% more by technology- meh. Especially given the negative impact it's had on 'a fans game experience' and given that two thirds of fans aren't in favour of VAR. Also its still getting the big decisions wrong which is what most fans assumed would improve. That's looking at it the wrong way round. Previously 7% of decisions were wrong - that's now been massively reduced to 1%. So before VAR one in every 14 game-changing decisions against you would be wrong, whereas now it's one in a hundred. That's a huge difference.
|
|
|
Post by westgatelakes on Nov 6, 2023 14:57:56 GMT
It's the numerous freeze frame shots that cause a lot of anger and dispute over VAR decisions. Why not do away with freeze frame and leave the VAR officials to determine any changes to on field decisions through review of action at actual speed only - just a thought.
|
|
|
Post by Laughing Gravy on Nov 6, 2023 15:38:39 GMT
Isn’t there some sort of automated system (might have been used in the World Cup) which effectively eliminates human error which is what is making VAR so terrible? The refs and especially linos in the Premier League are generally very good (unlike the EFL). VAR is supposed to help them but it is simply making things worse. There is way more controversy over VAR than there ever was over incorrect refereeing decisions and they’re still getting it wrong. So it’s obviously not working. Time to try something else. PS I wish we’d got it in the Championship though. We’d be about 5 points better of this season at least. We’d have had a few pennos at least. Not convinced that would mean we’d have any more points though 😆 You make a very valid point.
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Nov 6, 2023 15:47:18 GMT
I think 93% by refs is impressive, 5% more by technology- meh. Especially given the negative impact it's had on 'a fans game experience' and given that two thirds of fans aren't in favour of VAR. Also its still getting the big decisions wrong which is what most fans assumed would improve. That's looking at it the wrong way round. Previously 7% of decisions were wrong - that's now been massively reduced to 1%. So before VAR one in every 14 game-changing decisions against you would be wrong, whereas now it's one in a hundred. That's a huge difference. Who, and how were they judged to be 'right' or 'wrong' What is right and wrong seems to be subjective in a lot of the cases. For example, would the penalties Wolves conceded in the last 2 games now be considered right or wrong, if the answer is 'right' then something is clearly wrong! and that would mean the data analysis is questionable at best.
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Nov 6, 2023 15:50:48 GMT
It's the numerous freeze frame shots that cause a lot of anger and dispute over VAR decisions. Why not do away with freeze frame and leave the VAR officials to determine any changes to on field decisions through review of action at actual speed only - just a thought. I just don't get it, the authorities don't seem to realise that freeze frames do not reflect incidents accurately. This should be obvious to a child. They totally distort incidents and influence decisions badly in most cases. They should be only looking back at incidents in real time, if they cant decide based on that then just play on and get on with it.
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Nov 6, 2023 16:02:31 GMT
That's looking at it the wrong way round. Previously 7% of decisions were wrong - that's now been massively reduced to 1%. So before VAR one in every 14 game-changing decisions against you would be wrong, whereas now it's one in a hundred. That's a huge difference. Who, and how were they judged to be 'right' or 'wrong' What is right and wrong seems to be subjective in a lot of the cases. For example, would the penalties Wolves conceded in the last 2 games now be considered right or wrong, if the answer is 'right' then something is clearly wrong! and that would mean the data analysis is questionable at best. Yeah I don't know anything about that, I was just pointing out that the data taken at face value shows a much more significant improvement than just "5%". Still, I don't find it hard to believe, even taking into account all the errors and questionable decisions we've seen. Apart from anything else the scrutiny has increased enormously so things that we would have barely noticed before are now outrageous howlers - to go back again to that released audio about the Liverpool offside, they dropped a massive bollock, it was all over twitter, they were suspended etc etc, but at the end of the day it was just a very tight offside decision, barely discernible to the naked eye even on the replay, the like of which we would have had dozens of every weekend previously.
|
|
|
Post by idle on Nov 6, 2023 18:31:36 GMT
Who, and how were they judged to be 'right' or 'wrong' What is right and wrong seems to be subjective in a lot of the cases. For example, would the penalties Wolves conceded in the last 2 games now be considered right or wrong, if the answer is 'right' then something is clearly wrong! and that would mean the data analysis is questionable at best. Yeah I don't know anything about that, I was just pointing out that the data taken at face value shows a much more significant improvement than just "5%". Still, I don't find it hard to believe, even taking into account all the errors and questionable decisions we've seen. Apart from anything else the scrutiny has increased enormously so things that we would have barely noticed before are now outrageous howlers - to go back again to that released audio about the Liverpool offside, they dropped a massive bollock, it was all over twitter, they were suspended etc etc, but at the end of the day it was just a very tight offside decision, barely discernible to the naked eye even on the replay, the like of which we would have had dozens of every weekend previously. The thing is, if the offside is so marginal that you're not sure if it's even offside, why is it so important figuring out if he was an inch offside with his hand? He's not gained anything by it, and the old rule where you give the advantage to the attacker was good enough for most cases. It used to take half a second to look at the linesman to figure out if it was offside, now it's 4-5 minutes! I even think 30 seconds is too much. They're spending several minutes drawing lines (that aren't even straight according to tele lens experts) too in some insane pursuit of "fairness" that only takes away the excitement and immediacy of the game. And I strongly suspect these numbers are exaggerated. Who came up with them? We all see how much different the decisions from still frames and slow motion viewing is compared to watching situastions in realtime. Do these coount as "improving" the amount of "right" decisions"? And it makes it worse for the fans at the stadium. Fuck the gamblers and the TV plastic "supporters" craving more and more ridiculous measurements to see if it was "fair". What happened to "it evens out over the season"? It sure as hell hasn't made the fairness for smaller clubs any better. I'd argue it's worse now than ever for them.
|
|
|
Post by onepara on Nov 6, 2023 18:47:47 GMT
Apart for goal-line decisions, I'd bin it. I think that refs. are quite happy to let VAR make decisions, as it takes the heat off them. I think that refs. feel that they themselves are being refereed. When a Manager complains about a decision, the ref just shrugs & says 'It's a VAR decision'. It gives them a cop-out. This way, they cover for one another. So shirk responsibility.
|
|
|
Post by leicspotter on Nov 6, 2023 18:53:00 GMT
Here we go again.
As far as I recall the original plan for VAR was to intervene on the 'clear and obvious' errors made by officials.
If that remains the case, which I firmly believe it should, then a VAR check should take but a few seconds. Anything else is too close to call and rests with the original on field decision. Simple
Maybe refs can also request a VAR check if they have doubts about their own decision
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Nov 6, 2023 19:05:04 GMT
Yeah I don't know anything about that, I was just pointing out that the data taken at face value shows a much more significant improvement than just "5%". Still, I don't find it hard to believe, even taking into account all the errors and questionable decisions we've seen. Apart from anything else the scrutiny has increased enormously so things that we would have barely noticed before are now outrageous howlers - to go back again to that released audio about the Liverpool offside, they dropped a massive bollock, it was all over twitter, they were suspended etc etc, but at the end of the day it was just a very tight offside decision, barely discernible to the naked eye even on the replay, the like of which we would have had dozens of every weekend previously. The thing is, if the offside is so marginal that you're not sure if it's even offside, why is it so important figuring out if he was an inch offside with his hand? He's not gained anything by it, and the old rule where you give the advantage to the attacker was good enough for most cases. It used to take half a second to look at the linesman to figure out if it was offside, now it's 4-5 minutes! I even think 30 seconds is too much. They're spending several minutes drawing lines (that aren't even straight according to tele lens experts) too in some insane pursuit of "fairness" that only takes away the excitement and immediacy of the game. And I strongly suspect these numbers are exaggerated. Who came up with them? We all see how much different the decisions from still frames and slow motion viewing is compared to watching situastions in realtime. Do these coount as "improving" the amount of "right" decisions"? And it makes it worse for the fans at the stadium. Fuck the gamblers and the TV plastic "supporters" craving more and more ridiculous measurements to see if it was "fair". What happened to "it evens out over the season"? It sure as hell hasn't made the fairness for smaller clubs any better. I'd argue it's worse now than ever for them. I completely agree regarding the marginal offsides (although you can’t be offside with a hand) - I’m just not sure there’s a satisfactory solution other than binning it off altogether and thereby accepting huge mistakes will continue to be made. The law is the law and if the tech is capable of discerning things, what’s the justification for *not* using it in certain instances? And again, who decides which ones are “obvious” and which ones aren’t? You say “why is it so important”? but imagine if a goal was scored against Stoke which to you looks clearly offside, but they decided not to properly review it because it didn’t look an “obvious” enough error. The only way out would be down your wobbly lines route, where they come out and say the technology is not precise enough to determine when there is less than xxxx distance involved - but as they’ve been using it like that for years already, I can’t see that being an option somehow. They believe it’s accurate 🤷🏼♂️
|
|
|
Post by owdestokie2 on Nov 6, 2023 19:51:05 GMT
How do you feel about it? For or against? Please give reasons for your viewpoint. Also, I know this is difficult, but please try and avoid being partisan. It was hilarious when Chelsea had that equaliser riled out in the cup final but try and avoid those feelings in response. 🙂 It’s created problems that weren’t there before. Offside…..some years ago the rules were changed to the offside rule to give the forward the”benefit of the doubt”. Now every goal is subject to VAR scrutiny looking for a foot/elbow/nostril beyond an imaginary line. VAR adjudicators take minutes to review an incident looking for a clear and obvious mistake, they can’t make their minds up with slow mo’s different camera actions and hand the “decision making responsibility” back to the referee who was involved in split second/real time action. IMHO…….a load of shite
|
|
|
Post by terrorofturfmoor on Nov 6, 2023 19:59:03 GMT
Football was better without it, I'd rather cope with a wrong decision from the ref, it added to a good talking point after the game!!!
Now, you think you've scored, only for it to go to VAR, then even if it gets given, that first feeling of it going in has gone!!!
Nah, not for me!!!
|
|
|
Post by idle on Nov 6, 2023 20:00:40 GMT
I completely agree regarding the marginal offsides (although you can’t be offside with a hand) - I’m just not sure there’s a satisfactory solution other than binning it off altogether and thereby accepting huge mistakes will continue to be made. The law is the law and if the tech is capable of discerning things, what’s the justification for *not* using it in certain instances? And again, who decides which ones are “obvious” and which ones aren’t? You say “why is it so important”? but imagine if a goal was scored against Stoke which to you looks clearly offside, but they decided not to properly review it because it didn’t look an “obvious” enough error. This evens out over time. And is part of the charm of football. Or rather it was. After we got VAR, you're right that we expect more correct decisions. But we're also far more antagonistic against both the VAR personell and the "poor" refs that go without it like in the championship. Just because we are used to some of the decisions being overturned. It's football. It's not important unless you've bet your mortgage on a game. Because you know what? I see far more decisions being wrong after VAR. Penalities being given at the slightest contact. Goals being disallowed for 0.1 inch offsides. People being sent off for perfectly good tackles because they touched the opponent (again, the slightest contact). This changes football, and for the worse IMO. They even had to change the perfectly good handball rule to better suit VAR. And the offside rules. Meanwhile the Refs have never had less authority. Shithousing and timewasting are as rampant as ever. Players are surrounding the refs at every opportunity (and only the small clubs being punsihed, even in the championship - remember Leeds?). Managers moaning in every press conference. They're pathetic scum of the earth. VAR has made all of this worse, because we no longer expect that refs are human and makes mistakes. I always say the players get the refs they deserve. They make just as many, if not far more, errors than the refs in every single game, yet the refs are the bad guys every time. Just look at the "ref for the coventry game" where people are saying they've never heard of him, so he's shite. Absolutely pathetic from guys who couldn't ref a raffle! The only way out would be down your wobbly lines route, where they come out and say the technology is not precise enough to determine when there is less than xxxx distance involved - but as they’ve been using it like that for years already, I can’t see that being an option somehow. They believe it’s accurate 🤷🏼♂️ No, we could do like the Swedes have. Just drop VAR and accept that the beautiful game is just that. A game. A human game, with faults in every crook. But it has been taken over by money interests: sportswashers, investment bankers and gamblers. They cheat at every turn, and now they are ruining the game itself. None of them should be allowed near a football match, or be able to own a football club. Or several, as the cheating cunts owning Everton, Watford, QatarCity and Saudcastle does. I draw the line at VAR. Rant over.
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Nov 6, 2023 20:24:07 GMT
How in gods earth is that not a red for the spurs defender two feet off the ground
|
|
|
Post by satoshi on Nov 6, 2023 20:25:26 GMT
This spurs game has spent more time reviewing var than actual football
|
|