|
|
Post by jokker on Feb 7, 2024 23:20:56 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by GrahamHyde on Feb 7, 2024 23:31:31 GMT
Great insight there, Tony.
|
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Feb 7, 2024 23:35:06 GMT
Aw. Makes me kind of miss him a bit
|
|
|
|
Post by terrorofturfmoor on Feb 8, 2024 0:57:58 GMT
Just fuck it off completely, get back to the old way!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Feb 8, 2024 9:32:50 GMT
These officials are just like politicians, very selective in the information they disclose.
For example, why is he able to give all the stats that support the use of VAR, yet while acknowledging the time it is taking to make VAR decisions has increased this season, he was unable to disclose by how much? He must have that information otherwise he wouldn't know it had increased, but says he's unable to disclose it!!!! He'd be brilliant in the House of Commons!
|
|
|
|
Post by idle on Feb 8, 2024 10:02:09 GMT
They also include every single VAR decision overturning the ref as "correct" for the purpose of showing how much it is used, regardless of what everyone can see is complete bollocks.
|
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Feb 8, 2024 10:09:33 GMT
The interesting thing for me is that this is the first time I've seen any reference to Tony since he left Stoke to join the PL. The FSA has various meetings with the PL but he's never on their side of the table and I've not been clear what his role is - but at least this has partially answered that ! We do have a VAR group so maybe they will come into contact.
|
|
|
|
Post by Goonie on Feb 8, 2024 10:13:37 GMT
The only way VAR will work is to let AI make the decision instantly
Many years off though
The other problem with VAR is, and what erodes the egalitarian beauty of the game, is that it is reserved for elite competitions and will be unlikely to be at grass roots level in my lifetime
|
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Feb 8, 2024 10:30:55 GMT
The only way VAR will work is to let AI make the decision instantly Many years off though The other problem with VAR is, and what erodes the egalitarian beauty of the game, is that it is reserved for elite competitions and will be unlikely to be at grass roots level in my lifetime Very interesting point which is totally unacknowledged. |
|
|
|
Post by raythesailor on Feb 8, 2024 10:36:44 GMT
One of the problems with VAR and the game is the constant tinkering around with the rules and the interpretation of them.
There was nothing wrong with the rules of the game. "If it ain't bust don't try to fix it."⚽⚓
|
|
|
|
Post by sportsman on Feb 8, 2024 10:48:28 GMT
With we had it in the championship. Sick of being done like a good ‘un. The idiots that sometimes check the decisions might not always get it right, but at least we might only get done 2 times out of ten instead of ten out of ten.
|
|
|
|
Post by LGH87 on Feb 8, 2024 10:57:31 GMT
They need to change the offside rule to clear daylight.
If any goalscoring part of the body is level, then it's a goal.
Would see far more goals as well, as all the one's ruled out for a big toe being off would now be given.
|
|
|
|
Post by idle on Feb 8, 2024 11:00:50 GMT
With we had it in the championship. Sick of being done like a good ‘un. The idiots that sometimes check the decisions might not always get it right, but at least we might only get done 2 times out of ten instead of ten out of ten. More like 6-7 out of 10 rather than 2. They keep making football a non-contact sport, at least within the penalty boxes. Fuck that. The expectations go sky high though, so you'll be even more pissed when they fuck up. At least now we acknowledge that the refs and linos are human and make mistakes (although some watch too much PL football and have the same expectations for the refs down here). |
|
|
|
Post by chiprockets on Feb 8, 2024 11:11:49 GMT
They need to change the offside rule to clear daylight. If any goalscoring part of the body is level, then it's a goal. Would see far more goals as well, as all the one's ruled out for a big toe being off would now be given. You’d have the same millimetre decisions in this scenario too. Admittedly more goals , but it’s still the same fiddly measurement just at a different point |
|
|
|
Post by LGH87 on Feb 8, 2024 11:13:33 GMT
They need to change the offside rule to clear daylight. If any goalscoring part of the body is level, then it's a goal. Would see far more goals as well, as all the one's ruled out for a big toe being off would now be given. You’d have the same millimetre decisions in this scenario too. Admittedly more goals , but it’s still the same fiddly measurement just at a different point not really, with daylight you can pretty much see instantly. |
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Feb 8, 2024 11:25:04 GMT
You’d have the same millimetre decisions in this scenario too. Admittedly more goals , but it’s still the same fiddly measurement just at a different point not really, with daylight you can pretty much see instantly. What's considered "daylight" though? If, as you mentioned previously, it's just any part of your body that you can score with is level the it's onside, then you'll still have the same issues of drawing lines to see if the body part IS level or if it's actually 1mm in front of the defender etc. If daylight is 6 inches, you'll have to check it is 6 inches and not 5 etc. "Daylight" has to actually have some tangible and measurable meaning, so they'll still need to measure that. It can't just be "common sense" or "it'll be obvious" because those are different for everyone. You're then back to a point of it being completely subjective and people moaning about inconsistency/big club bias/awful referees etc. etc. |
|
|
|
Post by LGH87 on Feb 8, 2024 11:34:57 GMT
not really, with daylight you can pretty much see instantly. What's considered "daylight" though? If, as you mentioned previously, it's just any part of your body that you can score with is level the it's onside, then you'll still have the same issues of drawing lines to see if the body part IS level or if it's actually 1mm in front of the defender etc. If daylight is 6 inches, you'll have to check it is 6 inches and not 5 etc. "Daylight" has to actually have some tangible and measurable meaning, so they'll still need to measure that. It can't just be "common sense" or "it'll be obvious" because those are different for everyone. You're then back to a point of it being completely subjective and people moaning about inconsistency/big club bias/awful referees etc. etc. I 100% get what you're saying but I think this way there'd be less instances where it's so tight also so the times where it takes a bit longer wouldn't be as frequent but it's all just theory and I could be talking bollocks  |
|
|
|
Post by cvillestokie on Feb 8, 2024 11:59:44 GMT
With we had it in the championship. Sick of being done like a good ‘un. The idiots that sometimes check the decisions might not always get it right, but at least we might only get done 2 times out of ten instead of ten out of ten. More like 6-7 out of 10 rather than 2. They keep making football a non-contact sport, at least within the penalty boxes. Fuck that. The expectations go sky high though, so you'll be even more pissed when they fuck up. At least now we acknowledge that the refs and linos are human and make mistakes (although some watch too much PL football and have the same expectations for the refs down here). The only thing worse than watching the ref make the wrong decision once is to have him spend 20 mins watching it and still be wrong 😂 |
|
|
|
Post by idle on Feb 8, 2024 12:01:26 GMT
More like 6-7 out of 10 rather than 2. They keep making football a non-contact sport, at least within the penalty boxes. Fuck that. The expectations go sky high though, so you'll be even more pissed when they fuck up. At least now we acknowledge that the refs and linos are human and make mistakes (although some watch too much PL football and have the same expectations for the refs down here). The only thing worse than watching the ref make the wrong decision once is to have him spend 20 mins watching it and still be wrong 😂 Personally, I think waiting 4-7 minutes for a right decision is worse than the ref making the wrong one instantly, but that's me. |
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Feb 8, 2024 12:37:14 GMT
The only thing worse than watching the ref make the wrong decision once is to have him spend 20 mins watching it and still be wrong 😂 Personally, I think waiting 4-7 minutes for a right decision is worse than the ref making the wrong one instantly, but that's me. I agree, back in the day everyone would have just got on with it. Now with 500 million replays its become an unnecessarily inflated issue. Too much media around the game has actually made the game worse in many ways with freeze frames being over analysed and distorting real time incidents. |
|
|
|
Post by jokker on Feb 8, 2024 12:41:51 GMT
The interesting thing for me is that this is the first time I've seen any reference to Tony since he left Stoke to join the PL. The FSA has various meetings with the PL but he's never on their side of the table and I've not been clear what his role is - but at least this has partially answered that ! We do have a VAR group so maybe they will come into contact. I think there''s been one or two more examples where he was quoted, probably in the Guardian or BBC site. Can't remember what it was about, just the "nodding sensation" of hey don't I know that name from somewhere... |
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Feb 8, 2024 13:03:19 GMT
The only way VAR will work is to let AI make the decision instantly Many years off though The other problem with VAR is, and what erodes the egalitarian beauty of the game, is that it is reserved for elite competitions and will be unlikely to be at grass roots level in my lifetime It's true, you see it in tennis and cricket, people take computer generated decisions firmly on the chin, which they never do when there is a human in the loop. |
|
|
|
Post by scfcnicholas on Feb 8, 2024 13:12:59 GMT
There is one constant pre VAR’s implementation and post. Fucking moaning. It will never go away however it is improved, and people will never be happy.
|
|
|
|
Post by cheadlestokie on Feb 8, 2024 13:55:15 GMT
I blame Jimmy Hill and his instant replays! It started there.  |
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Feb 8, 2024 14:03:28 GMT
What's considered "daylight" though? If, as you mentioned previously, it's just any part of your body that you can score with is level the it's onside, then you'll still have the same issues of drawing lines to see if the body part IS level or if it's actually 1mm in front of the defender etc. If daylight is 6 inches, you'll have to check it is 6 inches and not 5 etc. "Daylight" has to actually have some tangible and measurable meaning, so they'll still need to measure that. It can't just be "common sense" or "it'll be obvious" because those are different for everyone. You're then back to a point of it being completely subjective and people moaning about inconsistency/big club bias/awful referees etc. etc. I 100% get what you're saying but I think this way there'd be less instances where it's so tight also so the times where it takes a bit longer wouldn't be as frequent but it's all just theory and I could be talking bollocks I also see what you're saying, to be fair. I guess it all comes down to whether we're happy with the constant delays and people being offside by a millimetre as is the case now...or if we'd prefer to accept they may get it wrong occasionally and people will disagree constantly with decisions and argue in the pub about it afterwards, as it always used to be. I don't think they'll ever come to a suitable solution until the tech is there and ready to be used properly (by tech I mean an instant signal to the ref it WAS offside, not going to VAR for 2-3 mins to check it out..and by used properly, I mean not just rushed in for PR sake and then trialled in major leagues/tournaments). I also don't think any changes will be made because of the fans view of the rules. They're bringing all this in nowadays due to clubs pressuring them to ensure EVERY decision is 100% correct because points on the board mean £££. It'll be a decision based on what the businesses...sorry I mean Clubs want. |
|
|
|
Post by wembley4372 on Feb 8, 2024 14:17:24 GMT
I 100% get what you're saying but I think this way there'd be less instances where it's so tight also so the times where it takes a bit longer wouldn't be as frequent but it's all just theory and I could be talking bollocks I also see what you're saying, to be fair. I guess it all comes down to whether we're happy with the constant delays and people being offside by a millimetre as is the case now...or if we'd prefer to accept they may get it wrong occasionally and people will disagree constantly with decisions and argue in the pub about it afterwards, as it always used to be. I don't think they'll ever come to a suitable solution until the tech is there and ready to be used properly (by tech I mean an instant signal to the ref it WAS offside, not going to VAR for 2-3 mins to check it out..and by used properly, I mean not just rushed in for PR sake and then trialled in major leagues/tournaments). I also don't think any changes will be made because of the fans view of the rules. They're bringing all this in nowadays due to clubs pressuring them to ensure EVERY decision is 100% correct because points on the board mean £££. It'll be a decision based on what the businesses...sorry I mean Clubs want. Just scrap the offside rule. The linesmen can then focus on the game and help the referee, they could even cover more of the pitch than just a half. |
|
|
|
Post by Goonie on Feb 8, 2024 15:03:53 GMT
There is one constant pre VAR’s implementation and post. Fucking moaning. It will never go away however it is improved, and people will never be happy. From Geoff Hurst's 'was it over the line' goal to last games contentious challenge, fans have always argued about what really happened or should of been the ref's decision. It's what makes the game great. VAR tries to get rid of all the controversy, sanitising the game and trying to make it free from uncertainty, but often creates new issues - every new technology solves an existing problem but creates new and unforeseen ones and VAR is no different At present it is an elitist tool for the big boys and is potentially killing the flow of the game |
|
|
|
Post by Vadiation_Ribe on Feb 8, 2024 15:36:18 GMT
They need to change the offside rule to clear daylight. If any goalscoring part of the body is level, then it's a goal. Would see far more goals as well, as all the one's ruled out for a big toe being off would now be given. I like the ides but could it lead to defences dropping deeper and therefore less goals? |
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Feb 8, 2024 15:47:45 GMT
There’s no one on the planet less qualified to sort it out I bet a Welsh bloke in sandbanks has a wry smile when he reads this one .
|
|
|
|
Post by walrus on Feb 8, 2024 16:23:05 GMT
They need to change the offside rule to clear daylight. If any goalscoring part of the body is level, then it's a goal. Would see far more goals as well, as all the one's ruled out for a big toe being off would now be given. No they don’t. There’s no need to change rules that have been perfectly good for decades just to suit VAR. And “clear daylight” would still end up requiring highly marginal calls at times and lines to be drawn. Plus I don’t think more goals is automatically better. It isn’t basketball. |
|
