VAR and is there a way to fix it?

[Matt1878]

I dont want to lose it completely personally, I think to go back and lose the ability to rule out shocking decisions that cost games, would quickly be hard to take, but it should be massively tempered.

Generally its not the technology thats the issue, its the human interpretation of the replays. Totally agree VAR officials should be passive in the process. I would prefer the captain to request a referal personally as I think any call to use it should come from the field of play. VAR officials should not be able to initiate intervention themselves, based on selective camera evidence, its just not in the spirit of the game.

[AjaxAndy]

I think just giving them 60 seconds to make the decision and no more would help massively... If you can't see an error within that time it's not clear and obvious.

[777Kidnappings]

I think just giving them 60 seconds to make the decision and no more would help massively... If you can't see an error within that time it's not clear and obvious.

I think that creates a whole new mess. When top teams ar done within the 60 seconds and big decisions that go against them the angle is found after 70

For me the answer is it shouldnt be the clear and obvious error. Just deemed wrong on the balance of probability and then the ref should always go to the screen to decide

I think the clear and obvious line justifies a wrong decision purely because a ref gave it

Also stop being so cowardly in terms of implementing it fairly. Think we all thought video evidence would take away the bias towards the big sides but its just been another tool to give them the benefit of the doubt.

None of the var problems are problems with video evidence. They are problems with crap referees, scared referees, referees wanting to make the decision isnt for their lives

[Gash]

They need to put a time on it, that's the whole problem with it, this taking 3-4-5 minutes and drawing lines, looking at different angles, normal speed, slow speed it's an absolute nonsense. Give them a minute to review it, if they can't see a clear reason to overturn the on pitch decision then it stands and get on with the fucking game. If the TV want to spend 10 minutes at half time analysing it then that's up to them but the length of time they're taking is killing the game.

[AjaxAndy]

I think that creates a whole new mess. When top teams ar done within the 60 seconds and big decisions that go against them the angle is found after 70

For me the answer is it shouldnt be the clear and obvious error. Just deemed wrong on the balance of probability and then the ref should always go to the screen to decide

I think the clear and obvious line justifies a wrong decision purely because a ref gave it

Also stop being so cowardly in terms of implementing it fairly. Think we all thought video evidence would take away the bias towards the big sides but its just been another tool to give them the benefit of the doubt.

None of the var problems are problems with video evidence. They are problems with crap referees, scared referees, referees wanting to make the decision isnt for their lives

In the main I disagree, mainly because if you can spend infinite amounts of time looking for something you'll usually find a justification for whatever your unconscious bias is.

If after 60 seconds you still can't decide if it's offside or not, or if it's a foul then you just need to stop looking.

I would happily allow var to overturn any decisions regardless of clear and obvious though, or as you said send the refs to the screen HOWEVER with zero information or coaching on what they are supposed to look for.

[AjaxAndy]

Imagine a world where the ref doesn't give something because they want VAR to bail them out, but instead of VAR not being able to because it's not 'clear and obvious', they could just look at it and if within 60 seconds think it's a foul just tell the ref to give it.

Simple, quick and effective.

[Stumpy]

They need to put a time on it, that's the whole problem with it, this taking 3-4-5 minutes and drawing lines, looking at different angles, normal speed, slow speed it's an absolute nonsense. Give them a minute to review it, if they can't see a clear reason to overturn the on pitch decision then it stands and get on with the fucking game. If the TV want to spend 10 minutes at half time analysing it then that's up to them but the length of time they're taking is killing the game.

Bang on the money.
Clear and obvious mistakes that's all it would be used for, that's what we were told from the start.
If you can't tell straight away from watching a replay that an error has happened then it's not a clear and obvious mistake is it.
The part that really pisses me off with it is the fact that everybody involved in this abomination is totally oblivious to the harm it is doing to the game.
It's all about them, they're desire to get everything forensically right has sucked all the joy out of the game.
And they still can't get get it right, even when they take ages to come to a decision.
It's the worst thing that's happened to football, ever.
We managed for well over a century without it, let's go back to being able to celebrate a goal without having to wait for some killjoy to see if he can find somebody a fag paper offside in the build up to scoring

[blueToffee]

They need to put a time on it, that's the whole problem with it, this taking 3-4-5 minutes and drawing lines, looking at different angles, normal speed, slow speed it's an absolute nonsense. Give them a minute to review it, if they can't see a clear reason to overturn the on pitch decision then it stands and get on with the fucking game. If the TV want to spend 10 minutes at half time analysing it then that's up to them but the length of time they're taking is killing the game.

There was a story the other day about the PL trying to bring in a rule change to ban long throws into the box. It’s a similar thing, the problem is really teams bringing forward the one guy, him using a towel to dry the ball, delay, delay, etc. I’ve no problem with long throws, just give them like 10 seconds or it goes to an opposition throw in instead.

With VAR, just make it under 15 seconds or something and keep things flowing.

[Cods]

We're searching for perfection that can not be achieved, especially within the time frame of a game, based on a rulebook that requires subjective judgement.

There will always be an unhappy party.

A good ref (or VAR) is one you don't see.

Perhaps the 2 unsuccessful reviews system has merit, but then it will be down to who uses their reviews the most strategically, and the proviso that the ref doesn't make more than 2 questionable decisions. I can still see that leading to farcical situations.

Then there are the decisions where the rule book and VAR analysis don't align. Is the smallest amount of innocuous contact (in a contract sport), that is only accessible by slow motion replays from multiple angles, a foul?

That's the referees call, not VAR. Are we going to VAR every decision, or only those in the box?

It's a mess, currently.

[Cods]

Take that Garnacho dive against Port Vale, where VAR was actually available.

It was an absolute disgrace on all fronts. The scoreline is irrelevant. The incident is far from it.

Cheating pure and simple, simulation, acting like he'd been shot while actually standing on the defender's foot,...!

VAR not doing their job at all. Ignoring it?

Assuming the ref didnt see it correctly despite calling it, saw the player drop down wailing in an obviously exaggerated manner, and rewarded the behaviour rather than carding him,...pathetic.

Where players have prior for this sort of thing, VAR needs to review immediately. Not to assume guilt initially, but at least for it to be checked with some level of scrutiny. Otherwise what's the point.

Disgrace, all round.

VAR being available, and absolute obvious clangers still occur.

[Matt1878]

We're searching for perfection that can not be achieved, especially within the time frame of a game, based on a rulebook that requires subjective judgement.

There will always be an unhappy party.

A good ref (or VAR) is one you don't see.

Perhaps the 2 unsuccessful reviews system has merit, but then it will be down to who uses their reviews the most strategically, and the proviso that the ref doesn't make more than 2 questionable decisions. I can still see that leading to farcical situations.

Then there are the decisions where the rule book and VAR analysis don't align. Is the smallest amount of innocuous contact (in a contract sport), that is only accessible by slow motion replays from multiple angles, a foul?

That's the referees call, not VAR. Are we going to VAR every decision, or only those in the box?

It's a mess, currently.

I think captains referral is the best solution in principle. If you appeal and lose it because it isnt clear and obvious, then thats cost you the chance to appeal later in the game. Thats how Cricket works and it works really well in my view.

The practicalities of that need to be worked out, as cricket is stop start and there is a natural break to appeal, discuss and refer to the 3rd umpire. Finding time to appeal during play and ensuring it happens within a sensible timeframe, would be the challenge.

Or its just restricted to offsides and in game intervention is scrapped altogether. Problem was they introduced it all at once and never got time to perfect any aspect of it

[4evablu]

I’ve said it before and will keep beating this drum….use the TMO System as they do in rugby…show it on the big screen…listen to the discussion between ref and var person over the loudspeaker system…..and stop reffing the game by video…everyone can see and hear what’s happening as opposed to it being “behind closed doors” and they’d be shit scared to drag it out…