VAR and is there a way to fix it?

[Stumpy]

Scrap it, it will never happen, but it;s the best outcome.

Football has become more of a chore to watch, last night in the Suprs v Chelsea game it was downright ridiculous how long the breaks in play were.

I hate VAR and I can't see that changing anytime soon. When it first came in, we were told we would need to give it time to bed in, it's had time and now it's worse then ever and most importantly, it's worse then before we had VAR, much worse.

Totally and utterly agree.
I didn't like it when it first came in but was prepared to give it a chance.
It has been a complete disaster, with farcical,blatently wrong decisions made week after week.
I honestly despise it, it has sucked joy and the soul out of the game

[blueToffee]

You can't be changing premier league rules about penalties when the rest of the world plays how its always been played. You'd end up.with teams playing with two different sets of rules in the same week with the European and Cup competitions.

It won’t happen, but I was suggesting the change for everywhere. The reward for minor fouls (often not really fouls, more players looking for contact) in the box with no clear goal scoring opportunity often seems to be out of proportion to the offence.

[Cods]

You can't be changing premier league rules about penalties when the rest of the world plays how its always been played. You'd end up.with teams playing with two different sets of rules in the same week with the European and Cup competitions.

It won’t happen, but I was suggesting the change for everywhere. The reward for minor fouls (often not really fouls, more players looking for contact) in the box with no clear goal scoring opportunity often seems to be out of proportion to the offence.

*like*

[4evablu]

We were all chatting about VAR yesterday and TBH we all basically ended up with a similar conclusion. For us it's all about how they now "define" or rather don't define how they reach a conclusive decision.
For example the definition of a tackle with 2 feet off the ground is "was it deemed with intent to injure or cause damage to the player on the ball"( or words to that effect) - what the heck does that actually mean ? I/we believe no professional footballer goes into a tackle to deliberately hurt another professional. Therefore it's left to the decision making of the ref on the pitch at the time. However a ref on the pitch may decide in his opinion NO it wasn't. VAR then review it a number of times even in slow motion which makes it looks worse and hey presto his decision is changed and the player is off. Yet if that decision is the opposite ie: The ref decides it was intentional to cause injury he sends the player off the team is down to 10 men. VAR/PLMO review it after the game and then decide actually it wasn't deserving of a red and it's rescinded.
But by then both the player and team have already been punished by going down to 10 men! TOO LATE

A possible solution:
1. re-defining and making it clear what is actually deemed as the "intent clause" so its understandable to all parties.
2. Leave the decision to the ref on the pitch whether he gets it right or wrong. Its his final decision as the on the pitch official
3. Keep VAR out of it
Same with the offside rule. It needs totally reviewing to make it clear to all how a player can be offside. Ie: if his hand/arm is "offside" the player is not offside as he hasn't gained an advantage because you cant score a goal with your hand or arm. ( unless your mo salah!!)

Not exactly Changing the rules just clarifying and giving clear guidance and explanations of what the rules are. This would help the refs, VAR and the fans and cut out all these delays in the game that continually drive people nuts.

[Cods]

We were all chatting about VAR yesterday and TBH we all basically ended up with a similar conclusion. For us it's all about how they now "define" or rather don't define how they reach a conclusive decision.
For example the definition of a tackle with 2 feet off the ground is "was it deemed with intent to injure or cause damage to the player on the ball"( or words to that effect) - what the heck does that actually mean ? I/we believe no professional footballer goes into a tackle to deliberately hurt another professional. Therefore it's left to the decision making of the ref on the pitch at the time. However a ref on the pitch may decide in his opinion NO it wasn't. VAR then review it a number of times even in slow motion which makes it looks worse and hey presto his decision is changed and the player is off. Yet if that decision is the opposite ie: The ref decides it was intentional to cause injury he sends the player off the team is down to 10 men. VAR/PLMO review it after the game and then decide actually it wasn't deserving of a red and it's rescinded.
But by then both the player and team have already been punished by going down to 10 men! TOO LATE

A possible solution:
1. re-defining and making it clear what is actually deemed as the "intent clause" so its understandable to all parties.
2. Leave the decision to the ref on the pitch whether he gets it right or wrong. Its his final decision as the on the pitch official
3. Keep VAR out of it
Same with the offside rule. It needs totally reviewing to make it clear to all how a player can be offside. Ie: if his hand/arm is "offside" the player is not offside as he hasn't gained an advantage because you cant score a goal with your hand or arm. ( unless your mo salah!!)

Not exactly Changing the rules just clarifying and giving clear guidance and explanations of what the rules are. This would help the refs, VAR and the fans and cut out all these delays in the game that continually drive people nuts.

I agree with the premise of this, but then the industries based on the business model of 'chatting the afters with/in front of agrieved and confused fans' would ultimately die.

It's all about the benjamins. The reason VAR remains is probably that whilst appearing to make decisions appear more often correct, and creating the illusion of credibility, it's actually adding another layer of complexity and therefore content for the media businesses that use it.

[4evablu]

We were all chatting about VAR yesterday and TBH we all basically ended up with a similar conclusion. For us it's all about how they now "define" or rather don't define how they reach a conclusive decision.
For example the definition of a tackle with 2 feet off the ground is "was it deemed with intent to injure or cause damage to the player on the ball"( or words to that effect) - what the heck does that actually mean ? I/we believe no professional footballer goes into a tackle to deliberately hurt another professional. Therefore it's left to the decision making of the ref on the pitch at the time. However a ref on the pitch may decide in his opinion NO it wasn't. VAR then review it a number of times even in slow motion which makes it looks worse and hey presto his decision is changed and the player is off. Yet if that decision is the opposite ie: The ref decides it was intentional to cause injury he sends the player off the team is down to 10 men. VAR/PLMO review it after the game and then decide actually it wasn't deserving of a red and it's rescinded.
But by then both the player and team have already been punished by going down to 10 men! TOO LATE

A possible solution:
1. re-defining and making it clear what is actually deemed as the "intent clause" so its understandable to all parties.
2. Leave the decision to the ref on the pitch whether he gets it right or wrong. Its his final decision as the on the pitch official
3. Keep VAR out of it
Same with the offside rule. It needs totally reviewing to make it clear to all how a player can be offside. Ie: if his hand/arm is "offside" the player is not offside as he hasn't gained an advantage because you cant score a goal with your hand or arm. ( unless your mo salah!!)

Not exactly Changing the rules just clarifying and giving clear guidance and explanations of what the rules are. This would help the refs, VAR and the fans and cut out all these delays in the game that continually drive people nuts.

I agree with the premise of this, but then the industries based on the business model of 'chatting the afters with/in front of agrieved and confused fans' would ultimately die.

It's all about the benjamins. The reason VAR remains is probably that whilst appearing to make decisions appear more often correct, and creating the illusion of credibility, it's actually adding another layer of complexity and therefore content for the media businesses that use it.

Couldn't agree more with this. The conversations post match are mainly about VAR nowadays not so much the game or the refs.
PS see klippety klopp is moaning about again after last night.

[Cods]

We were all chatting about VAR yesterday and TBH we all basically ended up with a similar conclusion. For us it's all about how they now "define" or rather don't define how they reach a conclusive decision.
For example the definition of a tackle with 2 feet off the ground is "was it deemed with intent to injure or cause damage to the player on the ball"( or words to that effect) - what the heck does that actually mean ? I/we believe no professional footballer goes into a tackle to deliberately hurt another professional. Therefore it's left to the decision making of the ref on the pitch at the time. However a ref on the pitch may decide in his opinion NO it wasn't. VAR then review it a number of times even in slow motion which makes it looks worse and hey presto his decision is changed and the player is off. Yet if that decision is the opposite ie: The ref decides it was intentional to cause injury he sends the player off the team is down to 10 men. VAR/PLMO review it after the game and then decide actually it wasn't deserving of a red and it's rescinded.
But by then both the player and team have already been punished by going down to 10 men! TOO LATE

A possible solution:
1. re-defining and making it clear what is actually deemed as the "intent clause" so its understandable to all parties.
2. Leave the decision to the ref on the pitch whether he gets it right or wrong. Its his final decision as the on the pitch official
3. Keep VAR out of it
Same with the offside rule. It needs totally reviewing to make it clear to all how a player can be offside. Ie: if his hand/arm is "offside" the player is not offside as he hasn't gained an advantage because you cant score a goal with your hand or arm. ( unless your mo salah!!)

Not exactly Changing the rules just clarifying and giving clear guidance and explanations of what the rules are. This would help the refs, VAR and the fans and cut out all these delays in the game that continually drive people nuts.

I agree with the premise of this, but then the industries based on the business model of 'chatting the afters with/in front of agrieved and confused fans' would ultimately die.

It's all about the benjamins. The reason VAR remains is probably that whilst appearing to make decisions appear more often correct, and creating the illusion of credibility, it's actually adding another layer of complexity and therefore content for the media businesses that use it.

Couldn't agree more with this. The conversations post match are mainly about VAR nowadays not so much the game or the refs.
PS see klippety klopp is moaning about again after last night.

Thanks. Will check it out. Schadenfreude I think he might call it.

[biziclop]

VAR should work like goal-line technology: automatically and instantly establish if something happened/didn't happen, then leave the decision to the referee.

We could have technology that tells us if the ball was out or not, we could probably even create one that will determine which players were in an offside position, and that should be it.

[TheRam]

I think managers should just get on with it and accept a lot of these decisions.

The rashford one was a red card, that Newcastle goal was legitimate, the liverpool one last night was handball.

Just get on with it and stop making officials and VAR the main character in football.

I’m one to criticise the officials myself but I think it’s gone way too far recently.

[Cods]

I think managers should just get on with it and accept a lot of these decisions.

The rashford one was a red card, that Newcastle goal was legitimate, the liverpool one last night was handball.

Just get on with it and stop making officials and VAR the main character in football.

I’m one to criticise the officials myself but I think it’s gone way too far recently.

Agree with that.

I think its pretty well covered by Postecoglu here, and pretty easy to contrast with Arteta's outburst last game (edit: and of course Klopp's the other week) . Chalk and cheese.

[youtube]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=23uDp33PdK0&t=102s[/youtube]

[Cods]

VAR should work like goal-line technology: automatically and instantly establish if something happened/didn't happen, then leave the decision to the referee.

We could have technology that tells us if the ball was out or not, we could probably even create one that will determine which players were in an offside position, and that should be it.

Agree MC, if it is to be used it could be for non-subjective instances like this where the technology can be used categorically to determine something one way or the other.

It has to be considered whether it should be implemented for some clubs/leagues, and not for others. IMO if it cant be implemented for all, then it probably should be implemented for none, we shouldn't have tiers of officiating beyond that of the natural variability in interpretation you would expect to see between humans/referees. Its not that important that we need it that badly.

[biziclop]

VAR should work like goal-line technology: automatically and instantly establish if something happened/didn't happen, then leave the decision to the referee.

We could have technology that tells us if the ball was out or not, we could probably even create one that will determine which players were in an offside position, and that should be it.

Agree MC, if it is to be used it could be for non-subjective instances like this where the technology can be used categorically to determine something one way or the other.

It has to be considered whether it should be implemented for some clubs/leagues, and not for others. IMO if it cant be implemented for all, then it probably should be implemented for none, we shouldn't have tiers of officiating beyond that of the natural variability in interpretation you would expect to see between humans/referees. Its not that important that we need it that badly.

Again, I can only point to the very successful goal line technology rollout. Has there ever been a story involving it? No. Because it just fucking works. (And because it just fucking works, it's not a big deal if some teams don't have it either, nothing changes in officiating.)

[4evablu]

Out of interest did anyone watch the Horsham game last night?
NO VAR. The ref was great a "lower league" ref. He managed the game brilliantly, No fuss No racing over to payers to get his decision over No over gesticulating. When a player went down there was always a split second before he blew If he blew at all. Some players went down easy and he just played on and told them to get up. Some of the "fouls" committed if they had of been in the prem league would of been bookings or even reds Why?because in this game the players weren't screaming and rolling over ten times in agony conning the ref into a decision.
At one point a barnsley player went down near the side line just in front of us and you could clearly hear the ref say " are you ok lad? yes? well get up then" haha we laffed our heads off. You could see the respect for the ref grow throughout the game by the players. He actually got clapped off the pitch.
SO point being to me if the golden balls prima donnas of the premier league stopped screaming and cheating decisions out of refs and helped and respected them more we probably wouldn't need VAR at all.

[Shogun]

https://twitter.com/Benny_Blancooo/status/1724794015042900069 https://twitter.com/AFCtariq/status/1721180539023999394

[Audrey Horne]

Crazy