I'm a fan of VAR (DRS) in cricket, but that's a sport that lends itself to it. For one thing there's a little break in play after every ball is bowled so it doesn't ruin the continuity of the event, it actually adds to the suspense. For another the action follows a predictable pattern so the cameras are always in the right place. They have a meaningful stepped reviewing procedure that is easy for all to follow. Even then though, the ball tracking part is still only the computer's best guess at what might have happened, it is not 100% accurate and is not error free. That said, I think they've got it just right in the way it's used. It's especially good when Tim Paine leads his country to test match defeat by making frivolous appeals.
Football's not like that though. It's more messy, more spontaneous and more frenetic. You could mount a camera in every seat in a stadium and it still wouldn't be perfect. It slows down the greatest sporting spectacle there is, right at the crucial stage. It sets an expectation that we should be measuring things that are imperceptible to the human eye; that we should be seeking perfection where none exists. Let's just get on with a game of football. If the man in the middle says it's offside that's good enough for me, and if he sometimes gets it wrong I'll take that as something to talk about in the pub afterwards.
And even DRS is flawed. Ask Tom Paine. A howler of a decision that would have meant England lost should have been "reviewed" by someone & not just be down to not having any reviews left.
Generally offsides in football are pretty much spot on nowadays & if not & they are tight calls whose fault is that....the linesman or the team trying to push up & catching someone offside...??
Agree with you 100% Stig.
I took your advice and asked him. Know what he said? "Don't ask me, mate. I think it's Tim Paine you should be asking".
I'm a fan of VAR (DRS) in cricket, but that's a sport that lends itself to it. For one thing there's a little break in play after every ball is bowled so it doesn't ruin the continuity of the event, it actually adds to the suspense. For another the action follows a predictable pattern so the cameras are always in the right place. They have a meaningful stepped reviewing procedure that is easy for all to follow. Even then though, the ball tracking part is still only the computer's best guess at what might have happened, it is not 100% accurate and is not error free. That said, I think they've got it just right in the way it's used. It's especially good when Tim Paine leads his country to test match defeat by making frivolous appeals.
Football's not like that though. It's more messy, more spontaneous and more frenetic. You could mount a camera in every seat in a stadium and it still wouldn't be perfect. It slows down the greatest sporting spectacle there is, right at the crucial stage. It sets an expectation that we should be measuring things that are imperceptible to the human eye; that we should be seeking perfection where none exists. Let's just get on with a game of football. If the man in the middle says it's offside that's good enough for me, and if he sometimes gets it wrong I'll take that as something to talk about in the pub afterwards.
And even DRS is flawed. Ask Tom Paine. A howler of a decision that would have meant England lost should have been "reviewed" by someone & not just be down to not having any reviews left.
Generally offsides in football are pretty much spot on nowadays & if not & they are tight calls whose fault is that....the linesman or the team trying to push up & catching someone offside...??
Agree with you 100% Stig.
I took your advice and asked him. Know what he said? "Don't ask me, mate. I think it's Tim Paine you should be asking".
Bizarrely I asked Tom Paine and he recommended taking the Fifth amendment.
Napoli's penalty allowed to stand despite it being a clear dive. Ter Stegen well off his line when saving a penalty from Marco Reus. No red card for Coquelin for a dangerous studs up challenge that injured Mason Mount.
I agree totally. It never ceases to amaze me how the football authorities can walk straight into a mess. It makes sense for the ref to review his decision, but rightly, if another ref buzzes him and says, you might want to look at that again, it seems like he is being told he is wrong and puts an extra pressure on him. But by somebody else deciding to introduce this not an obvious error, the line gets drawn to a point which undermines VER.
The penalty last night was a case in point. I thought it was a penalty when I first saw it, then in slow motion replay, it was a typical player looking for a penalty incident. Robertson not contacting the player and the player falling into him to instigate the contact. I don't blame the ref for giving it, but if HE had looked at it again in slow motion and with a clearer angle, I think he would probably have overturned his own decision. If not, fair enough, it is his decision. But given all the views of the incident to make a judgement, I believe most refs wouldn't give it.
I still believe VAR can benefit football, but am coming to the conclusion that it won't because the powers in the game don't have the ability to correctly implement it. From becoming a supporter of it I am becoming a reluctant opponent.
Refs play a part. Surely they should be at the forefront of improving its implementation. But I have long suspected they are part of the problem. The Offside law is ok now, but look at the mess getting there. The handball law is totally ridiculous etc... Because so many of them lack common sense and a knowledge of playing football where it hurts, they just can't read some incidents and their solution is to take as much common sense out of it so the ref refs by numbers!
If teams have their own appeal it solves the problem. yes, if they use it wrongly - as Australia did recently in the cricket and it cost them the Headingly test - it may mean they suffer from a wrong decision. But it is viewed as Australia's fault and that is how it should be in football. If you strive for 100% perfect decisions in a game like football, you are striving for the impossible. We can use the technology to empower teams to right a major injustice if it occurs and surely that is good enough.
But it could be a good thing if the authorities were not stupid!
This 100% It's such a shame that the technology is there to stop the big mistakes BUT the remit for the ref behind the camera is don't go against the ref on the field in too many cases.
You have to accept that nothing in football can ever be perfect. Then you have to ask why do we need VAR? I would answer that by saying, to try to prevent wrong decisions that can have massive negative implications for clubs, their employees and fans.
Without VAR, clubs have no power to do anything about a terrible decision that might cost them the League title or get them relegated. That is why if we gave them one review a game, they would then have the power. Yes, if they waste it, then they could still fall foul of a wrong decision, but that would be their own fault. Nobody made a big deal of Australia losing the third test because they used up their appeals did they. Not even they did.
You have three outcomes to an appeal:
Appeal upheld (appeal not lost) Appeal not upheld (appeal lost) Appeal not upheld but inconclusive (appeal not lost)
Then it is the responsibility of the teams how they use them, and they do have the power to right a massive wrong whereas before they didn't.
You have to accept that nothing in football can ever be perfect. Then you gave to ask why do we need VAR? I would answer that by saying, to try to prevent wrong decisions that can have massive negative implications for clubs, their employees and fans.
Without VAR, clubs have no power to do anything about a terrible decision that might cost them the League title or get them relegated. That is why if we gave them one review a game, they would then have the power. Yes, if they waste it, then they could still fall foul of a wrong decision, but that would be their own fault. Nobody made a big deal of Australia losing the third test because they used up their appeals did they. Not even they did.
You have three outcomes to an appeal:
Appeal upheld (appeal not lost) Appeal not upheld (appeal lost) Appeal not upheld but inconclusive (appeal not lost)
Then it is the responsibility of the teams how they use them, and they do have the power to right a massive wrong whereas before they didn't.
Would the "Hand of God" have been regarded as England's own fault if they had used up their appeal and the incident was showing in graphic detail on TV and phones around the stadium!
Yes, it would have mitigated the damage of the error to the game in general. But actually, that is an example of how an injustice in football history would have been corrected as there was not anything England would have appealed before that. My message is look for improvement, but never perfection. You will never be satisfied if you do.
And I'm not sure if Southampton's was one either. Defender might have just touched him but the attacker virtually threw himself into him after the touch.
Not a VAR one really, but I'm waiting for the first instance of a player who has just been substituted under the new "laws" being "flagged" for being offside as he us still walking around the side of the pitch having not gone off via the 4th official.
Many years ago players warming up on the touchline were told to put on a training top so that the linesman on the opposite side of the pitch wouldnt get them confused with a player.
And I'm not sure if Southampton's was one either. Defender might have just touched him but the attacker virtually threw himself into him after the touch.
Bournemouth’s non penalty VAR review happened after Sotons attack had broken down didn’t it ? im waiting for a penalty to be looked at by VAR and given when the other team has broken away and scored what they believe to be a legitimate goal (apologies if this has already been mentioned 100 times, I’ve just jumped to the end of the thread)
The decisive first goal with Napoli vs Liverpool wasn’t overturned by VAR. The people looking at incident need all available camera angles.
The Napoli ran at the player & dived - similar to the way Ronaldo won penalties in the World Cup.
VAR does work in some instances but its not perfect & still needs more work. It definitely shouldn’t be for every decision but only clear errors.
Leicester vs Tottenham - Leicester goal disallowed clearly offside - Tottenham player millimetres offside - VAR should be used for clear and obvious errors. I am no fan of Tottenham but that should stand. I guess strikers will need to adjust their runs now. Leicester equalise. Deserve a goal for all their hard work and happy to see Tottenham not winning - but I am not sure it is justice.
So is VAR only supposed to overturn "clear and obvious" errors?
If it is then how come we are waiting for minutes for someone to get their set square out and draw lines down the pitch that may or may not prove someone is a millimetre nearer the goal than someone else? Like in the Leicester v Spurs game just now.
If it's not a clear and obvious error then let it go and stop fucking about.
That Son offside highlights just how ludicrous the use of VAR is. Anyone who believes that sort of decision is good for football is not a fan of the same sport I've been watching all my life.
So is VAR only supposed to overturn "clear and obvious" errors?
If it is then how come we are waiting for minutes for someone to get their set square out and draw lines down the pitch that may or may not prove someone is a millimetre nearer the goal than someone else? Like in the Leicester v Spurs game just now.
If it's not a clear and obvious error then let it go and stop fucking about.
I don't disagree with you. However, they had a look and he was just offside. So they can't then give a goal, knowing it's offside, can they ?
Alternatively, should they bring in a measure of how offside you have to be before it's given offside ? :-)
So is VAR only supposed to overturn "clear and obvious" errors?
If it is then how come we are waiting for minutes for someone to get their set square out and draw lines down the pitch that may or may not prove someone is a millimetre nearer the goal than someone else? Like in the Leicester v Spurs game just now.
If it's not a clear and obvious error then let it go and stop fucking about.
I don't disagree with you. However, they had a look and he was just offside. So they can't then give a goal, knowing it's offside, can they ?
Alternatively, should they bring in a measure of how offside you have to be before it's given offside ? :-)
They did a few years ago. Had to be clear "daylight" between opposing players.
Comments
Bizarrely I asked Tom Paine and he recommended taking the Fifth amendment.
Napoli's penalty allowed to stand despite it being a clear dive.
Ter Stegen well off his line when saving a penalty from Marco Reus.
No red card for Coquelin for a dangerous studs up challenge that injured Mason Mount.
The penalty last night was a case in point. I thought it was a penalty when I first saw it, then in slow motion replay, it was a typical player looking for a penalty incident. Robertson not contacting the player and the player falling into him to instigate the contact. I don't blame the ref for giving it, but if HE had looked at it again in slow motion and with a clearer angle, I think he would probably have overturned his own decision. If not, fair enough, it is his decision. But given all the views of the incident to make a judgement, I believe most refs wouldn't give it.
I still believe VAR can benefit football, but am coming to the conclusion that it won't because the powers in the game don't have the ability to correctly implement it. From becoming a supporter of it I am becoming a reluctant opponent.
Refs play a part. Surely they should be at the forefront of improving its implementation. But I have long suspected they are part of the problem. The Offside law is ok now, but look at the mess getting there. The handball law is totally ridiculous etc... Because so many of them lack common sense and a knowledge of playing football where it hurts, they just can't read some incidents and their solution is to take as much common sense out of it so the ref refs by numbers!
If teams have their own appeal it solves the problem. yes, if they use it wrongly - as Australia did recently in the cricket and it cost them the Headingly test - it may mean they suffer from a wrong decision. But it is viewed as Australia's fault and that is how it should be in football. If you strive for 100% perfect decisions in a game like football, you are striving for the impossible. We can use the technology to empower teams to right a major injustice if it occurs and surely that is good enough.
it cant be used for some aspects of the game and not others, if anything it’s going to create more controversy
It's such a shame that the technology is there to stop the big mistakes BUT the remit for the ref behind the camera is don't go against the ref on the field in too many cases.
Unless this mindset changes, VAR will fail.
Without VAR, clubs have no power to do anything about a terrible decision that might cost them the League title or get them relegated. That is why if we gave them one review a game, they would then have the power. Yes, if they waste it, then they could still fall foul of a wrong decision, but that would be their own fault. Nobody made a big deal of Australia losing the third test because they used up their appeals did they. Not even they did.
You have three outcomes to an appeal:
Appeal upheld (appeal not lost)
Appeal not upheld (appeal lost)
Appeal not upheld but inconclusive (appeal not lost)
Then it is the responsibility of the teams how they use them, and they do have the power to right a massive wrong whereas before they didn't.
Not sure it would work so cosily in football!
As many of us have said before.....refs making sure they all stick together.
Of course we wont know because they dont explain it
Many years ago players warming up on the touchline were told to put on a training top so that the linesman on the opposite side of the pitch wouldnt get them confused with a player.
It wont be long.......
im waiting for a penalty to be looked at by VAR and given when the other team has broken away and scored what they believe to be a legitimate goal
(apologies if this has already been mentioned 100 times, I’ve just jumped to the end of the thread)
The Napoli ran at the player & dived - similar to the way Ronaldo won penalties in the World Cup.
VAR does work in some instances but its not perfect & still needs more work. It definitely shouldn’t be for every decision but only clear errors.
Leicester vs Tottenham - Leicester goal disallowed clearly offside - Tottenham player millimetres offside - VAR should be used for clear and obvious errors. I am no fan of Tottenham but that should stand. I guess strikers will need to adjust their runs now. Leicester equalise. Deserve a goal for all their hard work and happy to see Tottenham not winning - but I am not sure it is justice.
If it is then how come we are waiting for minutes for someone to get their set square out and draw lines down the pitch that may or may not prove someone is a millimetre nearer the goal than someone else? Like in the Leicester v Spurs game just now.
If it's not a clear and obvious error then let it go and stop fucking about.
Var has to improve or else it will ruin the game.
However, they had a look and he was just offside.
So they can't then give a goal, knowing it's offside, can they ?
Alternatively, should they bring in a measure of how offside you have to be before it's given offside ? :-)