I hate it, remember when you scored you might have a quick glance at the linesman to see if his flag is up? If not, going absolutely mad. Now after each goal you worry about what might happened a minute ago which they’ll pull it back for. Its a farce
You've picked two examples where the ball crossed the line, which is nothing to do with VAR but goal line technology, which I have no problem with as its an instant decision. Fine, there are some poor decisions in those clips, but that's part of football, referee mistakes are part of the game. Every club has decisions go there way and some that don't - football isn't meant to be an exact science, it takes out the raw emotion. And don't get me started on those silly offside lines.
You've picked two examples where the ball crossed the line, which is nothing to do with VAR but goal line technology, which I have no problem with as its an instant decision. Fine, there are some poor decisions in those clips, but that's part of football, referee mistakes are part of the game. Every club has decisions go there way and some that don't - football isn't meant to be an exact science, it takes out the raw emotion. And don't get me started on those silly offside lines.
I've read the rulebook and haven't found anything about referee mistakes being part of the game.
In no other sport would you find so much acceptance for poor officiating. Like referees are amateurs that aren't getting paid millions to officiate properly.
You've picked two examples where the ball crossed the line, which is nothing to do with VAR but goal line technology, which I have no problem with as its an instant decision. Fine, there are some poor decisions in those clips, but that's part of football, referee mistakes are part of the game. Every club has decisions go there way and some that don't - football isn't meant to be an exact science, it takes out the raw emotion. And don't get me started on those silly offside lines.
I've read the rulebook and haven't found anything about referee mistakes being part of the game.
In no other sport would you find so much acceptance for poor officiating. Like referees are amateurs that aren't getting paid millions to officiate properly.
Referees like players make mistakes. No ref and no player will be perfect.
You've picked two examples where the ball crossed the line, which is nothing to do with VAR but goal line technology, which I have no problem with as its an instant decision. Fine, there are some poor decisions in those clips, but that's part of football, referee mistakes are part of the game. Every club has decisions go there way and some that don't - football isn't meant to be an exact science, it takes out the raw emotion. And don't get me started on those silly offside lines.
I've read the rulebook and haven't found anything about referee mistakes being part of the game.
In no other sport would you find so much acceptance for poor officiating. Like referees are amateurs that aren't getting paid millions to officiate properly.
Football was fine before VAR, the standard of referees was generally ok. You'd debate it in the pub after the game then move on. Now tedious, tedious VAR comes along where it takes minutes for a decision which is subjective anyway! Just a different ref behind a computer.
@SELR_addicks - I understand (and respect) your point of view, although I don’t agree with it.
Keen on understanding the following though: If we can totally eliminate every single error in football, would you support this? Let’s say that in 20 years time, advanced cameras/computers can spot all mistakes and can ref a game without human interaction - no need for a referee on the field. Would you support this?
@SELR_addicks - I understand (and respect) your point of view, although I don’t agree with it.
Keen on understanding the following though: If we can totally eliminate every single error in football, would you support this? Let’s say that in 20 years time, advanced cameras/computers can spot all mistakes and can ref a game without human interaction - no need for a referee on the field. Would you support this?
If we are looking for perfection, we should allow for a period of review after each game before officially confirming the goals and result. We wouldn't actually know who won a match until the next day but at least there is less chance of a mistake.
And England have certainly never won a world cup - surely that was wiped off by VAR thirty years after we all thought it had happened?
One question @SELR_addicks, has your experience of watching football been improved or worsened by the introduction of VAR?
Improved.
No longer do we have to sit through an hour after every single game pointing out all the mistakes a referee has made in a big game.
People grumbling about 10 seconds making a (correct) decision mustve missed all those games a referee decided to ruin a game early with an awful decision.
@SELR_addicks - I understand (and respect) your point of view, although I don’t agree with it.
Keen on understanding the following though: If we can totally eliminate every single error in football, would you support this? Let’s say that in 20 years time, advanced cameras/computers can spot all mistakes and can ref a game without human interaction - no need for a referee on the field. Would you support this?
If we are looking for perfection, we should allow for a period of review after each game before officially confirming the goals and result. We wouldn't actually know who won a match until the next day but at least there is less chance of a mistake.
And England have certainly never won a world cup - surely that was wiped off by VAR thirty years after we all thought it had happened?
I think we need to get lawyers involved when it comes to intent of players re diving decisions etc. A proper investigation would ensure players were treated fairly and make cards fairer. The current system is too subjective...
@SELR_addicks - I understand (and respect) your point of view, although I don’t agree with it.
Keen on understanding the following though: If we can totally eliminate every single error in football, would you support this? Let’s say that in 20 years time, advanced cameras/computers can spot all mistakes and can ref a game without human interaction - no need for a referee on the field. Would you support this?
You would still need someone on the pitch making the decisions. But the more help he can get the better.
A 50 year old man running around the centre circle isn't exactly going to see every incident. Especially when the game is played so fast. The more help the better.
The problem currently is the referee's egos. And the ref in the VAR booth not having enough training.
One question @SELR_addicks, has your experience of watching football been improved or worsened by the introduction of VAR?
Improved.
No longer do we have to sit through an hour after every single game pointing out all the mistakes a referee has made in a big game.
People grumbling about 10 seconds making a (correct) decision mustve missed all those games a referee decided to ruin a game early with an awful decision.
Thanks - I think fair to say that we are on opposite sides of the fence on this one...
@SELR_addicks - I understand (and respect) your point of view, although I don’t agree with it.
Keen on understanding the following though: If we can totally eliminate every single error in football, would you support this? Let’s say that in 20 years time, advanced cameras/computers can spot all mistakes and can ref a game without human interaction - no need for a referee on the field. Would you support this?
You would still need someone on the pitch making the decisions. But the more help he can get the better.
A 50 year old man running around the centre circle isn't exactly going to see every incident. Especially when the game is played so fast. The more help the better.
The problem currently is the referee's egos. And the ref in the VAR booth not having enough training.
The ego of the ref? Must be a technological solution.
@SELR_addicks - I understand (and respect) your point of view, although I don’t agree with it.
Keen on understanding the following though: If we can totally eliminate every single error in football, would you support this? Let’s say that in 20 years time, advanced cameras/computers can spot all mistakes and can ref a game without human interaction - no need for a referee on the field. Would you support this?
You would still need someone on the pitch making the decisions. But the more help he can get the better.
A 50 year old man running around the centre circle isn't exactly going to see every incident. Especially when the game is played so fast. The more help the better.
The problem currently is the referee's egos. And the ref in the VAR booth not having enough training.
Ref's egos have always been part of the game. The ref in the VAR box are all just as qualified as the ref on the pitch.
@SELR_addicks - I understand (and respect) your point of view, although I don’t agree with it.
Keen on understanding the following though: If we can totally eliminate every single error in football, would you support this? Let’s say that in 20 years time, advanced cameras/computers can spot all mistakes and can ref a game without human interaction - no need for a referee on the field. Would you support this?
I would if it could do a perfect job. We are probably a long way from that though.
Whatever your view on VAR, surely we can all agree that adding another layer of subjectivity to the process is not the answer?
Imagine FIFA came out tomorrow and said “protocol is changed effective immediately: VAR is now only there for clear and obvious errors”.
Not only does a video assistant referee now have to decide if a referee made an incorrect decision, they also have to decide if it was a clear & obvious mistake or not.
That’s the most stupid decision process I think I’ve heard.
Imagine it’s the final of the Euros this summer, England vs Germany.
It’s 1-1 with five minutes left and Grealish gets tripped in the box but the referee doesn’t award a penalty.
Replays show that Grealish was touched and a foul was committed, to everyone with a set of working eyes it should be a penalty. But the video assistant deems that it wasn’t a clear and obvious error by the referee because his view was blocked by another player. No penalty is awarded even though this is a perfect use case for VAR to help.
@SELR_addicks - I understand (and respect) your point of view, although I don’t agree with it.
Keen on understanding the following though: If we can totally eliminate every single error in football, would you support this? Let’s say that in 20 years time, advanced cameras/computers can spot all mistakes and can ref a game without human interaction - no need for a referee on the field. Would you support this?
You would still need someone on the pitch making the decisions. But the more help he can get the better.
A 50 year old man running around the centre circle isn't exactly going to see every incident. Especially when the game is played so fast. The more help the better.
The problem currently is the referee's egos. And the ref in the VAR booth not having enough training.
Ref's egos have always been part of the game. The ref in the VAR box are all just as qualified as the ref on the pitch.
Exactly. I don't personally think the refs are good enough.
That's why VAR is so poor here but good elsewhere.
I would much, much, much prefer a few incorrect decisions made by a human referee over waiting for a VAR check after every goal/penalty decision, it's part of football.
The thought of watching the screen at the valley for a VAR check kills me inside a little bit.
@SELR_addicks - I understand (and respect) your point of view, although I don’t agree with it.
Keen on understanding the following though: If we can totally eliminate every single error in football, would you support this? Let’s say that in 20 years time, advanced cameras/computers can spot all mistakes and can ref a game without human interaction - no need for a referee on the field. Would you support this?
You would still need someone on the pitch making the decisions. But the more help he can get the better.
A 50 year old man running around the centre circle isn't exactly going to see every incident. Especially when the game is played so fast. The more help the better.
The problem currently is the referee's egos. And the ref in the VAR booth not having enough training.
Ref's egos have always been part of the game. The ref in the VAR box are all just as qualified as the ref on the pitch.
Exactly. I don't personally think the refs are good enough.
That's why VAR is so poor here but good elsewhere.
Whatever your view on VAR, surely we can all agree that adding another layer of subjectivity to the process is not the answer?
Imagine FIFA came out tomorrow and said “protocol is changed effective immediately: VAR is now only there for clear and obvious errors”.
Not only does a video assistant referee now have to decide if a referee made an incorrect decision, they also have to decide if it was a clear & obvious mistake or not.
That’s the most stupid decision process I think I’ve heard.
Imagine it’s the final of the Euros this summer, England vs Germany.
It’s 1-1 with five minutes left and Grealish gets tripped in the box but the referee doesn’t award a penalty.
Replays show that Grealish was touched and a foul was committed, to everyone with a set of working eyes it should be a penalty. But the video assistant deems that it wasn’t a clear and obvious error by the referee because his view was blocked by another player. No penalty is awarded even though this is a perfect use case for VAR to help.
That is why I would give an appeal (for key decisions only like sending offs or goals) to the teams. Let the ref officiate normally except for goal line technology or offside which are yes or no decisions. Although I like your frame suggestion for offside. Don't have an official in a control room, just have a technical team that can present the video footage to the ref for him to affirm or revise his decision.
By that one act you would get rid of a lot of the nonsense we have now. The ref wouldn't be under any pressure as another official hasn't suggested he look at it again. Teams won't waste the appeal because they might need it later. If they use up an appeal and an error is made, it would probably be accepted they are partly to blame as it currently is in cricket. I think this would be a far easier watch that what we have now.
Whatever your view on VAR, surely we can all agree that adding another layer of subjectivity to the process is not the answer?
Imagine FIFA came out tomorrow and said “protocol is changed effective immediately: VAR is now only there for clear and obvious errors”.
Not only does a video assistant referee now have to decide if a referee made an incorrect decision, they also have to decide if it was a clear & obvious mistake or not.
That’s the most stupid decision process I think I’ve heard.
Imagine it’s the final of the Euros this summer, England vs Germany.
It’s 1-1 with five minutes left and Grealish gets tripped in the box but the referee doesn’t award a penalty.
Replays show that Grealish was touched and a foul was committed, to everyone with a set of working eyes it should be a penalty. But the video assistant deems that it wasn’t a clear and obvious error by the referee because his view was blocked by another player. No penalty is awarded even though this is a perfect use case for VAR to help.
You're missing a fundamental point.
All decisions by the referee, by default, are correct. The video assistant referee doesn't have to decide if the referee made an incorrect decision. That will be triggered by some action on the pitch, usually for key incidents such as offside, goals, cautionable offences etc.
In your example, the trigger is the reaction of 'everyone with a set of working eyes' (eg the players in this case). The video assistant referee is stung into action and will decide that the referee has probably made a clear and obvious error and will instigate the VAR process. The fact that the referee was unsighted is merely an explanation for the clear and obvious error ... it doesn't vindicate his mistake. Good use of VAR ... when it is needed.
In other situations, the video assistant referee can continue to read his book and/or drink his tea confident that the referee is doing his job well enough. He isn't there is monitor continuously every single decision that the referee makes.
Appeals are by far the worst way of dealing with it.
Who gets to make the appeal? Manager, player? What if the other team are breaking clear on goal so the manager makes an appeal to stop the game?
Clear and obvious errors would be fine but yet again, what is clear and obvious? Offside is clear and obvious to some, either you're offside or you're not.
Comments
Can't wait to go back to this. Proper football this.
#properfootball
Nothing's ever perfect.
But what about when fans are denied a goal (legitimately) by VAR?
#properfootball
Fine, there are some poor decisions in those clips, but that's part of football, referee mistakes are part of the game. Every club has decisions go there way and some that don't - football isn't meant to be an exact science, it takes out the raw emotion. And don't get me started on those silly offside lines.
In no other sport would you find so much acceptance for poor officiating. Like referees are amateurs that aren't getting paid millions to officiate properly.
🎶one of us, one of us🎶
Probably driven by corporate lawyers given the zillions at stake.
Not a fan and hope it is removed.
Keen on understanding the following though:
If we can totally eliminate every single error in football, would you support this?
Let’s say that in 20 years time, advanced cameras/computers can spot all mistakes and can ref a game without human interaction - no need for a referee on the field. Would you support this?
And England have certainly never won a world cup - surely that was wiped off by VAR thirty years after we all thought it had happened?
No longer do we have to sit through an hour after every single game pointing out all the mistakes a referee has made in a big game.
People grumbling about 10 seconds making a (correct) decision mustve missed all those games a referee decided to ruin a game early with an awful decision.
A 50 year old man running around the centre circle isn't exactly going to see every incident. Especially when the game is played so fast. The more help the better.
The problem currently is the referee's egos. And the ref in the VAR booth not having enough training.
Imagine FIFA came out tomorrow and said “protocol is changed effective immediately: VAR is now only there for clear and obvious errors”.
Imagine it’s the final of the Euros this summer, England vs Germany.
That's why VAR is so poor here but good elsewhere.
The thought of watching the screen at the valley for a VAR check kills me inside a little bit.
By that one act you would get rid of a lot of the nonsense we have now. The ref wouldn't be under any pressure as another official hasn't suggested he look at it again. Teams won't waste the appeal because they might need it later. If they use up an appeal and an error is made, it would probably be accepted they are partly to blame as it currently is in cricket. I think this would be a far easier watch that what we have now.
All decisions by the referee, by default, are correct. The video assistant referee doesn't have to decide if the referee made an incorrect decision. That will be triggered by some action on the pitch, usually for key incidents such as offside, goals, cautionable offences etc.
In your example, the trigger is the reaction of 'everyone with a set of working eyes' (eg the players in this case). The video assistant referee is stung into action and will decide that the referee has probably made a clear and obvious error and will instigate the VAR process. The fact that the referee was unsighted is merely an explanation for the clear and obvious error ... it doesn't vindicate his mistake. Good use of VAR ... when it is needed.
In other situations, the video assistant referee can continue to read his book and/or drink his tea confident that the referee is doing his job well enough. He isn't there is monitor continuously every single decision that the referee makes.
Who gets to make the appeal? Manager, player? What if the other team are breaking clear on goal so the manager makes an appeal to stop the game?
Clear and obvious errors would be fine but yet again, what is clear and obvious?
Offside is clear and obvious to some, either you're offside or you're not.