Get rid of VAR NOW! We want our game back! (...or not, some are happy)

VAR - Love or Hate?


  • Total voters
    1,022

MackRobinson

Full Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2017
Messages
1,660
Location
Terminal D
Supports
Football
It might improve with technology but it will get more and more prevalent. In 5 years you will be a “sports purist” clamouring for the good old days of pre-var matches. I say this because I have seen sports ruined in the States. Starting with instant replay and superimposed lines on the tv with graphics out of control. It’s coming. There will be offside lines moving back and forth on your screen. There will be other graphics too just to keep the viewers informed and up to date on the latest var angle ect..You will accept it as improving the game. 5-10 years from now you will be a disgruntled feck like me.
What are you on about? Sports aren't ruined in the states because of instant replay. That's one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard. The NBA has probably some of worst examples of the overuse of instant replay and it's viewership has still increased over the last 5 years. The NFL has had replay since the mid 80s and is still the most popular sport in the US (in fact, they added MORE reviewable events after the Saints vs Rams debacle in the playoffs). Literally every major American sport has replay an there are no talks to remove it.

And no, I will never be a sports purists. They are insufferable, short-sighted, and almost always wrong.
 

MackRobinson

Full Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2017
Messages
1,660
Location
Terminal D
Supports
Football
NFL TV ratings, while still the most prominent in America of course, are down from a decade ago. By ~2M viewers. I'm not attributing this all to instant replay. Just saying.

NFL attendance is also down from a decade ago.
Well then why bring it up?

For the record, the NFL reviews 1.3 events per game for an average of time of 2:45 of stoppages. Let that sink in.
 

awop

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Sep 28, 2010
Messages
774
Location
Paris
Supports
Arsenal
I'm amazed the "debate" is still going on. I don't know why you bother, these 2 posters are obviously russian trolls sent to destroy democracy and our football as we know it.
@ForestRGoinUp & @Rafaeldagold please try to move the issue along and offer adjustements and changes that should/could be made to improve the system because, once again, for the 458th time, VAR has been voted in, it's here, it's not going anywhere. Other leagues have had the system for years and to my knowledge apart from some managers/players moaning when it goest against them, it never reached the point where the FAs thought about reverting the vote. So take VAR for granted for at least 2 to 3 years. Are you really going to post 50 posts per day about romanticism for the next 3 years ? Would not be that surprised that you will but come on...
 

R'hllor

Full Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2013
Messages
11,963
Well, someone said that he doesn't like VAR 'cause now all the referees are as good as each other, and how do you know who is the best referee anymore.'

Beat that argument!
Please tell me you made that up, please.
 

ForestRGoinUp

New Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2018
Messages
1,370
I'm amazed the "debate" is still going on. I don't know why you bother, these 2 posters are obviously russian trolls sent to destroy democracy and our football as we know it.
@ForestRGoinUp & @Rafaeldagold please try to move the issue along and offer adjustements and changes that should/could be made to improve the system because, once again, for the 458th time, VAR has been voted in, it's here, it's not going anywhere. Other leagues have had the system for years and to my knowledge apart from some managers/players moaning when it goest against them, it never reached the point where the FAs thought about reverting the vote. So take VAR for granted for at least 2 to 3 years. Are you really going to post 50 posts per day about romanticism for the next 3 years ? Would not be that surprised that you will but come on...
God forbid there’s debate over A change this significant.

I’m pretty sure even the most vocal against it (myself included) have said it does have a place in the sport - cups, coaching challenges, etc. But that overdone it risks becoming too dominant a presence. So by all means join in on that debate. Don’t act like there isn’t one.

And quit with this pretending that the refs were so awful previously when they factually weren’t. In fact they were near perfect themselves. It was part of the lie you were sold to get this approved in the first place.
 

ForestRGoinUp

New Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2018
Messages
1,370
Well then why bring it up?

For the record, the NFL reviews 1.3 events per game for an average of time of 2:45 of stoppages. Let that sink in.
Ratings declined significantly. Without the full research to back it up, yes I am making an assumption that the thing that changed the most about the viewing experience over that time had an effect. Not the only cause however, if I needed to state that again.

NFL games also have over 100 commercials on average, last ~4 hours and produce ~11 minutes of live action. So even while the construct of the game allows for the stoppages, 2:45 is quite significant. It’s especially significant when you consider it quiets the stadium and dulls the atmosphere when it kills momentum.
 

acnumber9

Full Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Messages
14,362
Again, I didn't say anyone had to shut up or stop complaining at all. Ye're all free to dislike and complain about VAR, ye're all free to stop celebrating goals, ye're all free to stop watching football. That's entirely your own perogative.

That poster specifically asked why the sport has to change though and the answer is that the sport has to change because (most) fans and clubs want it to change. They can't be "wrong" when it comes to a preference and that preference is currently the dominant one.
Where does this certainty that it’s the preference come from? A poll on the Internet?
 

awop

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Sep 28, 2010
Messages
774
Location
Paris
Supports
Arsenal
God forbid there’s debate over A change this significant.

I’m pretty sure even the most vocal against it (myself included) have said it does have a place in the sport - cups, coaching challenges, etc. But that overdone it risks becoming too dominant a presence. So by all means join in on that debate. Don’t act like there isn’t one.

And quit with this pretending that the refs were so awful previously when they factually weren’t. In fact they were near perfect themselves. It was part of the lie you were sold to get this approved in the first place.
There isn't one in the sense that multiple posters have offered various ways (good and bad) to try and improve the system but 9/10 of your replies are that you couldn't celebrate a goal the way you did in 1999.
Some english refs are awful and inconsistent. I probably would be too, whatever the training i had, if i knew i had only one chance to get to a decision in 4s after sprinting behind a 20y old athlete. You're bound to feck up, you're not a robot. Nobody sold me sh*t, the eyes i got at birth were free. They allowed me to see offside goals stand, leg breakers go unpunished and games ruined by mistakes.
Yet you still manage to go one more post without offering anything, stuck in a loop. Hold tight lad, this season is going to be really hard for you. United could win every game 4-0 and you'd still be miserable.
 

sullydnl

Ross Kemp's caf ID
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
20,186
Where does this certainty that it’s the preference come from? A poll on the Internet?
The preference from fans? Multiple polls. The preference from clubs? The fact that they voted to bring it in. It isn't something that has been foisted on football.
 

ForestRGoinUp

New Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2018
Messages
1,370
There isn't one in the sense that multiple posters have offered various ways (good and bad) to try and improve the system but 9/10 of your replies are that you couldn't celebrate a goal the way you did in 1999.
Some english refs are awful and inconsistent. I probably would be too, whatever the training i had, if i knew i had only one chance to get to a decision in 4s after sprinting behind a 20y old athlete. You're bound to feck up, you're not a robot. Nobody sold me sh*t, the eyes i got at birth were free. They allowed me to see offside goals stand, leg breakers go unpunished and games ruined by mistakes.
Yet you still manage to go one more post without offering anything, stuck in a loop. Hold tight lad, this season is going to be really hard for you. United could win every game 4-0 and you'd still be miserable.
Read it again but slow down so you can process the points I am making. Then take a deep breath and come back with a bit more spacing, punctuation, and coherence so that you can join the debate.
 

acnumber9

Full Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Messages
14,362
The preference from fans? Multiple polls. The preference from clubs? The fact that they voted to bring it in. It isn't something that has been foisted on football.
I know clubs voted to bring it in. I don’t remember fans having a choice. Online polls mean nothing.
 

awop

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Sep 28, 2010
Messages
774
Location
Paris
Supports
Arsenal
Read it again but slow down so you can process the points I am making. Then take a deep breath and come back with a bit more spacing, punctuation, and coherence so that you can join the debate.
Trying to find a point in the emptiness of your posts at normal speed is painful enough. I'll leave you punching the wall while i enjoy the season. ;)
 

Vato

Watches other men wank.Supports Real.Coincidence?
Joined
Feb 11, 2009
Messages
33,117
Location
None of your fecking business
Supports
Real Madrid
How is it stupid? Are you stupid?
Why would you go crazy celebrating knowing var could rule it out?
Your argument is stupid
Dunno, am I the one who thinks his dick will fall off by celebrating a goal that gets overturned? I think I'll survive the odd goal that gets ruled out just as I did before. I find it incredibly stupid that it would stop anyone from celebrating goals. But each to their own.
 

MackRobinson

Full Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2017
Messages
1,660
Location
Terminal D
Supports
Football
Ratings declined significantly. Without the full research to back it up, yes I am making an assumption that the thing that changed the most about the viewing experience over that time had an effect. Not the only cause however, if I needed to state that again.
The NFL has had instant replay since 1986 (33 years). Unless you can show some type of correlation between ratings and instant replay your assumption is completely random. There has actually been a lot written on the decline of NFL ratings and I have never seen instant replay given as a credible reason.

NFL games also have over 100 commercials on average, last ~4 hours and produce ~11 minutes of live action. So even while the construct of the game allows for the stoppages, 2:45 is quite significant. It’s especially significant when you consider it quiets the stadium and dulls the atmosphere when it kills momentum.
The average NFL telecast is 3 hours (180 minutes). We are talking about 1.5% of the total time. It's not significant by any means and neither does it kill momentum as American football by design is a start and stop game. I honestly don't understand the point you are trying to make
 

montpelier

Full Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
10,117
how much do you think the players hate it?

and

it's nailed-on to break down at some stage surely?

(which I'm rather looking forward to, tbh)
 

njred

HALA MADRID!
Joined
Nov 3, 2001
Messages
5,027
Supports
Liverpool
It's not significant by any means and neither does it kill momentum as American football by design is a start and stop game. I honestly don't understand the point you are trying to make
Maybe it’s just you have never seen an NFL game without instant replay? That’s understandable. But it’s not only replays that kill the broadcast. It’s the constant calls of the refs every other play calling some kind of penalty for the littlest of infractions. Combine the two and it becomes unwatchable. You just accept this while I cannot. Therefore I just can’t watch it and enjoy it like I used to. VAR is not at that point yet but it will be.
 

montpelier

Full Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
10,117
Maybe it’s just you have never seen an NFL game without instant replay? That’s understandable. But it’s not only replays that kill the broadcast. It’s the constant calls of the refs every other play calling some kind of penalty for the littlest of infractions. Combine the two and it becomes unwatchable. You just accept this while I cannot. Therefore I just can’t watch it and enjoy it like I used to. VAR is not at that point yet but it will be.
They could do that the way they've set it up here. The VAR ref just presses his button.

I kind of theoretically don't mind that somehow. Intervention only when necessary, but constant monitoring, with the intention of being as non-intrusive as possible.

If you could somehow make the offside more black & white or obvious or whatever you want to call it. And player behaviour is causing far less problems because they know they are being watched, then the VAR system could be on to something.

Fewer issues overall, only clear & obvious errors being called back.
 

mancan92

Full Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2011
Messages
7,570
Location
Loughborough university
I bet there isn’t. It’s a lazy and stupid connection.
Not really both are based on emotion rather than logic. A look at if and buts without proof. People bringing up the emotion being taken away and talk of a VAR overlord sounds alot like brexit to me.

The stupid thing is people have examples around Europe of leagues who have had VAR for 3 seasons and it hasn't changed or reduced those fans excitement for football. Yet for some reason they bring up these crazy future scenarios when the future has already been written.
 

acnumber9

Full Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Messages
14,362
Not really both are based on emotion rather than logic. A look at if and buts without proof. People bringing up the emotion being taken away and talk of a VAR overlord sounds alot like brexit to me.

The stupid thing is people have examples around Europe of leagues who have had VAR for 3 seasons and it hasn't changed or reduced those fans excitement for football. Yet for some reason they bring up these crazy future scenarios when the future has already been written.
Yes really. Not wanting football to be stop start and voting for Brexit are not the same thing and it’s beyond fecking stupid to try and make a correlation. The majority voted for Brexit and apparently the majority want VAR. Wanting change because you’re told it will make things better sounds more like Brexit to me.
 

mancan92

Full Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2011
Messages
7,570
Location
Loughborough university
Yes really. Not wanting football to be stop start and voting for Brexit are not the same thing and it’s beyond fecking stupid to try and make a correlation. The majority voted for Brexit and apparently the majority want VAR. Wanting change because you’re told it will make things better sounds more like Brexit to me.
As I said the way of thinking is the same. Emotion over logic or proof. We have other leagues who have had it for 3 years. There is proof that VAR around the world has increased the percentage of right decisions, there's proof attendences haven't reduced, there's proof that fans enjoyment hasn't been reduced, there's proof that it has gotten better and faster each year, there's proof that it hasn't changed the way other countries consume football.

That's the difference there is proof that's why it's like brexit you are all believing things when there is no proof so you are arguing with emotion rather than logic.
 

acnumber9

Full Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Messages
14,362
As I said the way of thinking is the same. Emotion over logic or proof. We have other leagues who have had it for 3 years. There is proof that VAR around the world has increased the percentage of right decisions, there's proof attendences haven't reduced, there's proof that fans enjoyment hasn't been reduced, there's proof that it has gotten better and faster each year, there's proof that it hasn't changed the way other countries consume football.

That's the difference there is proof that's why it's like brexit you are all believing things when there is no proof so you are arguing with emotion rather than logic.
It’s arguing for what you want the game to be. Having more correct decisions isn’t worth the delays for some and there’s debate as to how right some of the decisions still are. Why don’t you provide me this proof? Actual proof, not an anecdote.
 

mancan92

Full Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2011
Messages
7,570
Location
Loughborough university
It’s arguing for what you want the game to be. Having more correct decisions isn’t worth the delays for some and there’s debate as to how right some of the decisions still are. Why don’t you provide me this proof? Actual proof, not an anecdote.
It's not anecdote. You have reports all over the world of leagues using VAR. Attendances haven't lowered, football played in those leagues haven't changed, fans havent caused huge backlash, the technology has been improved, the right decisions have improved. This is fact because we have examples of atleast 3 years use of the technology.
 

Rafaeldagold

Full Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2015
Messages
1,244
Not really both are based on emotion rather than logic. A look at if and buts without proof. People bringing up the emotion being taken away and talk of a VAR overlord sounds alot like brexit to me.

The stupid thing is people have examples around Europe of leagues who have had VAR for 3 seasons and it hasn't changed or reduced those fans excitement for football. Yet for some reason they bring up these crazy future scenarios when the future has already been written.
I’m massively Pro EU & against VAR. So really stop making ridiculous connections that aren’t there to suit your agenda
 

Annihilate Now!

...or later, I'm not fussy
Scout
Joined
Nov 4, 2010
Messages
35,759
Location
W.Yorks
Finally got round to watching MOTD2 last night and saw the Wolves disallowed goal... which was absolutely ridiculous.

Still a ton of work to be done on VAR and handballs... as well as offsides and VAR. Neither rule as they are currently are suited to VAR.
 

podurban2

Full Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2010
Messages
5,097
Location
Stockholm
It’s evident by the poll that the majority is for VAR but then there’s a very vocal minority in here that really want their opinions to be heard.
 

mancan92

Full Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2011
Messages
7,570
Location
Loughborough university
Finally got round to watching MOTD2 last night and saw the Wolves disallowed goal... which was absolutely ridiculous.

Still a ton of work to be done on VAR and handballs... as well as offsides and VAR. Neither rule as they are currently are suited to VAR.
The funny thing is the FA actually changed the rules this season. They have decided to remove any sort of subjection. The ball hits the hand doesn't matter if it is accidental or not.
 

Annihilate Now!

...or later, I'm not fussy
Scout
Joined
Nov 4, 2010
Messages
35,759
Location
W.Yorks
The funny thing is the FA actually changed the rules this season. They have decided to remove any sort of subjection. The ball hits the hand doesn't matter if it is accidental or not.
Which in my opinion is a dumb rule.
 

Sir Red Devil

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Sep 6, 2012
Messages
189
Imagine for a moment that we don't have the Goal Line Technology. So we would also have to use VAR to determine whether the ball completely crossed the line or not. It would be better than nothing but it wouldn't be nearly as accurate as the Goal Line Technology. There have been many situations since introduction of Goal Line Technology when on the replays it seemed that the ball completely crossed the lined but the Goal Line Technology showed "No Goal" because the technology is down to millimeters accurate.

Unlike VAR which makes subjective decisions all the time, the decisions made by Goal Line Technology are objective and very accurate so nobody can argue about those. So ideally in the future we will use VAR only for decisions that are always going to be subjective ( for decisions like penalties, diving, yellow and red cards etc.).

For offsides we would need to come up with a completely new technology (Offside Line Technology) which will be able to determine the exact moment the passer releases the ball and the exact position of the attacker and the last defender. And like Goal Line Technology it will quickly show whether the play was offside or not and nobody would argue about those decisions because they will be objective and very accurate.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Rafaeldagold

Full Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2015
Messages
1,244
It is the same thought process emotion over logic or facts.
You’re talking absolute rubbish. It’s embarrassing.

One is about a game & wanting it to be the best it can be & the most enjoyable.

If anything you’re like the brexit lot. Have the majority so think everyone should fall in line & ask no questions, arrogant. That’s a strong correlation
 

mancan92

Full Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2011
Messages
7,570
Location
Loughborough university
You’re talking absolute rubbish. It’s embarrassing.

One is about a game & wanting it to be the best it can be & the most enjoyable.

If anything you’re like the brexit lot. Have the majority so think everyone should fall in line & ask no questions, arrogant. That’s a strong correlation
Nope I use logic and facts in decisions. Both brexit and being anti-VAR require dropping fact, reason and logic for emotion.
 

Rafaeldagold

Full Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2015
Messages
1,244
Nope I use logic and facts in decisions. Both brexit and being anti-VAR require dropping fact, reason and logic for emotion.
Nope I use logic and facts in decisions. Both brexit and being anti-VAR require dropping fact, reason and logic for emotion.
Wow the arrogance.

Firstly I’ve already said I’m pro EU& against VAR.

Secondly isn’t it logical not to keep stop starting a free flowing game? If you looked at it logically VAR just isn’t worth it & causes more problems than it solves
 

Annihilate Now!

...or later, I'm not fussy
Scout
Joined
Nov 4, 2010
Messages
35,759
Location
W.Yorks
For offsides we would need to come up with a completely new technology (Offside Line Technology) which will be able to determine the exact moment the passer releases the ball and the exact position of the attacker and the last defender. And like Goal Line Technology it will quickly show whether the play was offside or not and nobody would argue about those decisions because they will be objective and very accurate.
Whilst I agree that VAR isn't good/accurate enough to call offsides, I also think that if we had Offside Line Technology we'd still have the issue of goals being ruled out because someone is a millimeter offside - which isn't what the point of the rule is or was when it was introduced.

For me the rule needs to be you're offside if your whole foot is ahead of the defenders trailing foot (or some other distance that actually equates to gaining an advantage)... and forget about whether your arm/head whatever is ahead
 

wub1234

New Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2018
Messages
485
Supports
Don't support a team
Fewer issues overall, only clear & obvious errors being called back.
This is really the key phrase.

The whole point of VAR should be to eliminate really bad decisions from the game. Everyone is in favour of that. You'd have to be very hardline against VAR not to be in favour of that.

It shouldn't be to delay the game as often as possible, in order to attempt to identify microscopic indiscretions that absolutely no-one could see with the naked eye, and which, in some cases, wouldn't even have been deemed against the rules just a few years ago.

I want to see football matches decided by skill. I don't want to see them decided by...oh, look at that incident in slow motion, is that an 'unnatural silhouette'? Well, we simply have to give a penalty. Look at that striker dragging his foot...look! There's contact with the defender! That has to be a penalty. Well, that seems like a good goal, but actually Sterling's fingernail is 1mm offside for 0.01 seconds, so we need to chalk that one off immediately.

It's quite possible now that you could have a game in which a brilliant goal is disallowed for being unbelievably marginally offside, to such a degree that it depends which frame you look at as to whether it's offside or not (this has already happened), while at the other end someone boots the ball straight at someone's hand from close range, and they get a penalty because the defender had an 'unnatural silhouette' at the time (I appreciate the rules for handball are slightly different in the Premier League, but this has already happened as well).

This would represent games being decided by technology rather than good play. Which is not what VAR should be about. VAR should be about ensuring that massive mistakes cannot decide a game.
 

acnumber9

Full Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Messages
14,362
It's not anecdote. You have reports all over the world of leagues using VAR. Attendances haven't lowered, football played in those leagues haven't changed, fans havent caused huge backlash, the technology has been improved, the right decisions have improved. This is fact because we have examples of atleast 3 years use of the technology.
I’d love to see this factual evidence. Have you got any to hand?
 

mancan92

Full Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2011
Messages
7,570
Location
Loughborough university
Wow the arrogance.

Firstly I’ve already said I’m pro EU& against VAR.

Secondly isn’t it logical not to keep stop starting a free flowing game? If you looked at it logically VAR just isn’t worth it & causes more problems than it solves
No the logic would be to look at another flowing sport e.g. Rugby and see how they have implemented it for many years without it affecting the flow of the game at all. It would also be logical to understand that a couple more stoppages a game will not stop the flow of the match or affect it in any significant way as shown by the many other leagues that have used it for a few years now. It would also be logical to understand that at first it may be 2-3 minutes for a decision but over time this time will quicken to the point where you will wait 30sec to 1 min for a decision. Finally logically it makes sense that a game which has rules set in place to follow has tools like VAR to help referees enforce said rules.
 

acnumber9

Full Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Messages
14,362
It’s evident by the poll that the majority is for VAR but then there’s a very vocal minority in here that really want their opinions to be heard.
The majority aren’t exactly silent here. Anyone who expresses a different opinion is shouted down and accused of voting for Brexit.
 

mancan92

Full Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2011
Messages
7,570
Location
Loughborough university
I’d love to see this factual evidence. Have you got any to hand?
Literally google VAR reports Spain or Italy or Germany or any of these other countries below

  • Argentina
  • Australia
  • Brazil
  • Belgium
  • China
  • Colombia
  • Czech Republic
  • England
  • France
  • Germany
  • Greece
  • Indonesia
  • Israel
  • Italy
  • Korea Republic
  • Kuwait
  • Morocco
  • Malaysia
  • Mexico
  • Netherlands
  • North Korea
  • Poland
  • Portugal
  • Romania
  • Russia
  • Qatar
  • Saudi Arabia
  • Spain
  • Switzerland
  • Thailand
  • Turkey
  • United Arab Emirates
  • Major League Soccer (US and Canada)
  • Vietnam