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

[Tel074]

Another howler. Lacazette kicks a player deliberately off the ball. VAR check. Nothing.

All VAR is doing is highlighting the sheer incompetence of our referees.

Totally agree it's actually becoming embarrassing to watch . I think VAR is making referees worse because some now are making no decisions because they just leave it to VAR but in turn VAR is such a shambles they rarely go against what the ref decided ..

Look at Rashfords pen against City okay VAR did sort that out but how in gods name did the ref not give it I will never know

 

[ShinjiNinja26]

Pile of wank! End of.

 

[TheReligion]

Totally agree it's actually becoming embarrassing to watch . I think VAR is making referees worse because some now are making no decisions because they just leave it to VAR but in turn VAR is such a shambles they rarely go against what the ref decided ..

Look at Rashfords pen against City okay VAR did sort that out but how in gods name did the ref not give it I will never know

The decisions that VAR sees but just ignores are unforgivable for me. Spinelessness by the video referees not wanting to rock the boat or undermine their colleagues. It's actually scary have incompetent some really are.

 

[duffer]

That Lacazette kick was so much worse than the one Son got sent off for. I'd love to hear an explanation why the ref gave nothing.

 

[Moonwalker]

I much prefer it when they are 'hands on' and not afraid to overrule the main ref, but sadly that's a version of VAR we have only seen in the first couple of weeks. This castrated iteration is really pointless.

 

[Rafaeldagold]

Who could have guessed VAR isn’t compatible with football & wont be a positive for the game? Oh wait anyone who understood the very nature of football did. Piece of trash ‘technology’ & can’t wait til it fcks off.

 

[That'sHernandez]

Who could have guessed VAR isn’t compatible with football & wont be a positive for the game? Oh wait anyone who understood the very nature of football did. Piece of trash ‘technology’ & can’t wait til it fcks off.

VAR in principle is not incompatible with football. Its current application in the Premier League, however, has been terrible.

 

[TheReligion]

That Lacazette kick was so much worse than the one Son got sent off for. I'd love to hear an explanation why the ref gave nothing.

I think that's the issue. They need to be forced to come out and explain themselves. All this could be avoided if they were mic'd up like in rugby and cricket. It's as if the FA know that are all shite and want to protect them. For full transparency mic up the referees on and off field and let us hear what's going on in their tiny brains.

 

[BeforeKeanetherewasRobson]

Who could have guessed VAR isn’t compatible with football & wont be a positive for the game? Oh wait anyone who understood the very nature of football did. Piece of trash ‘technology’ & can’t wait til it fcks off.

It's not rocket science to tell the ref Lacazette kicked someone.

The technology is fine unless you give it a country who arses up how to use it and refs who are scared to point out other refs mistakes.

 

[That'sHernandez]

I think that's the issue. They need to be forced to come out and explain themselves. All this could be avoided if they were mic'd up like in rugby and cricket. It's as if the FA know that are all shite and want to protect them. For full transparency mic up the referees on and off field and let us hear what's going on in their tiny brains.

Even when there were one or two decent refs about, they were beyond questioning.

 

[Mb194dc]

This confirms what we've been seeing all season...:

https://www.espn.co.uk/football/eng...r-liverpools-lead-slashed-as-title-race-is-on

Though I think they're still understating the effect of it. Don't think they've counted the dodgy handball and other goals for (and marginal goals disallowed against, with forensic offside calls that haven't been used in other games) Spurs in this analysis.

7 point lead wouldn't be totally insurmountable once City get Laporte back.

 

[Sidious]

City see their home derby loss to United turned into a victory, as Marcus Rashford's penalty with the score at 0-0 is scrubbed out, and their early season draw at home to Tottenham would become a victory.

They give city the win for that? United totally outplay city that day.
Totally random...

 

[giorno]

From the article

City see their home derby loss to United turned into a victory, as Marcus Rashford's penalty with the score at 0-0 is scrubbed out

A reminder of why we have VAR

 

[sullydnl]

They give city the win for that? United totally outplay city that day.
Totally random...

Tbf, City are a better team than us by pretty much every metric so it's hardly surprising their algorithm has them beating us.

 

[do.ob]

Leaving aside that I don't put any stock in some random algorithm from ESPN it's perhaps noting that Liverpool only lose 2 points in that table and the gap mostly closes, because City gain a lot.

 

[giorno]

Leaving aside that I don't put any stock in some random algorithm from ESPN it's perhaps noting that Liverpool only lose 2 points in that table and the gap mostly closes, because City gain a lot.

Liverpool still have a game in hand though. Also, 3 of city's extra five points come from a very obviously wrong penalty decision

 

[sewey89]

That’s not really VARs fault, as with the new handball rule, that’s a handball by Rice.. but fecking hell. The handball rule is ridiculous

 

[giorno]

That’s not really VARs fault, as with the new handball rule, that’s a handball by Rice.. but fecking hell. The handball rule is ridiculous

Disagree. Goal doesn't happen without the handball

 

[sewey89]

Disagree. Goal doesn't happen without the handball

It’s not handball if somebody heads the ball at you from a yard away. Where are Rice’s hands supposed to go?

 

[Paul_Scholes18]

VAR is starting to piss me off a lot. They ignore big errors and obvious penalties a lot. Red cards get ignored and they give it just as yellow. Shirt pulls and dirty things in the box gets ignored.
What they do is claim handboll for things when there is no intention to hit it with the hand/arm. Give offside for everything even when it is very hard to tell even with VAR.

Different refs also give very different calls so there is no improvement when it comes to objectivity at all. You still see stupid calls from VAR just as you would get in the games. Can't even enjoy the goals since VAR will always find tiny errors to correct things with even if they miss the obvious things most of the time.

Right now I want it gone or bring some new better non biased refs for it.

 

[Dan_F]

They give city the win for that? United totally outplay city that day.
Totally random...

We countered well for 25 minutes and created 4 decent chances in that time. Totally outplaying them just isn’t true. Genuinely think people have forgotten what dominating a game of football looks like.

 

[Denis' cuff]

We countered well for 25 minutes and created 4 decent chances in that time. Totally outplaying them just isn’t true. Genuinely think people have forgotten what dominating a game of football looks like.

They don't have to dominate

Genuinely think people have forgotten what controlling a game of football looks like.

 

[giorno]

It’s not handball if somebody heads the ball at you from a yard away. Where are Rice’s hands supposed to go?

Don't care. Without the handball there's no goal-scoring chance. One thing i agree with the new rule is a goal scored thanks to a decisive handball shouldn't stand, regardless of intentionality(with the one caveat being arm against the body, unless the goal is scored with the hand)

Just my opinion. Handball should be judged based on impact on the play. Much simpler and easier to enforce then the current rules, too

 

[Paul_Scholes18]

Don't care. Without the handball there's no goal-scoring chance. One thing i agree with the new rule is a goal scored thanks to a decisive handball shouldn't stand, regardless of intentionality(with the one caveat being arm against the body, unless the goal is scored with the hand)

Just my opinion

Should it be a pen for that too in defense? Because I don't see why the rules should be different.

 

[giorno]

Should it be a pen for that too in defense? Because I don't see why the rules should be different.

If it's stopping a chance? Yes. Also, if the ref sees it live he would have probably given the foul.

Btw, most of the time if the ref sees that, in the box, it results in a penalty

 

[sullydnl]

Don't have a problem with the idea that if it hits your hand then tough luck, it's a handball. It's harsh but equally harsh on both teams and very clear cut.

The issue to my mind is the discrepancy between how attackers are punished and how defenders are punished. Right now the handball law is weighted heavily in favour of defenders, which isn't good for the game.

 

[Paul_Scholes18]

If it's stopping a chance? Yes. Also, if the ref sees it live he would have probably given the foul.

Btw, most of the time if the ref sees that, in the box, it results in a penalty

The problem is strikers will aim for the arm and gain pens from that. Already happens a lot. I think they should be given when defenders has the arm in a position that is not expected or if they use the hands/arm on purpose. It can be hard for normal refs to see that, but with VAR that should not be a problem at all.

 

[RUCK4444]

The problem is strikers will aim for the arm and gain pens from that. Already happens a lot. I think they should be given when defenders has the arm in a position that is not expected or if they use the hands/arm on purpose. It can be hard for normal refs to see that, but with VAR that should not be a problem at all.

Of course it should, VAR has bastardised the rule by adding needless elements to what was a pretty basic rule.

It’s taken a rule that was fair but sometimes hard to call and perversely made it ridiculously harsh when they now have the chance to review each case.

It made zero sense to change the rule once VAR was implemented.

Just another thing I hate about VAR.

 

[montpelier]

Don't have a problem with the idea that if it hits your hand then tough luck, it's a handball. It's harsh but equally harsh on both teams and very clear cut.

The issue to my mind is the discrepancy between how attackers are punished and how defenders are punished. Right now the handball law is weighted heavily in favour of defenders, which isn't good for the game.

Neither side can handball deliberately. There is allowance for defenders accidentally handling if their arms are in a sensible position. I don't see it as a massive advantage for the team defending.

I don't want to see a load of soft penalties. An occasional defender might get away with one.

You want to see more goals, you don't mind how they get scored? Forwards that can't keep their hands out of the way can benefit from that?

I do agree defenders get a marginal advantage, that is obvious. And I agree attackers might be unlucky from time to time.

I think maybe denying an obvious goal opportunity could come into it for some, they should probably be penalties.

That one tonight is the right decision for me.

 

[cyberman]

Don't have a problem with the idea that if it hits your hand then tough luck, it's a handball. It's harsh but equally harsh on both teams and very clear cut.

The issue to my mind is the discrepancy between how attackers are punished and how defenders are punished. Right now the handball law is weighted heavily in favour of defenders, which isn't good for the game.

Defenders need something now. People dont want offsides to be offsides etc.
Do we just hate defenders?

Plus Rice clearly handled the ball. Those were slways given

 

[montpelier]

I think the rule got changed purely because they were arguing about the old one.

Can he get out of the way? vs what is he doing with his arms there anyway?

It's a change for the sake of changing it. Rather than aspiring to get referees to give better decisions.

I mean, just looking at penalties now, is it that hard to decide where a defender gains an unfair advantage? Or its clearly not totally accidental? And as said above, I'm inclined to side with the defender, but I wouldn't do it too often I don't think.

Attackers have no hope though, they need to score goals properly.

 

[Dan_F]

They don't have to dominate

Genuinely think people have forgotten what controlling a game of football looks like.

Controlling is not conceding 71% possession and having 21 shots against you. It’s called holding on.

 

[mancan92]

Wait people actually think the goal wasn't handball? I mean that's as clear cut as they come. He literally uses his hand to control the ball into his path. The ball full hits his hand like there's no other decision to give there. The goal literally doesn't happen without it.

 

[DAK222]

This confirms what we've been seeing all season...:

Though I think they're still understating the effect of it. Don't think they've counted the dodgy handball and other goals for (and marginal goals disallowed against, with forensic offside calls that haven't been used in other games) Spurs in this analysis.

7 point lead wouldn't be totally insurmountable once City get Laporte back.

This is such a terribly written article!

1. The table's caption says "The Anti-VAR table in January after 21 games". Liverpool haven't played 21 games.

2. They say "However, we're not just removing goals here to get the amended results. That is far too simplistic. We've developed an algorithm that takes into account many factors, such as the state of the game at that point, form, performance and relative strength, then we've got a whole new set of results based on probability of outcome."

Great, happy to hear that they are not being simplistic. Could we take a look at this algorithm? Or at least hear more about this? How exactly are these admittedly crucial factors taken into account? Without this info it's no different from some random dude's opinion. For some it will "confirm what they've been seeing all season" and for others it may not. How on earth are people allowed to write stuff like this I'll never know. Especially, if they have an academic on board they must know that they should provide readers links to more details about their fancy index!

3. They say "Manchester City have been robbed of FIVE points by VAR decisions". Apart from the surprising need to shout "FIVE", they are claiming that by correcting the wrong penalty call on Rashford, VAR has "robbed" City of 3 points.

I will admit that City have been unlucky the last few years with VAR in the sense that in 17/18 when VAR would have corrected wrong decisions against them, it was absent and in the following years when incorrect decisions went in their favour, VAR was there to correct these.

 

[Jericholyte2]

Just started watching Soccer Saturday and had a bit of an epiphany. Whilst all the pundits are saying the laws need to be re-written I disagree. I haven’t checked the thread to see if this has been mentioned so apologies if this has been discussed. The issue to me is, laws don’t need re-writing, they just need appendices which takes VAR into account. At the moment they don’t fit the context of VAR so, for example, last night’s handball, the law saws, ball hits arm = freekick.

Taking a bit from my workplace with marking assessment, there is always the main ‘box’ stating the key to the answer, yet then there is always a ‘things to consider’ section.

This should be used with VAR, have the main law written as is, but then add, “VAR Considerations” where you have things such as distance between the two players, is the arm in an unnatural position etc. This way the law will remain but allow for context to be used in the use of VAR to rule on a decision.

Thoughts?

 

[giorno]

Just started watching Soccer Saturday and had a bit of an epiphany. Whilst all the pundits are saying the laws need to be re-written I disagree. I haven’t checked the thread to see if this has been mentioned so apologies if this has been discussed. The issue to me is, laws don’t need re-writing, they just need appendices which takes VAR into account. At the moment they don’t fit the context of VAR so, for example, last night’s handball, the law saws, ball hits arm = freekick.

Taking a bit from my workplace with marking assessment, there is always the main ‘box’ stating the key to the answer, yet then there is always a ‘things to consider’ section.

This should be used with VAR, have the main law written as is, but then add, “VAR Considerations” where you have things such as distance between the two players, is the arm in an unnatural position etc. This way the law will remain but allow for context to be used in the use of VAR to rule on a decision.

Thoughts?

Don't dislike the idea

Once again, yesterday's handball is entirely the wrong example to name. 100% correct call by the rules, and also by "spirit of the game" which you brits seem to care so much about

 

[cyberman]

Wait people actually think the goal wasn't handball? I mean that's as clear cut as they come. He literally uses his hand to control the ball into his path. The ball full hits his hand like there's no other decision to give there. The goal literally doesn't happen without it.

Exactly. If the ref sees it in normal time then theres no debate.
Its ridiculous at this stage.

 

[SilentWitness]

Another one. Walcott is blatantly pulled back by the defender and VAR doesn’t give it. Ridiculous decision.

 

[Le Red]

Blatant dive by Willian not given by VAR.
The point that a lot of people in this thread miss is that it's not VAR's fault. It's the English referees that are the worst.
English refereeing is comical.
Removing VAR would not solve the issue, it would just give more power to these cnuts.

 

[sullydnl]

Auba red card was obviously the correct call, thought the Willian penalty was fine too, the Walcott decision was worse. I suspect that if the latter had gone down instead of trying to stay on his feet he would have got a penalty.