Throw ins count in that? How long do you think a match would last with your ideal use of VAR?
VAR and Refereeing 2025/26 | General Discussion
- Thread starter Pogue Mahone
- Start date
Thanks bud. Can’t really tell from that angle if it’s above his head or in front but it doesn’t look like a natural jump, that’s for sure.
I mean, you might as well name me. And you’d be correct. But the whole point of VAR was, apparently, to cut down on those arguments. And it’s done nothing of the sort. It’s inflamed them, if anything. Because if you remove human error (which is what VAR says on the box) then people will jump straight to corruption if they think their team is being screwed over.
Besides, arguing the toss about referees decisions is the life blood of this place. And football fan discussion in general. Turn on MOTD on a Saturday night and you’ll see the same arguments. It’s always been part of football. What’s changed now is that nobody is willing to accept that bad decisions are a simple mistake. And that’s a big change for the negative. Stacked up on top of all the negative effects on the match going (and even match watching) experience.
Fair enough, my memories fairly useless also. I don't have an issue with it in Rugby and on the whole i think it's done quite well. The fact that the refs are mic'd up and review it on the big screen for all to see, along with not seeming to think they're infallible or that getting to the right decision on review somehow makes them lesser men, helps a lot.
It's possible it doesn't suit football as you say but it could definitely be implemented a hell of a lot better than it's current incarnation.
Surely the whole point of VAR was getting the right decision?
I'm with you, the arguments were fine. To a point.
Unless a ref was cheating, we should just suck up mistakes.
Great excuse to post this again.
Yes you're right, I'd actually forgotten they used to do that, I suppose the arguement is that the player wasn't sent off in the game, so the opposing team didn't get the advantage they should have got, or if the player got sent off but shouldn't have then the team don't get to play the game again.
But this is the point, we were in a quite normal position where human error was accepted as part and parcel of the game, but now we're in a postion where human error is still happening but is alot more difficult for people to accept, and this also comes with all obvious downsides it is having on watching the game.
What gets me is that VAR decisions are human decisions. People chide referees as being below standard as if they think VAR is some kind of superhuman, AI-based algorithm. It's the same guy they thought was so useless last week with his reading glasses on squinting at a screen.
VAR has no place being involved in 50/50 or even 70/30 calls. If a referee is looking at an incident and gets it wrong - he gets it wrong. Only have to look at the FA Cup just how disastrous it is when officials become reliant on a technology that suddenly isn't there. VAR interventions should be as frequent as Bank of England interest rate announcements, not as regular as Donald Trump Tweets.
This is because human error should now be minimised as there are 3 of them involved in the decision, with the benefit of as many replays as they need.
There are, of course, incidents which will always be in a grey area where they are open for debate. However, those should be minimised. What we should never be seeing are incidents like the non sending off of the Brentford player in our match against them. It’s completely clear-cut and just beyond poor that VAR didn’t correct it.
The main problem in my view remains the “clear and obvious” wording. It distracts from the VAR considering whether they agree with the decision, and introduces a two-stage test which is always going to lead to inconsistency and problems. All the VAR (and their assistant) should be looking at is whether they agree with the on-field decision. If they don’t, referee to the screen and they have a grown up discussion - the ref still has final call.
You have to have a threshold though. You can’t have a drawn out discussion between the referee on the pitch and the VAR official over every single decision the ref has (arguably) got wrong. We’ve seen what that looks like already and it isn’t football. The threshold had to be introduced to avoid the fans attending games to sit there, bored off their tits, for 15-20 minutes every game while VAR pores over a half dozen decisions every single game. Nobody wants that to happen in a sport where fast paced, non stop action is its USP. So here we are. Trying to “fix” a system that is inherently unsuitable for the sport it’s been foisted on.
Yes because as we all know that where humans are involved mistakes will happen, and that's fine, so lets not wreck the game by trying for a perfection that will never exist.
They nailed the goal line tech, and it's great, no one complains about that because it is flawless, and has zero impact on the flow of a game, but there is no other aspect in football where this can be applied right now so it should have been left there.
The offside VAR on paper could work, but it's the worst of the lot, and often takes forever for them to work out, and even then for the really tight calls how can you be sure they've pressed the button at the right time for when the ball was played? And often the semi automated cartoon doesn't match up with what you've just been shown on screen beforehand.
Other than clear daylight offsides, and blatant red cards, both of which should not be missed by professional refs in real time, there is no place for it imo, as the benefits surely have to outwiegh the drawbacks, and they just don't.
I honestly believe that we would have much shorter stoppages if VAR did away with the clear and obvious threshold. Most of the time spent during a check is not whether the call was wrong (the fact that it is subject to more than three replays often indicates it was), but whether it was clearly and obviously wrong.
Burnley’s late equaliser took 5 minutes of looking at replays over and over from the same two angles before deciding that there was indeed clear evidence that the ball had hit Barnes’s arm. Those five minutes could’ve been spent with the referee at the monitor who quickly could’ve said ”angles are not good enough, I’ll go with on-field decision”, and it wouldn’t have been a matter of overruling the guy in charge or publicly telling him he’s made a big error.
We were probably saved by the referee not giving a yellow to Lacroix when he fouled Cunha, because it made it easier for the VAR to say it was a clear and obvious error. Had he given a yellow I don’t think he’d have been sent to the monitor at all or the check would’ve taken even longer to ascertain whether it cleared the bar for intervention.
More rugby Union like? (though their TMOs recently are getting too involved).
Key decisions only… “Ref, have a look at a couple of angles that might be useful”… ref has a look and says “yeah, changing decision” or “no, I’m ok” and game moves on.
Remember it like yesterday. Subjective stuff though. Get sick to fecking death of of all the agonising about it. It really has taken over the “sport”.
We can blame referees and VAR all we want, but we should all realise whom is really to blame.
Thierry Henry
Cheating in football is so ingrained, that discussion of what is obviously cheating, wrestling at corners before the ball is in play isn't even mentioned as such. Sure the referee can't call a foul without the ball in play, but they can sanction cheating with a yellow for unsporting conduct (pushing to gain an unfair advantage!) or even a red for violent conduct if it's physical enough. Along with obviously just giving either a penalty to the attacking team (and a yellow or red card) or a foul to the defending team as soon as the ball is kicked. Shambles of a sport:
https://www.espn.com/soccer/?cc=5739
https://www.espn.com/soccer/?cc=5739
Do think the Everton/Man Utd game and the Arsenal/Chelsea game has brought more focus when it comes to wrestling at the corners. Slot, Carrick, Hurzeler today alone have mentioned it today.
United will be the first team to have a goal dissalowed for excessive contact in the box
If there was piss easy solutions surely by now one of the leagues or international tournaments would have mastered it
I never wanted VAR, how can you use a video reply to determine such subjective decisions no one will ever agree on. Maybe at a push it could have been for blatant obvious, really obvious ref misses like hand of god and Henry handball but they are so rare you would never hardly see VAR involved anyway.You've really got a bee in your bonnet and are being quite revisionist about this whole thing now that you've decided VAR is the devil.
A minority of babies and dickheads? Really? Well I'm glad to see we still have reasonable fans
Are you seriously claiming you weren't part of the cohort who were in favour of bringing in Video refs and that it was only a minority who wanted it? Can't be arsed looking for evidence but I find that very hard to believe.
What it’s become is worse than I could ever have imagined
Another gripe I have about refereeing is that an attacker gets the ball and turns his back to the defender, the defender makes minimal contact and the attacker falls down conveniently over the ball and the ref gives a free kick to the attacker every single time.
You’ve misspelled “Arsenal player”
Fixed.
Spurs have written to PGMOL apparently, using Arsenal non-decisions as an example of why they have been shafted. Very Spursy but interesting to see the caf isn’t the only group that thinks arsenal are being preferred by refs this season
The solution diminishes the role of the matchday referee. It’s easy but not wanted.
It’s just a coincidence that Arsenal are consistently getting away with fouls when scoring and defending corners.
I wouldn't blame a manager for going full "fachts" with a powerpoint presentation on Arsenal's nonsense at this point.
They are being refereed differently from the rest of the league.
If Arsenal had been consistently officiated like they were when Kolo Muani ”sent Gabriel flying” for the goal that would’ve made it 2-2 between spurs and arsenal they’d have half their goals disallowed this season and they would’ve been battling for a top 5 position.
Most decisions are not subjective at all. Most of the wrong decisions made by on-field referees are due to the pace of the game and the fact that they can't see everything all at once.
There's definitely more correct decisions under VAR regardless of the controversial ones than when most things were based off vibes. There's literally no way a human on the sideline can tell if someone is offside or not because you can't keep track of three things at once.
Remember when a bunch of us argued that the ref didn't have to send Shea Lacey off and refs often overlook dissent for a second booking?
See: Joe Linton
See: Joe Linton
Yep! Ostentatiously clapping above his head and nothing.
Haaland getting manhandled and his shirt pulled while trying to take a shot just being waived away was a poor decision in my view.
I'd be fuming if that was allowed against us.
I'd be fuming if that was allowed against us.
Ref tonight dogshit for both teams.
Completely lost control in the first half then changed the standard for what’s a yellow card after half-time. Really poor performance. Not as poor as ours though, in fairness.
As soon as he gave the red he decided to giv everything to Newcastle. Five minutes added a disgrace as well. Doesn't excuse how shite we were
Dreadful referee, he's terrible every game I see him ref.
It doesn’t but that second half he gave them everything. Like Dalot and Gordon both holding each others shirt, Gordon drops to the floor holding his foot and gives a free kick. Useless prick.
The opposition getting a red is often the worst thing that can happen. Game shuts down and refs will buy every bit of diving and timewasting for the plucky underdogs.
2 mins later a tackle that put Maz off, nothing given. He's on the ground injured, play on.
Tonali sits down at the end, stops the game to plod over and check he's ok.
Newcastle actually went for it though for the first 20/25 minutes of the second half. They looked more likely to score. It wasn't like they shut up shop. We were just god-awful.