VAR and Refs | General Discussion | May 15: Premier League clubs to vote on proposal to scrap VAR from next season

[Mike Smalling]

What a terrible start to the season for us, when it comes to VAR. Not commenting on the individual decisions, but rather how much joy it's taking out of the games for me. You literally can't celebrate anything anymore. The first thought I have when a goal is scored is about whether it can be overturned by something - offside, foul in the build-up, handball, whatever. It's legitimately awful for the game, in my opinion, and they should just scrap it - especially if they can implement something reliable and quick for just offsides.

There is as much (or more) controversy about ref decisions now as compared to before VAR, so what's the fecking point?

 

[Gio]

The City goal was universally considered a mistake that shouldn't happen. Are some of you arguing that all goals in a similar situation should stand this whole season because there's been a mistake one time?

That shouldn’t be a goal under the spirit of the law, but it was correctly allowed under the rules. The problem is the rules specified scenarios where a player is interfering, but did not include one to cover the City situation. To me the problem is the rules being too prescriptive rather than simply resting on if the referee considers the offside player to gain an advantage from his position.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

I’d happily get rid of VAR it’s the worst thing to happen to football and I don’t want to say I told you so, but I always knew it wasn’t suitable for football with the way the game flows. Take last nights decision, no common sense applied, you’re telling me that Trafford is saving that header from point blank range if Hojland isn’t there? Of course he isn’t, so it’s another stupid decision based on some changing rule book. Yes there were issues pre VAR with bad decisions, but it was nowhere near as bad as it is now.

 

[bstb3]

Well before you always had the excuses of 'it happened quickly, referee unsighted etc'. Now with multiple replays those are gone and it's shown that some of the rules are actually causing the issue. Most of the controversies are around offsides and handballs it feels, which are human decisions until we can set some measurable parameters around them that machines can implement - distance between ball and hand when the ball is played etc. Then though we get into the accuracy argument too.

What VAR has really done is shine a light on grey areas that were covered and excused by blaming referees ability to see. Now that's removed the fact referees still struggle to implement the rules consistently both in Europe and domestically is the talking point. Completely unintended consequence of a well meant move. If we can't clean the rules up (and the constant tinkering suggests they can't) then at this point I'd be rescinding the role of VAR significantly to something like violent conducts and simulation. Leave the rest to the on the field officials - but I think that ship has sailed. Can you imagine now if VAR is not used and a blatant offside is not given in your favour? VAR would have caught that etc. Cat is out of the bag.

 

[90 + 5min]

Hojlund one was clearly offside, but frustrating after the City one was given.

By the same referee. He was in VAR room that night.

Am I allowed to say that I find this pervasive conspiracy and victimization complex extremely annoying?

We seen this over and over again. That same situations gets different decisions. Where majority of those are against us. So I’m not surprised when people say one rule for us, one rule for others.

 

[Sylar]

There's no conspiracy, there's no corruption or favouritsm.
It's just the refs are inept and it's been shown time and time again.

Having the refs and their mates in charge of the tech just causes so much inconsistency from game to game

 

[sullydnl]

That shouldn’t be a goal under the spirit of the law, but it was correctly allowed under the rules. The problem is the rules specified scenarios where a player is interfering, but did not include one to cover the City situation. To me the problem is the rules being too prescriptive rather than simply resting on if the referee considers the offside player to gain an advantage from his position.

Are you referring to the Ake goal against Fulham? Because the PGMOL said that was a mistake and shouldn't have been allowed.

As per Howard Webb, Chief Refereeing Officer of the PGMOL:

From the outset I want to say I think this should have been disallowed, this goal. It certainly appears that Akanji has an impact on Bernd Leno who seems to hesitate. The officials on the field gave the goal. They didn’t see an obvious action that impacted Leno’s ability to play the ball. They see Akanji moving slightly away from the ball to let it past him. There’s a flick out of the foot but that’s after the ball has passed. They didn’t feel that that was clearly impactful on Leno’s ability to play the ball. But you can see that hesitation by the goalkeeper, who is waiting to see if the ball makes contact with Akanji, which would have deflected the ball. So we think it’s a clear situation of offside. Unfortunately, it wasn’t identified on the day, and, of course, the learning from this one will also be shared amongst all of our group because we’re always looking to do better each and every week, and this was an error.

 

[Catt]

Why was Evans' goal called off?

 

[Fluctuation0161]

They would just argue about other things. And also, many refereeing mistakes which ARE being corrected now by VAR, will remain oncorrected.

People just have short memories.

As for people being offside by a fraction, it's simple: If you're a fraction offside, then you're offside.

To what fraction is the technology 100% reliable? Do you know?

 

[Amir]

To what fraction is the technology 100% reliable? Do you know?

No, I do not.

 

[bstb3]

Why was Evans' goal called off?

Hojlund was given offside. Although he didn't play or attempt to play the ball, he was obstructing the vision of the Burnley keeper whilst being in an offside position & hence deemed active. It was probably correct in fairness.

 

[Fluctuation0161]

No, I do not.

So "If you're a fraction offside, then you're offside." Can't be quantified.

Surely the logical and more entertaining outcome in the very close callz is to give the benefit of any doubt to the attacking player?

 

[Catt]

Hojlund was given offside. Although he didn't play or attempt to play the ball, he was obstructing the vision of the Burnley keeper whilst being in an offside position & hence deemed active. It was probably correct in fairness.

Alright, thanks! Feel like it's completely random if it's given or not

 

[Amir]

So "If you're a fraction offside, then you're offside." Can't be quantified.

Surely the logical and more entertaining outcome in the very close callz is to give the benefit of any doubt to the attacking player?

Just because I don't know how much the technology is reliable in terms of fractions of offside doesn't mean it isn't very reliable.

 

[bstb3]

So "If you're a fraction offside, then you're offside." Can't be quantified.

Surely the logical and more entertaining outcome in the very close callz is to give the benefit of any doubt to the attacking player?

Then you have the difficulty of defining very close and what constitutes that. It's the same problem just turned on it's head.

I'd try something like if the exact moment of the ball being played isn't determinable due to frames, then if any of the immediately preceding or following frames show onside it's onside and give the benefit of the doubt that way. The frame rate is supposedly around 50 per second (same as broadcast cameras), which while it sounds high means at speed the players can have moved 15-20cm between frames, and we are trying to judge to mm. It's a bit crazy.

 

[sullydnl]

So "If you're a fraction offside, then you're offside." Can't be quantified.

Surely the logical and more entertaining outcome in the very close callz is to give the benefit of any doubt to the attacking player?

They already do. As is if the broadcast lines they draw overlap, it's deemed onside.

The problem is that as soon as you do that, there are offside calls that fall just outside that margin of error which people then complain about. And that will be the case whatever the MOE is. "X was allowed, so it's stupid to disallow Y which is only a mm more off".

 

[Berbasbullet]

Would it be easier just to use feet for offside? Might make calls easier on VAR.

 

[Gio]

Are you referring to the Ake goal against Fulham? Because the PGMOL said that was a mistake and shouldn't have been allowed.

As per Howard Webb, Chief Refereeing Officer of the PGMOL:

That's interesting, good to see they're encouraging more common sense application of offside despite the wording of the rules.

 

[garelo]

If VAR was scrapped tomorrow nobody is going to miss its' existence, one of the worst inventions in football with no clear rules of how to apply it into the game.

When xhaka scored against De Gea, Nketiah was offside blocking the keepers view. VAR is a joke. They pick and choose what to award.

There was almost identical goal against us few years ago and of course they didnt overruled the goal, it's a joke really.

 

[FortunaUtd]

We seen this over and over again. That same situations gets different decisions. Where majority of those are against us. So I’m not surprised when people say one rule for us, one rule for others.

They are not, in the long run. These are just the ones we care about and remember more.

 

[Bobski]

Am I allowed to say that I find this pervasive conspiracy and victimization complex extremely annoying?

100000% Every single fanbase asserts that the refs are against them and there is a conspiracy to keep their team down. "No, but all the rest are deluded, it is true for us" "

It is incredibly tedious, and that you have people crying about objectively correct decisions because last week/month/year a similar but not identical incident ended with a different outcome makes it even more so. Last night all the "watch there be 9/10/11 mins of injury time" at the end and then there were 4 and crickets, or the Forest game when there was constant, correct, crying about their timewasting while they were leading and then outrage that the refs added on the time at the end when Utd were ahead. Worse than ever, and not just here.

 

[Doracle]

Not hearing much noise about the decision in the Luton game. The penalty they got was a joke.

Even the red card was questionable, yellow would have been enough there, Wolves player was being held down and just has a little push back with his foot. .

The penalty was laughable and highlights the stupidity of the rule. The ball goes from his knee onto his hand, with no possibility it’s deliberate, but because his hand was in an “unnatural” position to start with, it’s given as a handball. I’m just waiting for the occasion when the ball ricochets onto a defender’s hand when it’s behind their back and how they justify that being “natural”.

I don’t honestly know whether this was a VAR error as I suspect it’s actually the fault of the stupidity in the current implementation of the handball rules. However, it needs to change.

 

[acnumber9]

Would it be easier just to use feet for offside? Might make calls easier on VAR.

I’ve always thought it should be based on what they score with. Measuring to the shoulder because you can score with your shoulder is stupid if you haven’t actually scored with your shoulder.

 

[Murder on Zidanes Floor]

I’d happily get rid of VAR it’s the worst thing to happen to football and I don’t want to say I told you so, but I always knew it wasn’t suitable for football with the way the game flows. Take last nights decision, no common sense applied, you’re telling me that Trafford is saving that header from point blank range if Hojland isn’t there? Of course he isn’t, so it’s another stupid decision based on some changing rule book. Yes there were issues pre VAR with bad decisions, but it was nowhere near as bad as it is now.

Always thought it was crap. Also the issue is, teams quickly learn how to gamify it (see Son against McTominay). Really rubbish and just ruins the game.

 

[SER19]

No, but then, you can also say that one person will look at an incident and reach a definite conclusion while another will not...

As long as human beings are involved, some inconsistency will remain. However, VAR definitely corrects errors, and plenty of them. So I'll always take that over one referee making a decision based on what he saw in real time.

Refereeing is NOT worse than it has been. That claim is based on short memory.

How can you make a claim about another persons memory? Im not alone in people thinking that the standard is terrible, rarely any game goes by without a really poor error- even with var. Using technology to enforce laws so open to interpretation by different people is utterly pointless.

 

[SER19]

Hojlund one was clearly offside, but frustrating after the City one was given.

and another similar one will be given later in season. Its too inconsistent to justify the negatives that the technology brings

 

[90 + 5min]

They are not, in the long run. These are just the ones we care about and remember more.

What is long run? Season? 3 years? 5? 10? For example lets take this season and some major ones.
Against Wolves we should have 2 penalties, but talking point was why didn’t Wolves get when Onana knocked their player. Nobody talked about our situations.
Against Tottenham we should have clear penalty. One that is given every day. We didn’t and Tottenham scored after that.
Against Arsenal we were denied a clear goal. Then moments later Arsenal were given one when it was clear freekick for us.

There are lot of other situations that can be mentioned. So when are we going to have decisions going our way in the same way as other teams?

 

[Pogue Mahone]

I’ve always thought it should be based on what they score with. Measuring to the shoulder because you can score with your shoulder is stupid if you haven’t actually scored with your shoulder.

That’s a good idea.

 

[Harry190]

Hojlund wasn't obstructing the keeper's vision. They gave it offside because he was pushing against the keeper, which does make him an active component unfortunately.

 

[Amir]

How can you make a claim about another persons memory? Im not alone in people thinking that the standard is terrible, rarely any game goes by without a really poor error- even with var. Using technology to enforce laws so open to interpretation by different people is utterly pointless.

Plenty of games go by without a poor error. Yesterday's match was one of them. But no one is going to highlight those games in any way, and rightly so.

Few rules in football are open to interpretation. Most are not. And I believe that over the last few years we've seen plenty of correct decisions being applied thanks to VAR. The game is better for it, and cleaner for it, even if it's not perfect.

 

[Amir]

If VAR was scrapped tomorrow nobody is going to miss its' existence

Until the moment a referee makes a big decision with the replays easily showing he is wrong.

 

[Oranges038]

The penalty was laughable and highlights the stupidity of the rule. The ball goes from his knee onto his hand, with no possibility it’s deliberate, but because his hand was in an “unnatural” position to start with, it’s given as a handball. I’m just waiting for the occasion when the ball ricochets onto a defender’s hand when it’s behind their back and how they justify that being “natural”.

I don’t honestly know whether this was a VAR error as I suspect it’s actually the fault of the stupidity in the current implementation of the handball rules. However, it needs to change.

Had the game on in the background, a disgraceful decision.

 

[Zlaatan]

I’d happily get rid of VAR it’s the worst thing to happen to football and I don’t want to say I told you so, but I always knew it wasn’t suitable for football with the way the game flows. Take last nights decision, no common sense applied, you’re telling me that Trafford is saving that header from point blank range if Hojland isn’t there? Of course he isn’t, so it’s another stupid decision based on some changing rule book. Yes there were issues pre VAR with bad decisions, but it was nowhere near as bad as it is now.

It doesn't matter if he would've saved it or not because the rules state that if the goalie is affected by a player in an offside position the goal should be disallowed. This has nothing to do with how good or bad VAR is, it's the offside rule you're upset about.

 

[Snow]

Hojlund wasn't obstructing the keeper's vision. They gave it offside because he was pushing against the keeper, which does make him an active component unfortunately.

He wasn't pushing against the keeper when Evans headed the ball. Until Evans heads the ball Højlund isn't offside.

 

[Samid]

Martinez time wasting at every goal kick, Digne had a bloody nose that took several minutes. 3 minutes added time and the Aussie ref blows for half time at 46 mins

 

[Pogue Mahone]

It doesn't matter if he would've saved it or not because the rules state that if the goalie is affected by a player in an offside position the goal should be disallowed. This has nothing to do with how good or bad VAR is, it's the offside rule you're upset about.

The reaction of the keeper spoke volumes. Not a word of complaint. Hojlund was wrestling with him when the cross came in (and he wasn’t offside) but he wasn’t in the keeper’s line of sight when Evans headed the ball and his only motion from then was getting even further out of the keeper’s way.

One thing that really bothered me about that call was they never showed an angle from behind the goal or, even better, behind Jonny Evans. The side view they made the decision on tells us nothing about whether the keeper’s view is obstructed or not and the keeper definitely didn’t react as though it was (very different reaction to the keeper after the City goal that VAR didn’t rule out) That’s the thing with VAR. It’s supposed to be this near flawless system but it’s fecking constantly getting referees to make very tight, marginal calls based on crappy evidence.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Romero handball the latest in a long line of VAR fuelled bullshit. It’s made the whole handball rule an absolute farce, completely different to the way the rule has been applied for decades. Ruining the game, it really is.

And that’s even without the infuriating inconsistency where the same player wasn’t penalised in the game against United.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

It doesn't matter if he would've saved it or not because the rules state that if the goalie is affected by a player in an offside position the goal should be disallowed. This has nothing to do with how good or bad VAR is, it's the offside rule you're upset about.

Well it’s not because before VAR there’s absolutely no way that goal doesn’t stand. So people can quote the rules all they like but the fact is that VAR has put the rules under a microscope that was never the intention.

 

[Nero]

They simply have to come out now and explain clearly why they didn't give the handball against United but they did give this one.

 

[Di Maria's angel]

They're making it up. What a fecking farce. Also explains the confusion from yesterday.