VAR - Not the hero we want, the one we need

We can't make any progress if one side thinks it's a handball & the other doesn't can we? That's for sure.

I've stated 2 ways of deciding that it's a handball. Either the 'like always' precedent or saying he jumped at the ball with the intention of making contact - which he did with his arm.

There you go.

I don't believe in 'accidental handball' in those circumstances - there's another if you like.

So (the application of) VAR fecked up.

I honestly can't say anymore. Which you'll rejoice at, I'm sure, :D.
 
Carolina Red said:
By that you mean when one side believes in the rules and the other side believes in their own personal rules which don’t apply to anything.
Click to expand...

No, its worse than that really. I'm saying your side of the argument is really conveniently believing in the rules.
 
ForestRGoinUp said:
The beauty and drama of sport comes from the human side that balances out the cold, results obsessed side of it.

Replay is going to quickly throw that perfect balance out of whack as everything tilts toward results.
Click to expand...

Completely agree, this crazy thirst to put money as the only objective of football is warping the game.

I'm happy living in a world where referees make mistakes just like the players do every few seconds. I can't get my head around some people's obsession for perfection and robot football.

And on a granular level, VAR fails on its own terms. The penalty box has always existed which means there's always been a focus on incidents that happen inside it, fair enough. But in this need for absolute correctness, how is it that VAR can make calls on questionable handballs that nobody cared about before, but miss shirt pulling and keepers diving?

My biggest problem with VAR is that it can award a penalty for a foul but ignore the fact that the attacking team could have won the ball on the counter just seconds before with a foul around the half way line that the ref missed...which 2 or 3 passes later leads to the foul that VAR does rule on. Absurd.

A football match and phase of play has too many interdependent parts for VAR to be truly fair.

Adding extra focus on the box has turned footbal even more into a highlight package where only 'moments' matter and the entirity of the game is lost.
 
The Midnight Rambler said:
Completely agree, this crazy thirst to put money as the only objective of football is warping the game.

I'm happy living in a world where referees make mistakes just like the players do every few seconds. I can't get my head around some people's obsession for perfection and robot football.

And on a granular level, VAR fails on its own terms. The penalty box has always existed which means there's always been a focus on incidents that happen inside it, fair enough. But in this need for absolute correctness, how is it that VAR can make calls on questionable handballs that nobody cared about before, but miss shirt pulling and keepers diving?

My biggest problem with VAR is that it can award a penalty for a foul but ignore the fact that the attacking team could have won the ball on the counter just seconds before with a foul around the half way line that the ref missed...which 2 or 3 passes later leads to the foul that VAR does rule on. Absurd.

A football match and phase of play has too many interdependent parts for VAR to be truly fair.

Adding extra focus on the box has turned footbal even more into a highlight package where only 'moments' matter and the entirity of the game is lost.
Click to expand...
Yep, I think people (fans and viewers) incorrectly assign too much value to the results in sports. When in reality, you could go back 100 years and assign completely different results and crown an entirely different set of winners and losers...and the popularity now would be the same and still come down to all the characters and stories that got us here. The tragedies, the triumphs, the heroes, the villains. Those are what have made sports what they are today, not the inches that would have determined offsides or not, handball or not. It's a production that no director or writer could ever or will ever match because it's made up of an infinite number of decisions from such a large number of participants. To try and direct too much of that humanity out of sports will be the end of them, at least as we knew them.
 
ForestRGoinUp said:
Yep, I think people (fans and viewers) incorrectly assign too much value to the results in sports. When in reality, you could go back 100 years and assign completely different results and crown an entirely different set of winners and losers...and the popularity now would be the same and still come down to all the characters and stories that got us here. The tragedies, the triumphs, the heroes, the villains. Those are what have made sports what they are today, not the inches that would have determined offsides or not, handball or not. It's a production that no director or writer could ever or will ever match because it's made up of an infinite number of decisions from such a large number of participants. To try and direct too much of that humanity out of sports will be the end of them, at least as we knew them.
Click to expand...
I guess we just shouldn’t have rules to be enforced in sports then...?

Just let the game go as it may.
 
Carolina Red said:
I guess we just shouldn’t have rules to be enforced in sports then...?

Just let the game go as it may.
Click to expand...
Wow, that’s the conclusion you jumped to? It’s played by and for people and enforced by people. The good and the bad that comes with that has made it the most popular sport on earth, likely never to be surpassed.

For me, and apparently half the global population the rules are really great as is, or as they were.
 
Carolina Red said:
Who do you think watches the replay?
Click to expand...
Oh you want to just do the thing where you get into all the semantics now? Cute.

To introduce VAR is to change the natural course of events. A course, by the way, that has written 100+ years of incredible history and drama. How arrogant do you have to be to think you should alter the process that gives us that?

As others have said, the beauty and the poetry of the sport (things people only subconsciously feel connected to) comes from all human elements built into it, good and bad. It’s these things that people can relate to as they sit on couches guzzling beers. If you want to legislate that stuff out of it, you’re boring. And if you think it will make for a more entertaining product, you’re wrong.
 
ForestRGoinUp said:
Oh you want to just do the thing where you get into all the semantics now? Cute.

To introduce VAR is to change the natural course of events. A course, by the way, that has written 100+ years of incredible history and drama. How arrogant do you have to be to think you should alter the process that gives us that?

As others have said, the beauty and the poetry of the sport (things people only subconsciously feel connected to) comes from all human elements built into it, good and bad. It’s these things that people can relate to as they sit on couches guzzling beers. If you want to legislate that stuff out of it, you’re boring. And if you think it will make for a more entertaining product, you’re wrong.
Click to expand...
I want you to drop the overly romantic nonsense and get back into the real world.

There are rules. The rules exist for a reason. There are officials to enforce said rules. Quit getting bent out of shape because we’ve developed better ways for officials to enforce the rules.

People complaining about VAR helping to actually get rulings right make about as much sense to me as if someone had complained because an official decided to wear eye glasses so he could see better.
 
Carolina Red said:
I want you to drop the overly romantic nonsense and get back into the real world.

There are rules. The rules exist for a reason. There are officials to enforce said rules. Quit getting bent out of shape because we’ve developed better ways for officials to enforce the rules.

People complaining about VAR helping to actually get rulings right make about as much sense to me as if someone had complained because an official decided to wear eye glasses so he could see better.
Click to expand...
It’s okay if it doesn’t make sense to you. And football is romantic. Always has been.
 
ForestRGoinUp said:
It’s okay if it doesn’t make sense to you. And football is romantic. Always has been.
Click to expand...
How you’d have been 100 years ago...

“Spectacles take away from the poetry of the game provided by that near sighted twat in stripes getting his calls wrong”

Also you, 1 week later, after an official gets an offside wrong against your team...

“Put some spectacles on you nearsighted twat!”

No sense, whatsoever.
 
Football doesn't have the minute adherence to the rules of other sports, maybe. And is more difficult to officiate than most.

They write the rules down & then 22 blokes & a ref largely ignore them for 90 minutes. How about we say that? But there is always widely accepted precedence

I have examples:

throw ins from the right place

GK holding the ball for more than 6 secs

1st offences not being yellow cards

Other offences not being 2nd yellow cards

defenders handling the ball being different from attackers handling the ball - (more leeway for accidental-ness for defenders)

you're not usually allowed score goals with your arm

stuff like that...

This referee sent off Nani according to the letter of the law & this place was incandescent with rage. I mentioned the letter of the law for that one (being a contrary berk as per) & was slaughtered for it.

And back to Llorente, doesn't he lose his 'accidental' protection because of how far the ball has travelled & relatively slowly too. And the main change of force & definitely direction of travel of said ball is caused by the first contact by his arm.
 
Last edited:
In the general sense though, we are travelling with/towards technology-assisted decision-making being part of sport & in football giving equivalent leeway or benefit of the doubt to attackers now.

And I was wondering - and I don't mean this rudely but younger, non-romantics & American people seem to love the meticulous accuracy, strict rules being rules approach & all the data & statistics more than the 'making it up as you go along' approach.

I remain undecided on VAR generally, a long trial seems reasonable. Once you see the best angle, Llorente was a stone-cold handball. VAR should have been disallowing it, therefore VAR cocked it up on this occasion.
 
Last edited:
VAR can't guarantee complete justice. Rules are interpreted and applied by fallible human beings. Still, VAR contributes to justice.

City would have won with an offside goal without VAR. Maybe they were a bit shafted with Llorente goal but it was because the referee didn't see the situation from other angles. With practice VAR will get implemented better and better and rules which are not sufficiently clear will be formulated more precisely.
 
@montpelier

How can you in 1 post wax poetically about wiggle room in the laws of the game, then in the next post claim that VAR has “cocked it up” by the official correctly applying wiggle room (it was accidental) that’s actually built into the laws of the game?
 
montpelier said:
In the general sense though, we are travelling with/towards technology-assisted decision-making being part of sport & in football giving equivalent leeway or benefit of the doubt to attackers now.

And I was wondering - and I don't mean this rudely but younger, non-romantics & American people seem to love the meticulous accuracy, strict rules being rules approach & all the data & statistics more than the 'making it up as you go along' approach.

I remain undecided on VAR generally, a long trial seems reasonable. Once you see the best angle, Llorente was a stone-cold handball. VAR should have been disallowing it, therefore VAR cocked it up on this occasion.
Click to expand...
There is no trial. There is only what we have now and what gets added to it. It will never go backwards. See: American sports.
 
Carolina Red said:
I guess we just shouldn’t have rules to be enforced in sports then...?

Just let the game go as it may.
Click to expand...

There’s a referee to do that.

Football got quite popular with this way of enforcing the rules without a guy watching a video replay hoping to find a way to disrupt the game & creating a stop start game
 
Rafaeldagold said:
There’s a referee to do that.

Football got quite popular with this way of enforcing the rules without a guy watching a video replay hoping to find a way to disrupt the game & creating a stop start game
Click to expand...
By that, you mean “a referee to do that”.

So we’ve just added a referee doing what referees do.
 
Treble said:
VAR can't guarantee complete justice. Rules are interpreted and applied by fallible human beings. Still, VAR contributes to justice.

City would have won with an offside goal without VAR. Maybe they were a bit shafted with Llorente goal but it was because the referee didn't see the situation from other angles. With practice VAR will get implemented better and better and rules which are not sufficiently clear will be formulated more precisely.
Click to expand...

How did they get shafted with the Llorente goal? It wasn’t handball, they got it right. VAR is excellent and future generations will laugh at the idea we just let games be decided even if the decision was massively incorrect.
 
Carolina Red said:
I want you to drop the overly romantic nonsense and get back into the real world.

There are rules. The rules exist for a reason. There are officials to enforce said rules. Quit getting bent out of shape because we’ve developed better ways for officials to enforce the rules.

People complaining about VAR helping to actually get rulings right make about as much sense to me as if someone had complained because an official decided to wear eye glasses so he could see better.
Click to expand...

1) Football is romantic

2) There are plenty of rules which still don’t get adeherd to with VAR (throw ins wrong place, incorrect fouls given not in penalty area)

3) If something fundamentally changes the way a game is viewed /played then sometimes it’s not worth the extra accuracy
 
Rafaeldagold said:
1) Football is romantic

2) There are plenty of rules which still don’t get adeherd to with VAR (throw ins wrong place, incorrect fouls given not in penalty area)

3) If something fundamentally changes the way a game is viewed /played then sometimes it’s not worth the extra accuracy
Click to expand...
1) It still is.

2) So it hasn’t turned it into the robotic, lifeless thing that anti-VAR types claim.

3) Enforcing the rules is a fundamental change, eh?
 
Carolina Red said:
By that, you mean “a referee to do that”.

So we’ve just added a referee doing what referees do.
Click to expand...

Yes..how does that change the point i made? Football developed quite well with this system.

We’re at this place now with every minute play being looked at in different camera angles & speeds (which changes how a tackle looks) because of everyone & managers moaning & placing the blame of results to referees.

The game has changed so much with this & sometimes technology progress isn’t good in sport - yes In other areas of life but the cost/benefit of VAR just isn’t there in my opinion
 
Carolina Red said:
1) It still is.

2) So it hasn’t turned it into the robotic, lifeless thing that anti-VAR types claim.

3) Enforcing the rules is a fundamental change, eh?
Click to expand...

1) it’s becoming less romantic

2) Just because it’s not involved in these areas now doesn’t mean it won’t be in the future- not sure how it being robotic & lifeless in some parts of the game help your pro var point?

3) Yes..yes it is & you just won’t understand this point as if you really want to in football you could analyse pretty much every tackle, throw in, corner, goal kick to make sure the ‘rules are being enforced’
Emotions of scoring a goal have already changed for me just in case a subjective decision wasn’t seen originally which looks a million times worse in slow mo or someone was 1mm offside in the build up to a goal. It’s not progress- it’ll eventually suck a lot of the life & emotions in the game.
 
Rafaeldagold said:
1) it’s becoming less romantic

2) Just because it’s not involved in these areas now doesn’t mean it won’t be in the future- not sure how it being robotic & lifeless in some parts of the game help your pro var point?

3) Yes..yes it is & you just won’t understand this point as if you really want to in football you could analyse pretty much every tackle, throw in, corner, goal kick to make sure the ‘rules are being enforced’
Emotions of scoring a goal have already changed for me just in case a subjective decision wasn’t seen originally which looks a million times worse in slow mo or someone was 1mm offside in the build up to a goal. It’s not progress- it’ll eventually suck a lot of the life & emotions in the game.
Click to expand...
I’m not buying the subjective slippery slope argument.
 
Rafaeldagold said:
1) it’s becoming less romantic

2) Just because it’s not involved in these areas now doesn’t mean it won’t be in the future- not sure how it being robotic & lifeless in some parts of the game help your pro var point?

3) Yes..yes it is & you just won’t understand this point as if you really want to in football you could analyse pretty much every tackle, throw in, corner, goal kick to make sure the ‘rules are being enforced’
Emotions of scoring a goal have already changed for me just in case a subjective decision wasn’t seen originally which looks a million times worse in slow mo or someone was 1mm offside in the build up to a goal. It’s not progress- it’ll eventually suck a lot of the life & emotions in the game.
Click to expand...
They won’t understand it until they’ve grown bored of it. Football is about the billions of minor/major human decisions that go into each game/season/etc.

To change a part of that would be like removing something from a natural ecosystem. It will have consequences you can’t picture right now.
 
There are reasonable arguments against and criticisms of VAR to be made but the idea that it has sucked the emotions out of the game is a bizzare one. If you weren't emotionally drawn in to that VAR offside in the Spurs/City game then there's frankly something wrong with you and the way you process football. At no point in the future will moments like that stop being anything other than utterly compelling.

Similarly, if even the possibility of VAR stops you being emotionally invested in your team scoring a goal then what can we say? Football probably isn't going to be for you from now on. Luckily most people aren't so highly strung.
 
sullydnl said:
There are reasonable arguments against and criticisms of VAR to be made but the idea that it has sucked the emotions out of the game is a bizzare one. If you weren't emotionally drawn in to that VAR offside in the Spurs/City game then there's frankly something wrong with you and the way you process football. At no point in the future will moments like that stop being anything other than utterly compelling.
Click to expand...
In only a few years it’s already become an annoyance in American football.
 
Carolina Red said:
It’s not too difficult when they all follow the same subjective slippery slope pattern.
Click to expand...

Yes because when everyone said goal line technology would be that & we wouldn’t use it in other areas of the game..

Think you’re naive if you think in 5/10 years we won’t have more & more stoppages from more & more incidents being reviewed
 
sullydnl said:
There are reasonable arguments against and criticisms of VAR to be made but the idea that it has sucked the emotions out of the game is a bizzare one. If you weren't emotionally drawn in to that VAR offside in the Spurs/City game then there's frankly something wrong with you and the way you process football. At no point in the future will moments like that stop being anything other than utterly compelling.

Similarly, if even the possibility of VAR stops you being emotionally invested in your team scoring a goal then what can we say? Football probably isn't going to be for you from now on. Luckily most people aren't so highly strung.
Click to expand...

How I process football is how everyone has for 100 years plus before VAR.

Just because you found it compelling doesn’t mean it’s the right direction for football- sure the ‘correct’ decision prevailed as someone was marginally offside in the build up, but it just felt so weird...yes funny it happened to City but what if it happened to us? Emotion was certainly sucked out for City fans.

Anyway it’s not about that particular decision it’s all the other goals that’ll be reviewed - which is every single one.
No more can you be confident you’ve scored until var has it checked for any minor infringement
 
Rafaeldagold said:
How I process football is how everyone has for 100 years plus before VAR.

Just because you found it compelling doesn’t mean it’s the right direction for football- sure the ‘correct’ decision prevailed as someone was marginally offside in the build up, but it just felt so weird...yes funny it happened to City but what if it happened to us? Emotion was certainly sucked out for City fans.

Anyway it’s not about that particular decision it’s all the other goals that’ll be reviewed - which is every single one.
No more can you be confident you’ve scored until var has it checked for any minor infringement
Click to expand...

If it's both compelling and correct then you'll have a hard time arguing that it isn't an improvement. Plus the emotion wasn't sucked out for City fans (or indeed Spus fans). Despair is as much an emotion as joy after all, so both went on an emotional rollercoaster in that minute and a half.

Like I said though, if even the potential threat of VAR stops you from being emotionally invested in your team scoring then that's unfortunate. Most people aren't that sensitive so.... *shrugs*

I mean good luck finding a sport that doesn't incorporate modern technology into its ruleset as we move further into the 21st century.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.