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

Don't forget that when this is enforced, certain fouls will become less frequent as players know they'll get caught out more often. So in theory, there shouldn't be tons of these moments in the game (eventually) anyway.
 
Don't forget that when this is enforced, certain fouls will become less frequent as players know they'll get caught out more often. So in theory, there shouldn't be tons of these moments in the game (eventually) anyway.

This is a good point, if things are ever consistent. Which is a big if.
 
Well take the penalty, an incident occurred, a man watched it from a number of angles and fed back on what he saw, then another man watched it on another screen, from one angle and gave a penalty. The whole thing took 3 minutes.

That can obviously be done quicker.

It took 3 minutes, partially because the ref wanted to see it for himself. If you've two men feeding back the same thing then it would potentially speed it up. If you've two men feeding back conflicting information then not only do you have the time it takes for the referee to stroll over to the screen to have a look himself, you're also adding the time it takes to listen to feedback from two people rather than one.
 
It is it's own kind of drama, yes. But I prefer the "OMG! This is amazing! 92nd minute winner!" sort of drama to the pensive wait for the decision to come back from the VAR, pondering whether I've time to nip out for a piss, kind of drama.

Like I said, watch any of those other mainstream sports which have video review and see how it doesn’t take away from anything and if anything only adds more drama. You’re being overly dramatic with all your talking points.

And if a last minute game winner is a clear goal, then you already know and don’t have to wait for the officials to come to a conclusion. That happens in hockey now we’re a team scores in overtime, the other team may challenge offsides just on the off chance it was but most of the time the replay comes up on the video board and everyone knows its a good goal before the refs can even get together.
 
Honestly, nothing boils my piss than people wanting to turn football into other, vastly less popular, sports. Whether it's this or the 'sin bin' debate, or any other 'It works in...' argument. Including that one where we all conclude that what's actually ruined football for all of us all our lives is those times when players mouth off to the referee, unlike in rugby.
 
In my honest opinion with all due respect to put into simplest terms: you’re either a full on Neanderthal or not when it comes to this, no offense intended.

Like if you’re COMPLETELY against ANY degree of review/challenge system for whatever excuses you may as well be riding on horseback and handwriting us mailed responses instead of here on the caf. And yes they’re excuses and most definitely not reasons.
 
Every single issue people have with it, its not on VAR. People in charge could make a decision to not use VAR in goal situations. People involved on VAR should practice, improve on using it in general, regardless of what parts of the game is used.

Whats fecked up for me is this, either it works for all or whats the point of having it idea. It looks like its a set up for VAR to fail, what will happen then? Will those on power positions in football use it as excuse to shut the door for VAR and say "Yea well we tried it, it didnt work".

For me personally, idea behind VAR is to correct ref`s wrong doings. Does that means it has to jump straight away on decisions where goals are involved? No. At the moment VAR cant provide us 100% justice/right calls but i rather take 1% more justice then status quo.

For example in penalty situations you can use VAR only if ref stops a game by rewarding a pen, while players surround ref like they usually do, decision can be checked is it right one or not, now is that 100% justice vs in same situations but ref shows no pen and game to carry on? No but i rather take half then none at all.
 
In my honest opinion with all due respect to put into simplest terms: you’re either a full on Neanderthal or not when it comes to this, no offense intended.

Like if you’re COMPLETELY against ANY degree of review/challenge system you may as well be riding on horseback and handwriting us mailed responses instead of on the caf.

The problem is that you need a video review system that works and is compatible with the game. You can't just introduce one, ignore the criticism and claim the fact that it now exists is proof that anyone who doesn't like it is a neanderthal. Quite apart from the fact that neanderthals are now widely regarded as being far wiser and more intelligent than previously assumed.

"LASER STRIKERS!!"

- What the hell does that even..

"NEANDERTHAL!!!
 
The ref sometimes goes to the TV to look at instant replay (that has been pre-selected by officials in the booth).

But it's not that bad. The time spent is used by the (knowledgeable) commentators to muse over the play in contentions, the actions leading up to it, and the potential ramifications of a decision either way. I've never felt a replay was taking too long. But I'm American, so there's that.

There’s also the fact that American football is a game spent in almost perpetual stoppage. The play’s only in motion for something like 11 minutes, so what’s another beer break amongst the numerous time outs, tactical huddles and gregarious pop concerts?

Football football is more like Hockey or Basketball, but a lot more intense, because it’s less guaranteed of action, which means when it comes it’s followed by this huge, passionate, cathartic release of tension, even in meaningless games. You know all this, obviously, but my point is that if you start softening these moments of release, with a kind of technological bureaucracy that requires you to wait, I can see why some fans might feel like it’s a stab at the soul of the sport, and the very thing that makes it so special.

Personally, I’ve always been a huge advocate of VAR, because it just seems so silly that the most popular pass-time on the planet was so comically resistant to a progress that almost everyone else had embraced. And while I’m still in favour of the idea, I can definitely see why the first half of this game seemed like a walking (or kicking) example of its faults to some.

And I’ll admit it gave me a little pause. Particularly by West Brom’s 3rd, where it felt like the initial use of it, had virtually required it be used in every big decision, for the appearance of fairness if nothing else, which was both a headfeck and a killjoy for fans in the stadium.

I still reckon these are teething problems that can be worked out eventually. But I’m maybe 15-20% less convinced by it than I was before this game. Which seems an odd thing to say after a match where all the right decisions were made because of it.
 
Last edited:
Honestly, nothing boils my piss than people wanting to turn football into other, vastly less popular, sports. Whether it's this or the 'sin bin' debate, or any other 'It works in...' argument. Including that one where we all conclude that what's actually ruined football for all of us all our lives is those times when players mouth off to the referee, unlike in rugby.

Dude, what’s wrong with you lol. Like 99% of people who’ve responded to you have said, you’re making a mountain out of a molehill on any and every talking point.

Football won’t change into anything. It’s still football. We’re not proposing adding wings on the backs of players to make them fly. This is a matter of human progress and moving on from stone aged rules and adapting the game for the better. That’s literally all it is.
 
...likewise reviews add its own drama and human element. Silly excuse for anyone against challenges.

I'm not against the change. I understand why the sport wants to move forward in it's approach, but to say it doesn't take away from the drama of the game is wrong.

Also if it is going to be implemented, they need to think of a way to make it much more streamline.
 
Honestly, nothing boils my piss than people wanting to turn football into other, vastly less popular, sports. Whether it's this or the 'sin bin' debate, or any other 'It works in...' argument. Including that one where we all conclude that what's actually ruined football for all of us all our lives is those times when players mouth off to the referee, unlike in rugby.

No one is wanting to do this. I'd imagine people just want to see the correct decisions made at the highest level of the world's most popular and widespread sport.

Taking ideas from other sports doesn't automatically mean you're 'copying' them either, it just means you're looking at (potentially) good ideas from a different sport in order to see if they might work within football at all. I don't see what's wrong with that. And I say that as someone who's completely against the idea of introducing the sin bin into football. And as someone who couldn't give a shite about rugby.
 
It'd suck. I'd carry the pain and resentment around me for as long as I'm alive.

I still wouldn't think it'd be worth trading for a reality where I could never truly celebrate a last minute United winner again until I saw what the outcome of the referee holding his ear piece steadily in his ear and having a conversation with a man who was busy reviewing it on tape for the sole purpose of finding fault with it and with the power to instruct the referee to rule it out if he does.

This is my biggest issue with it. If a goal is incorrectly awarded for offside it can be disallowed but if a player running through on goal is incorrectly given offside you can't reinstate that.
 
It took 3 minutes, partially because the ref wanted to see it for himself. If you've two men feeding back the same thing then it would potentially speed it up. If you've two men feeding back conflicting information then not only do you have the time it takes for the referee to stroll over to the screen to have a look himself, you're also adding the time it takes to listen to feedback from two people rather than one.

Big reason was replay supplied wasn't sufficent, all ref had to go on was an angle filmed from the top of stand ffs.

The TV companies need to step up to this aswell and make sure they supply proper close ups and much quicker than they do aswell.
 
I'd be in favour of a system where there was a '3rd eye', watching on a screen who for penalty decisions or incidents where the referee has suggested he may be looking to issue a red card, to be involved in the conversation between ref and (potentially) the linesman with the purpose of pointing out any incident that he feels the referee has missed. That I think is potentially workable. Reviewing goals as they go in to find an excuse to chalk them off, not so much
 
What the feck is wrong with people complaining about VAR!!

they want Real Madrid to win all the trophies? :lol:

I wonder if they're opinion would change after Utd getting disqualified in a champions semi final from a wrong ref decision...
 
Ok so it's not perfect yet but it's a step forward as more decisions are correct.
All those saying it takes away from the game....what about if we had this when Nani was red carded against real madrid. Or fletchers card which made him miss the cl final. If var was available then would you have not been happy for the 3 min delay if it resulted in a different decision. Of course both of those are debatable they were wrong in the first place but......
 
I'm not against the change. I understand why the sport wants to move forward in it's approach, but to say it doesn't take away from the drama of the game is wrong.

Also if it is going to be implemented, they need to think of a way to make it much more streamline.

@ the latter true. Like I said I don’t know how VAR works but I’ve given my $0.02 on what I think would be efficient for the game.

It takes away momentarily but add its right back in its own way. And better to have correct drama rather than corrupt/bitter drama. I don’t think anyone wants to see the Lampard situation or a team winning on an offside goal and would much rather just get the call right.
 
This is my biggest issue with it. If a goal is incorrectly awarded for offside it can be disallowed but if a player running through on goal is incorrectly given offside you can't reinstate that.

Well there’s the human aspect of the game which we’ll all continue to live with. No different than a player incorrectly given a foul for a dive (which I think should be reviewable in the case of a penalty).
 
I'd be in favour of a system where there was a '3rd eye', watching on a screen who for penalty decisions or incidents where the referee has suggested he may be looking to issue a red card, to be involved in the conversation between ref and (potentially) the linesman with the purpose of pointing out any incident that he feels the referee has missed. That I think is potentially workable. Reviewing goals as they go in to find an excuse to chalk them off, not so much

1) it’s not an excuse, what you’re saying is
2) it’s ensuring the correct call is made in a match defining moment
 
I think if a decision can't be taken in less than a minute, then the original one remains and they move on.
 
I think if a decision can't be taken in less than a minute, then the original one remains and they move on.

Worst of both worlds. 5 decisions to be reviewed, 5 pauses of 59 seconds. 5 minutes added time. Absolutely no reason for it because nothing happened other than a pause.
 
Well there’s the human aspect of the game which we’ll all continue to live with. No different than a player incorrectly given a foul for a dive (which I think should be reviewable in the case of a penalty).

The issue is that in many cases it can only rule a goal out, not rule one in.

I really like video technology in rugby league. I think it adds to the drama when a try is scored but it is regularly criticised for being used too often and slowing the game. It's only used for try/no try where there is a natural break in play and it is still seen as an issue.

VAR disrupting the flow of a game for not enough benefit is a genuine concern in football.
 
1) it’s not an excuse, what you’re saying is
2) it’s ensuring the correct call is made in a match defining moment


When a goal is scored and a review called for the purpose of that review is to see whether or not the goal should stand. The person reviewing the footage is looking for reasons why the goal could be disallowed, that's what it's for. They're not reviewing the footage to rate the celebrations out of 10 for originality, choreography and style.
 


Check out the replies. There must be loads of these we can do.

Like I said, watch any of those other mainstream sports which have video review and see how it doesn’t take away from anything and if anything only adds more drama. You’re being overly dramatic with all your talking points.

And if a last minute game winner is a clear goal, then you already know and don’t have to wait for the officials to come to a conclusion. That happens in hockey now we’re a team scores in overtime, the other team may challenge offsides just on the off chance it was but most of the time the replay comes up on the video board and everyone knows its a good goal before the refs can even get together.
 
For those of you complaining about VAR.

If we had VAR when we played Porto in the champions league, then Mourinho would not have his first CL trophy.

Just think about that, a history defining moment in a mans career, four clubs histories, all where they are now because we had a goal incorrectly called offisde:

 
The issue is that in many cases it can only rule a goal out, not rule one in.

Agreed, and I think that full rollout of this, God forbid it ever happens, is pretty much nailed on to reduce the number of goals in the game as we'll quickly get to a stage where a great many of them are reviewed, if only by chance just to see if there was anything questionable about them in the first place.
 
For those of you complaining about VAR.

If we had VAR when we played Porto in the champions league, then Mourinho would not have his first CL trophy.

Just think about that, a history defining moment in a mans career, four clubs histories, all where they are now because we had a goal incorrectly called offisde:




In defence of those of us complaining about VAR I'm not sure changing the game in detrimental ways, as we see it at least, are persuaded on the basis of a clip from a football match that took place fourteen years go. Nobody has denied that miscarriages of justice happen. Nobody not of that mindset already is going to be persuaded on the basis that none of us were aware that bad refereeing decisions have ever taken place before.

It's balancing the evils. IMO not having goals turned into a mere first phase of a lengthy confirmation process is the lesser of two evils vs finding a clip from over a decade ago when it could have been useful.
 
VAR is stupid system.
1. It kills the flows of the game
2. Encourage players to debate every decisions (as we saw from pool players tonight)
3. The worst of all, its still relly on human decision in the end.
So what's the point?
I dont watch rugby, tennis, or any other sports. i dont care if they use VAR, if they're better they'll be more popular than football (which they are not)
 
For those of you complaining about VAR.

If we had VAR when we played Porto in the champions league, then Mourinho would not have his first CL trophy.

Just think about that, a history defining moment in a mans career, four clubs histories, all where they are now because we had a goal incorrectly called offisde:



Game would've gone to extra time would it not? ;)
 
In defence of those of us complaining about VAR I'm not sure changing the game in detrimental ways, as we see it at least, are persuaded on the basis of a clip from a football match that took place fourteen years go. Nobody has denied that miscarriages of justice happen. Nobody not of that mindset already is going to be persuaded on the basis that none of us were aware that bad refereeing decisions have ever taken place before.

I happened. It's not like we never had advantage of scoring offside/dubious goals before and after that incident.
 
For those of you complaining about VAR.

If we had VAR when we played Porto in the champions league, then Mourinho would not have his first CL trophy.

Just think about that, a history defining moment in a mans career, four clubs histories, all where they are now because we had a goal incorrectly called offisde:


It's not available to overturn goals that have been ruled out for offside is it?
If an assistant ref puts their flag up that's got to be the end of it because the defending team can say they stopped when they saw the flag.
 
About time they’ve allowed VAR.
Next step is to make it work without the 3 min delay we saw for the Liverpool penalty today. It was clear from the 1st replay it was a tug on his arm. Did he flop afterwards? Yes, but still a peno.
Not sure why it took so long to figure that out.
Once they streamline it, by whatever means, the better it’ll become.
 
The issue is that in many cases it can only rule a goal out, not rule one in.

I really like video technology in rugby league. I think it adds to the drama when a try is scored but it is regularly criticised for being used too often and slowing the game. It's only used for try/no try where there is a natural break in play and it is still seen as an issue.

VAR disrupting the flow of a game for not enough benefit is a genuine concern in football.

True. Considering how football is played, I don’t think there should be as much potential for VAR to interfere with the game as there is.

If it were up to me: the refs don’t decide what’s to be reviewed, leave that to the managers to decide. Each team gets 1 review to either challenge offsides on a goal, a foul leading to a penalty, or one of those Lampard-ball crossing the line or not instances. That’s really all there is for football or at least which I can think of but am pretty sure those 3 would be it. Maybe even a red card idk. If you win the review (literally will take 2-3 mins AT MOST) you’re rewarded another challenge, if you lose it you’re not. If you want to ‘punish’ teams for incorrectly challenging a play maybe have them take out a player for the duration it took the review to take place and have the player come back on once that time has gone by? Just a thought and throwing it out there but considering it’d only take a couple minutes I don’t see the point in that + it’ll be added back in added time anyways.
 
About time they’ve allowed VAR.
Next step is to make it work without the 3 min delay we saw for the Liverpool penalty today. It was clear from the 1st replay it was a tug on his arm. Did he flop afterwards? Yes, but still a peno.
Not sure why it took so long to figure that out.
Once they streamline it, by whatever means, the better it’ll become.

The referees are probably a bit nervous because its so new and want to make sure they get the right decision since the spotlight is on them. It will definitely speed up with time.
 
It's new and will have teething problems , but thankfully it's here to stay. People just don't like change, but give it a couple years and it'll be difficult to imagine football without it.
 
About time they’ve allowed VAR.
Next step is to make it work without the 3 min delay we saw for the Liverpool penalty today. It was clear from the 1st replay it was a tug on his arm. Did he flop afterwards? Yes, but still a peno.
Not sure why it took so long to figure that out.
Once they streamline it, by whatever means, the better it’ll become.


Shouldn't the way of streamlining it been devised before it's imposed on the game? Whatever else, it's really odd to see such a clunky, prototype being imposed on the top level of the professional game like this. IMO hardon for the idea (not even the reality) of technology has rushed this thing along to the point where something as relatively prestigious as the FA Cup is subject to this 'suck it and see' experiment.

It's not as if the issues that have arisen thus far couldn't have been foreseen at the very beginning of the concept of the idea with someone in a room with a pencil and paper and 5 minutes to spare. Really is odd that it's being used in something like the FA Cup without anyone seemingly ever even thinking about its flaws and how to avoid the obvious pitfalls.