| This VAR business 19:15 - Dec 28 with 7220 views | MrSwerve |
All a bit odd, innit. |  |
| |  |
| This VAR business on 09:23 - Dec 29 with 1527 views | johnlangy |
| This VAR business on 22:05 - Dec 28 by DrGonzo |
I can honestly take the odd mistake from a linesman or ref. VAR takes the emotion out of the purest moment in football and it sucks. |
Logically it seemed a good idea. In practice it's crap. I completely agree with DrGonzo and i'd scrap it now.
And we're still complaining about decisions even when it's done by VAR instead of the ref. 100% of Newcastle fans will believe that Andy Carroll was pushed yesterday and it should have been a penalty. Everton fans would not have complained if they saw it back even if they're glad it was not given.
So nothing's changed. We all still feel hard done by when decisions go against our team. And we still gladly accept crap decisions that benefit our team. |  | | |
| This VAR business on 09:34 - Dec 29 with 1520 views | Best_loser |
All in all its a good thing, need a bit of tweaking
But there is nothing worse walking home from a match feeling your team were robbed |  | | |
| This VAR business on 10:51 - Dec 29 with 1462 views | MrSwerve |
| This VAR business on 08:31 - Dec 29 by hobo |
Bit late now. I had plenty of arguments on here pre VAR saying how it would ruin football, how it's mainly there to help the big teams, and will take the emotion out of the sport...but no, "football NEEDS VAR!" "We must move with the times!" "It works in rugby!". We even had fans from countries where VAR had been used for trials saying how awful it was.
No doubt the FA had some billion pound deal already tied up with some technology company, and the fans pretty much begged them to push it through
I'm just glad it's not ruining our games in the Championship, but I'm sure it will be on it's way |
Well theoretically of course football should be using technology to bring it in line with nearly every professional sport in the world. The practical usage of it though, is shocking. I’d rather have a couple of genuinely wrong decisions than spend 2 minutes deliberating and then not having a black or white answer.
Sorry but nothing will convince me or millions of others, or even many referees that that Norwich goal was offside. It looks clearly onside to me. Therein lies the problem. I bet if there was a diffent VAR ref for yesterday’s match, it could well have gone the other way.
Another brilliant goal spoiled and chalked off. | |
| |
| This VAR business on 10:55 - Dec 29 with 1459 views | MrSwerve |
Oh and without VAR, I reckon nearly everyone would have said ‘timed his run perfectly’ looking at that goal. As Monny says, these things should be clear and obvious. | |
| |
| This VAR business on 11:24 - Dec 29 with 1434 views | WarwickHunt |
| This VAR business on 10:51 - Dec 29 by MrSwerve |
Well theoretically of course football should be using technology to bring it in line with nearly every professional sport in the world. The practical usage of it though, is shocking. I’d rather have a couple of genuinely wrong decisions than spend 2 minutes deliberating and then not having a black or white answer.
Sorry but nothing will convince me or millions of others, or even many referees that that Norwich goal was offside. It looks clearly onside to me. Therein lies the problem. I bet if there was a diffent VAR ref for yesterday’s match, it could well have gone the other way.
Another brilliant goal spoiled and chalked off. |
There also needs to be some common sense applied - where’s the advantage in having a hand or arm “offside”? |  | | |
| This VAR business on 11:28 - Dec 29 with 1427 views | Andy1300 |
| This VAR business on 11:24 - Dec 29 by WarwickHunt |
There also needs to be some common sense applied - where’s the advantage in having a hand or arm “offside”? |
Doesn’t the law state that only parts of the body that you can legally score with must be on-side? |  |
| |
| This VAR business on 11:46 - Dec 29 with 1414 views | Cooperman |
| This VAR business on 11:28 - Dec 29 by Andy1300 |
Doesn’t the law state that only parts of the body that you can legally score with must be on-side? |
I remember Luis Suarez scoring against us when his teeth were offside. |  |
| |
| This VAR business on 17:32 - Dec 29 with 1330 views | union_jack |
Another ludicrous decision in the Liverpool game denying Wolves an equaliser.
Surely VAR should only disallow a goal if it is clearly offside not by the width of a shoelace. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| This VAR business on 17:36 - Dec 29 with 1325 views | ploppy |
| This VAR business on 03:27 - Dec 29 by Cooperman |
That’s quite right but If you apply a tolerance you also need to be able to measure to that tolerance and this cannot be done today for offside rulings.
Goal line technology on the other hand delivers a result that everyone trusts - there is both timely delivery and a visual aid. I’d throw VAR away unless this quality is available for offside rulings. |
Other way round, surely. The tolerance should depend on the precision of your measuring equipment.
Goal-line technology works because it's tracking a very simple object's trajectory - no players involved, just a spherical object and a vertical plane. The offside problem is much more difficult to solve. I'd be very surprised if they scrap VAR, so the best we can hope for is timely decisions - which means no humans projecting lines from parts of bodies to the ground, a short and fixed amount of time and actually abiding by the "clear and obvious error" mantra. | | | |
| This VAR business on 18:13 - Dec 29 with 1302 views | Andy1300 |
| This VAR business on 09:12 - Dec 29 by Andy1300 |
It’s just useless officials that ruin things. |
And as if to rub it in, that Lino on the east side.......he must be feckin blind if he thought that ball came off our player, every other person in the ground knew their player kicked it straight out, also, he couldn’t keep up with play to see they were offside. [Post edited 29 Dec 2019 19:40]
| |
| |
| This VAR business on 19:36 - Dec 29 with 1262 views | JACKMANANDBOY |
Seems to have gone well this afternoon
🤔 |  |
| |
| This VAR business on 20:00 - Dec 29 with 1238 views | Best_loser |
I like the souness idea
If any part of the player is onside, it's not offside | | | |
| This VAR business on 14:01 - Dec 30 with 1131 views | Badlands |
If we'd have had VAR in our final PL season we would almost certainly have stayed up.
If we'd had VAR in last season's FA Cup we'd have almost certainly have beaten Man City. |  |
| |
| This VAR business on 14:31 - Dec 30 with 1121 views | BryanSwan |
| This VAR business on 17:32 - Dec 29 by union_jack |
Another ludicrous decision in the Liverpool game denying Wolves an equaliser.
Surely VAR should only disallow a goal if it is clearly offside not by the width of a shoelace. |
It just seems to be getting worse, there was also debate as to whether Van Dijk handballed in the build up to their goal.
I have seen that due to the pixels & inability to completely make out when a ball has been played it is not accurate, yet they are still making decisions to the mm when the tech isnt there to do so. (So it is still a guess).
I would get rid completely, would rather have a few go against us, but not have to wait for an age before they can decide if we van celebrate. | |
| |
| This VAR business on 15:01 - Dec 30 with 1104 views | Catullus |
| This VAR business on 08:31 - Dec 29 by hobo |
Bit late now. I had plenty of arguments on here pre VAR saying how it would ruin football, how it's mainly there to help the big teams, and will take the emotion out of the sport...but no, "football NEEDS VAR!" "We must move with the times!" "It works in rugby!". We even had fans from countries where VAR had been used for trials saying how awful it was.
No doubt the FA had some billion pound deal already tied up with some technology company, and the fans pretty much begged them to push it through
I'm just glad it's not ruining our games in the Championship, but I'm sure it will be on it's way |
I was all for VAR to decide on penalties, sendings off and goal line decisions but not for this.
I'm with Souness on this, if one foot is onside then you are onside, if both feet are offside, you are offside. Being given offside by millimetres is spoiling the game. | |
| |
| This VAR business on 15:15 - Dec 30 with 1090 views | jojaca |
| This VAR business on 15:01 - Dec 30 by Catullus |
I was all for VAR to decide on penalties, sendings off and goal line decisions but not for this.
I'm with Souness on this, if one foot is onside then you are onside, if both feet are offside, you are offside. Being given offside by millimetres is spoiling the game. |
Rules are rules😉
There was always going to be teething problems for first couple of seasons. I personally would gauge offside by footballers feet not armpit or any other body part. I would have hawkeye type sensors in players boots and you know in seconds if player is offside and the decision would be made by computer and not human. |  |
| Even when you know, you never know? |
| |
| This VAR business on 15:26 - Dec 30 with 1073 views | Badlands |
| This VAR business on 17:32 - Dec 29 by union_jack |
Another ludicrous decision in the Liverpool game denying Wolves an equaliser.
Surely VAR should only disallow a goal if it is clearly offside not by the width of a shoelace. |
Like being pregnant .. you are offside or onside ... he was off-side so wha's the problem? | |
| |
| This VAR business on 15:47 - Dec 30 with 1048 views | Vincent_Vega |
| This VAR business on 15:26 - Dec 30 by Badlands |
Like being pregnant .. you are offside or onside ... he was off-side so wha's the problem? |
What a minute, Pukki is pregnant?!?! |  |
| Boycott Shampoo......Demand Real Poo!!! |
| |
| This VAR business on 15:53 - Dec 30 with 1044 views | AnotherJohn |
| This VAR business on 22:09 - Dec 28 by Cooperman |
The argument isn’t about what part of the body is offside so your suggestion won’t work.
The argument is about the dividing line between being onside or offside and the ability to detect it with the naked eye. In essence it’s about the size of the grey area. My engineering brain only works with black or white, wrong or right, off or on so when I see someone who is clearly 1cm offside toe to toe then I will happily accept the decision. What I’m not satisfied with is the grey area caused by grainy images and lines on a monitor.
Therefore FWIW I’ll happily bin VAR and go back to the old methods until the point that someone is able to provide a quick and conclusive decision. That’s quick and conclusive, not one or the other. If that’s not forthcoming anytime soon then I will happily consign VAR to the trash bin once and for all. |
I was right with you on the first part of your post, but you lost me towards the end because the issue is not an area of indeterminacy, but rather that the critics want to deny offside decisions when the margin is very small.
The position some are putting forward is wrong headed because they are really saying that the way to deal with subjective errors is to allow a new area of subjectivity. At the moment we see a clear line across the pitch on the VAR screen and if the extended foot or hand of an attacker is across the line then he is offside. That is the rule, whether the margin is 10 cm or 10 mm. People are saying in effect, 'he is only marginally offside so the ref should let the goal stand'. They are proposing that instead of a line we have a fuzzy area with unclear cut off points. If people don't like the idea that being onside depends on being level then perhaps the answer is to change the rule to require that all parts of the attacker's body are clear of the 2nd last defender for offside to apply. Alternatively a tracking system using the players' GPS sports vests could be used to automate the process. We need a rule where a clear line can be drawn.
I am in favour of VAR because I believe it helps clubs of our size. | | | |
| This VAR business on 15:54 - Dec 30 with 1043 views | Cooperman |
| This VAR business on 20:00 - Dec 29 by Best_loser |
I like the souness idea
If any part of the player is onside, it's not offside |
So what happens when the tip of his longest trailing finger is in line with the longest outstretched finger of the defender? This isn’t about what part of the body is or isn’t offside, it’s about how offside is accurately measured (as per goal line decisions) and the results portrayed to the watching audience. [Post edited 30 Dec 2019 15:55]
| |
| |
| This VAR business on 15:54 - Dec 30 with 1043 views | Highjack |
| This VAR business on 15:47 - Dec 30 by Vincent_Vega |
What a minute, Pukki is pregnant?!?! |
Yes but they don’t Nor which player is the father. |  |
| |
| This VAR business on 16:00 - Dec 30 with 1032 views | MrSwerve |
| This VAR business on 15:54 - Dec 30 by Cooperman |
So what happens when the tip of his longest trailing finger is in line with the longest outstretched finger of the defender? This isn’t about what part of the body is or isn’t offside, it’s about how offside is accurately measured (as per goal line decisions) and the results portrayed to the watching audience. [Post edited 30 Dec 2019 15:55]
|
I can see what you’re saying, but it would be more acceptable to give these rediculous offsides if the majority of the attacker is offside, rather than 1% of his body being offside. | |
| |
| This VAR business on 16:06 - Dec 30 with 1022 views | Highjack |
| This VAR business on 16:00 - Dec 30 by MrSwerve |
I can see what you’re saying, but it would be more acceptable to give these rediculous offsides if the majority of the attacker is offside, rather than 1% of his body being offside. |
It’s supposed to overturn “clear and obvious errors”. How can a linesman see in real-time whether or not someone’s pube is offside when it takes some bloke sitting in a box hundreds of miles away with multiple camera angles, the ability to slow down and freeze the footage and the ability to draw lines several minutes to deliberate over?
They shouldn’t have to watch it several times from several different angles. Just watch it once. Is it clearly an error from the official? If it’s at all close they should go with the officials decision.
They are over analysing everything which leads to the stupid delays that are ruining the games. | |
| |
| This VAR business on 16:12 - Dec 30 with 1017 views | Algorfajack |
| This VAR business on 16:06 - Dec 30 by Highjack |
It’s supposed to overturn “clear and obvious errors”. How can a linesman see in real-time whether or not someone’s pube is offside when it takes some bloke sitting in a box hundreds of miles away with multiple camera angles, the ability to slow down and freeze the footage and the ability to draw lines several minutes to deliberate over?
They shouldn’t have to watch it several times from several different angles. Just watch it once. Is it clearly an error from the official? If it’s at all close they should go with the officials decision.
They are over analysing everything which leads to the stupid delays that are ruining the games. |
Spot on Highjack, 'clear & obvious error'. I seem to remember that the offside law referred to 'seeking to gain an advantage by being in an offside position'.
Having your little toe ahead of the defence is hardly breaking that law, is it |  |
| Prediction league winner 2016-2017 aka llanedeyrnjack |
| |
| This VAR business on 16:16 - Dec 30 with 1009 views | A_Fans_Dad |
I have said from the beginning that the Refs did not and still don't want it.
They have made a mockery of the whole process.
They have clear cases of hand ball not given, players pulled over or pushed over not given, penalties not given when they should be etc etc.
They als o take for ever to come to a very obvious decision, it is as if they are trying to bring the whole thing in to disrepute.
But even if it not used we will still get to see them making mistakes or "giving" bad decisions week in and week out on the TV replays.
They can't hide and they hate it. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
