VAR... really??

[PaddockLad 22427]

 

 

 

[ewerk 39151]

Angry old man agrees with other angry old man shocker!

[PaddockLad 22427]

5 minutes ago, ewerk said:

Angry old man agrees with other angry old man shocker!

 

 

 

[Andrew 7457]

Calling out correct decisions as an avenue to complain about VAR is a weird line that he really seems to like.

[Howmanheyman 43836]

Celebrating a goal then waiting around a couple of minutes to celebrate a refs whistle isn't the beautiful game, like. Pro's and cons. 

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 4935]

35 minutes ago, Howmanheyman said:

Celebrating a goal then waiting around a couple of minutes to celebrate a refs whistle isn't the beautiful game, like. Pro's and cons. 

 

If referees weren't so shit I  would not be bothered if we didn't bring in VAR. However they are incredibly shit and self centred so we do need it.

[Ayatollah Hermione 17233]

It was alright in the World Cup because the refs used it well (for the most part) and there was a certain novelty to it. Letting our lot loose on it is asking for trouble.

[The Fish 12538]

On 2/13/2019 at 22:45, Andrew said:

Calling out correct decisions as an avenue to complain about VAR is a weird line that he really seems to like.

Aye the arguments against VAR aren't being explained well, for me. It all comes across a bit Luddite-y.

The time to get the decision right will shorten with experience. Why wouldn't you want the right decision to be found more often? 

[Howmanheyman 43836]

24 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Aye the arguments against VAR aren't being explained well, for me. It all comes across a bit Luddite-y.

The time to get the decision right will shorten with experience. Why wouldn't you want the right decision to be found more often? 

It might be a bit pedantic or I could well be a luddite but when your team score a goal it's nice to go a bit apeshit celebrating it without having to stop for an inquest before resuming the celebration which has lost the moment or it getting chalked off. I see it's good intentions and I'm not totally against it but parts of it don't do anything for a game that's managed perfectly well for over a hundred years. 

[RobinRobin 14489]

It would be much quicker if the VAR referee just made the decision, not get the on-field referee to walk over to a monitor and then do exactly what the VAR referee has been doing, i.e. checking several times and making a decision.

[essembeeofsunderland 811]

On 14/02/2019 at 10:37, Ant said:

 

Celebrating a goal and getting booked for it is just as annoying 

More than annoying if you're a kid or old person sitting In the front row when dozens run or jump over the seats to celebrate a goal with the goalscorer who has run to the advertising boards surrounding the ground. 

[essembeeofsunderland 811]

Oh right. Got it x

[The Fish 12538]

On 2/16/2019 at 19:03, Howmanheyman said:

It might be a bit pedantic or I could well be a luddite but when your team score a goal it's nice to go a bit apeshit celebrating it without having to stop for an inquest before resuming the celebration which has lost the moment or it getting chalked off. I see it's good intentions and I'm not totally against it but parts of it don't do anything for a game that's managed perfectly well for over a hundred years. 

It won't happen half as much as the detractors suggest. Most goals are not controversial in any way. Even before VAR there were inquests and the ref plodding over to the linesman for a chat. This is no different, except they'll have an actual decent chance of getting the decision right. 

There are two things finer than going apeshit when your team scores;

• Going apeshit again as the protests from the opposition are proven to be baseless because not only have you scored, but the other team are whiny cheating cry babies
• The long, drawn out "ARHHHHHHHHH you get to shout as the cheating bastard's non-goal is rightfully chalked off and you can celebrate the opposition fans' hubris.

The game managed fine without goal-line tech for years, but goal line tech is better and more accurate. The game managed years without the offside rule, but the offside rule is better and a more accura.... actually ignore that one, because they've fucked it. But you get my point.

[PaddockLad 22427]

16 hours ago, RobinRobin said:

It would be much quicker if the VAR referee just made the decision, not get the on-field referee to walk over to a monitor and then do exactly what the VAR referee has been doing, i.e. checking several times and making a decision.

 

Hold on, I thought one of the big selling points for the cult of everything that is new, shiny and beeps is that the ref on the pitch still makes the final decision?  So because it's been shown to be ill thought out and poorly applied nonsense you want to break one of the core tenats of the game? 

 

 

 

 

[PaddockLad 22427]

2 hours ago, The Fish said:

It won't happen half as much as the detractors suggest. Most goals are not controversial in any way. Even before VAR there were inquests and the ref plodding over to the linesman for a chat. This is no different, except they'll have an actual decent chance of getting the decision right. 

There are two things finer than going apeshit when your team scores;

• Going apeshit again as the protests from the opposition are proven to be baseless because not only have you scored, but the other team are whiny cheating cry babies
• The long, drawn out "ARHHHHHHHHH you get to shout as the cheating bastard's non-goal is rightfully chalked off and you can celebrate the opposition fans' hubris.

The game managed fine without goal-line tech for years, but goal line tech is better and more accurate. The game managed years without the offside rule, but the offside rule is better and a more accura.... actually ignore that one, because they've fucked it. But you get my point.

 

Goal line tech is fact based. When it came in I said on this very forum that it would usher in all sorts of fancy do dahs and I was shouted down by the likes of you and Andrew and the rest of the IT crowd type geeks who also have some unfathomable interest in football. Time was you lot would be sat in your bedrooms fuckin terrified of the footy lads but you're getting your own back by hooking your fuckin fancy zx spectrums and Commodores up to the match to spoil it for it for every normal fucker out there

 

 

Offside should be fact based but there's ample evidence to suggest it's still down to an individual's interpretation of the very wooly offside laws. 

 

See also my reply to @RobinRobin 

 

All joking aside, if VAR is here to stay the rules of the game WILL have to change because of it, so it will work properly, quickly and with the crowd in the stadium kept fully informed. 

 

[RobinRobin 14489]

7 hours ago, PaddockLad said:

 

Hold on, I thought one of the big selling points for the cult of everything that is new, shiny and beeps is that the ref on the pitch still makes the final decision?  So because it's been shown to be ill thought out and poorly applied nonsense you want to break one of the core tenats of the game? 

 

 

 

 

I agree, but if you are going to make use of technology, and keep the game moving, it may lead to less delay, which I thought was the original issue.  Similar use to cricket and rugby (although I concede they don't seem to save time).

[wykikitoon 28485]

12 hours ago, PaddockLad said:

 

Goal line tech is fact based. When it came in I said on this very forum that it would usher in all sorts of fancy do dahs and I was shouted down by the likes of you and Andrew and the rest of the IT crowd type geeks who also have some unfathomable interest in football. Time was you lot would be sat in your bedrooms fuckin terrified of the footy lads but you're getting your own back by hooking your fuckin fancy zx spectrums and Commodores up to the match to spoil it for it for every normal fucker out there

 

 

Offside should be fact based but there's ample evidence to suggest it's still down to an individual's interpretation of the very wooly offside laws. 

 

See also my reply to @RobinRobin 

 

All joking aside, if VAR is here to stay the rules of the game WILL have to change because of it, so it will work properly, quickly and with the crowd in the stadium kept fully informed. 

 

 

Rugby League has had the Video Ref for years and the rules havent changed for that at all.  All the VAR is doing is giving the chance of a relook at an incident.  Has the rules of Tennis changed in their game for the line call or whatever it is?  

If they are going to use VAR it needs to be in ALL games and not just some games.  This is one of the arguing points in RL as at the moment the VR is only for Telivised games. 

 

With the amount of camera's at games now televised or not, there is no excuse for VAR at all games.

[Howmanheyman 43836]

12 hours ago, PaddockLad said:

 

Goal line tech is fact based. When it came in I said on this very forum that it would usher in all sorts of fancy do dahs and I was shouted down by the likes of you and Andrew and the rest of the IT crowd type geeks who also have some unfathomable interest in football. Time was you lot would be sat in your bedrooms fuckin terrified of the footy lads but you're getting your own back by hooking your fuckin fancy zx spectrums and Commodores up to the match to spoil it for it for every normal fucker out there  

 

 

Offside should be fact based but there's ample evidence to suggest it's still down to an individual's interpretation of the very wooly offside laws. 

 

See also my reply to @RobinRobin 

 

All joking aside, if VAR is here to stay the rules of the game WILL have to change because of it, so it will work properly, quickly and with the crowd in the stadium kept fully informed. 

 

 

PL has gone full Leazes Mag. Repeat, PL has gone full Leazes Mag. Over. 

 

 

[OTF 10543]

2 hours ago, wykikitoon said:

 

Rugby League has had the Video Ref for years and the rules havent changed for that at all.  All the VAR is doing is giving the chance of a relook at an incident.  Has the rules of Tennis changed in their game for the line call or whatever it is?  

If they are going to use VAR it needs to be in ALL games and not just some games.  This is one of the arguing points in RL as at the moment the VR is only for Telivised games. 

 

With the amount of camera's at games now televised or not, there is no excuse for VAR at all games.

 

The problem with the iteration in rugby league is that the on-field referees overuse the video ref for simple decisions. Most of the time the decisions are right but the effect of the stoppage impacts on the fluidity of the game. If the same began to occur with football it would have a greater negative impact on the game because football has fewer lengthy stoppages so is inherently more fluent.

 

I'm definitely in favour of it, but only used where absolutely necessary and put a limit on the time the review can last. I also wouldn't mind if incidents were reviewed when the game has resumed and retrospectively righted. It gets more tricky in that scenario depending what has transpired after the incident, but at least the free flow of the game is maintained.

Edited February 19, 2019 by OTF

[essembeeofsunderland 811]

Going back to the old offside rule is a must. Which daft makem bastard thought up the 'not interfering /first phase/second fuckin phase' nonsense. 

[essembeeofsunderland 811]

I seem to be witnessing refs being pursuaded by players to consult the assistant refs more now than ever. Whether this is Var related or not I don't know. I thought approaching the ref as a group had been banned. 

[The Fish 12538]

22 hours ago, PaddockLad said:

 

Goal line tech is fact based. When it came in I said on this very forum that it would usher in all sorts of fancy do dahs and I was shouted down by the likes of you and Andrew and the rest of the IT crowd type geeks who also have some unfathomable interest in football. Time was you lot would be sat in your bedrooms fuckin terrified of the footy lads but you're getting your own back by hooking your fuckin fancy zx spectrums and Commodores up to the match to spoil it for it for every normal fucker out there

 

 

Offside should be fact based but there's ample evidence to suggest it's still down to an individual's interpretation of the very wooly offside laws. 

 

See also my reply to @RobinRobin 

 

All joking aside, if VAR is here to stay the rules of the game WILL have to change because of it, so it will work properly, quickly and with the crowd in the stadium kept fully informed. 

 

How will the laws change?

I for one don’t see the point in metal poles. What’s wrong with jumpers?

[Howmanheyman 43836]

5 hours ago, essembeeofsunderland said:

Going back to the old offside rule is a must. Which daft makem bastard thought up the 'not interfering /first phase/second fuckin phase' nonsense. 

Completely agree. 

[PaddockLad 22427]

2 hours ago, The Fish said:

How will the laws change?

I for one don’t see the point in metal poles. What’s wrong with jumpers?

 

Well if we’re to make a go of it and for it to work “properly” for the people in the stadiums the decisions have to be taken out of the hands of the man in the middle and given to the team in the van back at Wembley. We’ll need some sort of on screen notification at the stadium to indicate something is under review. Then the ref can be signalled whether he’s been overruled and whether he should stop play or not. This will improve the flow of the game and decisions will be quicker. 

Edited February 19, 2019 by PaddockLad

[wykikitoon 28485]

On 19/02/2019 at 10:20, OTF said:

 

The problem with the iteration in rugby league is that the on-field referees overuse the video ref for simple decisions. Most of the time the decisions are right but the effect of the stoppage impacts on the fluidity of the game. If the same began to occur with football it would have a greater negative impact on the game because football has fewer lengthy stoppages so is inherently more fluent.

 

I'm definitely in favour of it, but only used where absolutely necessary and put a limit on the time the review can last. I also wouldn't mind if incidents were reviewed when the game has resumed and retrospectively righted. It gets more tricky in that scenario depending what has transpired after the incident, but at least the free flow of the game is maintained.

 

The game is interrupted so much now with the fannies throwing themselves on the floor or stopages the point re flow is moot.