Rodneyfernsfeet
We must be in heaven man
He deserves better
Spurs v Chelsea
- Thread starter Club_B00k_Crutchless
- Start date
Brusselsfox
Roofer
What he is saying is actually 100% correct. The game would be much better if we ditched VAR, everyone played to the whistle and accepted that sometimes referees (like players) make mistakes. … but I have no idea how you get back there.
And I also wonder if he himself is not playing sophisticated mind games ‘we are the refs friends.. not like those horrible blokes Arteta and Klopp’
DagenhamFox
Blue Roofer
It’s easy to get there, just announce VAR will be scrapped in the Premier League from the start of the 24/25 season.
Maybe have 4 Lino’s, two in each half that have a day in decisions. A view from both sides of the pitch will surely help to get the decisions correct more often than not.
Maybe have 4 Lino’s, two in each half that have a day in decisions. A view from both sides of the pitch will surely help to get the decisions correct more often than not.
Adumass
Bentleys Roofer
Keep var for goal line.
Adopt the semi autonomous off side (hopefully fully autonomous in the near future), like we had in world cup. It worked well and was quick. Not sure how much infrastructure is required for this.
Ditch the rest of it.
Clarify the handball rule to bring in some sense.
Daggers - what happens when the two linos disagree?
Adopt the semi autonomous off side (hopefully fully autonomous in the near future), like we had in world cup. It worked well and was quick. Not sure how much infrastructure is required for this.
Ditch the rest of it.
Clarify the handball rule to bring in some sense.
Daggers - what happens when the two linos disagree?
DagenhamFox
Blue Roofer
Well then the ref has the final say.
buz_not_buzz
Occasional Poster
That isn't VAR though is it?
Agree that it is preferable to what we do here but do we know it worked well? It seemed to work well and was quick but essentially you show someone two lines and a crappy set of player outlines and unless obviously appearing as if done by someone who had drunk several bottles of vodka people go "oh ok then". I guess the best you can ask for you would hope is that it be consistent (whether consistently right or wrong) in any one game.
Certainly. As a minimum.
This gets done every 2 years or so as it is just adding to the feeling of confusion. No idea what the answer is there. Even if you end up going "any touch of the hand/arm is handball" you then get "where does the arm start".
blackthorn8
Roofer
The trouble is with people sanitising a game when nothing needed to be done, rules were easy, but when you poke your nose into something you know nothing about it results in chaos
There was nothing wrong with the old
rules they were simple ........human beings make mistakes always have always will.
But I'm not advocating computer controlling.
The system worked for years was brilliant entertainment along with its controversy.
Lozfox1978
The eternal pessimist
The old test that the referee must adjudge a hand ball to be deliberate seemed perfectly adequate to me. All this bollocks about arms being in the wrong position is just confusing.
Just watching the Cricket and the difference in making a decision is staggering!
One look (10 secs) and decision made no need to go through all the other options unlike last night where on the first look we could clearly see Dier was offside but they over thought it and needed to draw lines!!
One look (10 secs) and decision made no need to go through all the other options unlike last night where on the first look we could clearly see Dier was offside but they over thought it and needed to draw lines!!
foxesneverquit
Member of the lark around club.
GN mentioned this. He thinks they may have slowed things down to avoid another mess up.Just watching the Cricket and the difference in making a decision is staggering!
One look (10 secs) and decision made no need to go through all the other options unlike last night where on the first look we could clearly see Dier was offside but they over thought it and needed to draw lines!!
Harwichfox
Roofer
Oh for the days when handball was simple intentional or unintentional.
T
Tuz_Not_Tuzz
Guest
VAR in football has the obvious problem that it isn't about making the correct decision.
In cricket the VAR review is to determine what is the correct decision, only if the decision is borderline, does the ump get the nod (ands that's debatable).
In football VAR is 'did the ref make an obvious mistake?'
In the former the responsibility for the decision shifts from the onfield ref to the VAR crew. They have to get it right.
In the latter the responsibility always stays with the onfield ref so it's much easier for the VAR crew to pass the buck. They can always argue 'we didn't see anything obvious'. It's a subtle difference, but crucial to understand why football's VAR is crap.
Yes, the caveat is that in cricket ball tracking and the like show unequivocally what would've happened and in football apart from offside there's much more subjectivity.
As for handball, i've said this for many a year. Does the player doing the handball gain an advantage? yes, it's a foul, no, it isn't, keep on playing. You then remove the intent and interpretation that the ref must infer, and it's pretty easy to define where the arm ends.
And one more thing, kicking the ball away after a foul is a yellow, so players pick it up and walk away and get away with it week in and week out. Why don't we have a law that states any delay of game by the team conceding a foul is a yellow so we don't have to list all the ways a player can hold onto the ball?
And another one more thing, does anybody here doubt that Newcastle's goal against the gooners would've been disallowed if joelinton had manhandled the goalie instead of a defender? It wasn't a foul IMO, but i'll bet you good money that if it had been the goalie the ref would've blown for a foul. There needs to be equal applicability of law to outfield players and goalies.
In cricket the VAR review is to determine what is the correct decision, only if the decision is borderline, does the ump get the nod (ands that's debatable).
In football VAR is 'did the ref make an obvious mistake?'
In the former the responsibility for the decision shifts from the onfield ref to the VAR crew. They have to get it right.
In the latter the responsibility always stays with the onfield ref so it's much easier for the VAR crew to pass the buck. They can always argue 'we didn't see anything obvious'. It's a subtle difference, but crucial to understand why football's VAR is crap.
Yes, the caveat is that in cricket ball tracking and the like show unequivocally what would've happened and in football apart from offside there's much more subjectivity.
As for handball, i've said this for many a year. Does the player doing the handball gain an advantage? yes, it's a foul, no, it isn't, keep on playing. You then remove the intent and interpretation that the ref must infer, and it's pretty easy to define where the arm ends.
And one more thing, kicking the ball away after a foul is a yellow, so players pick it up and walk away and get away with it week in and week out. Why don't we have a law that states any delay of game by the team conceding a foul is a yellow so we don't have to list all the ways a player can hold onto the ball?
And another one more thing, does anybody here doubt that Newcastle's goal against the gooners would've been disallowed if joelinton had manhandled the goalie instead of a defender? It wasn't a foul IMO, but i'll bet you good money that if it had been the goalie the ref would've blown for a foul. There needs to be equal applicability of law to outfield players and goalies.
