World Cup VAR

[JeMeSouviens]

I'm liking it so far. Delays are minimal and wrongs have been righted.

[scuttle]

Not for me so far, some incidents not getting reviewed so too inconsistent

[Hibbyradge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Not for me so far, some incidents not getting reviewed so too inconsistent

Every incident is automatically reviewed.

It's only when there's a clear mistake that the ref is asked to look again.

[Sylar]

I like it, but I can't see it being widely implemented outside of an international tournament (aside from perhaps the Champions League).

The cost (financial and personnel) of having something like this across all levels of the game would be prohibitive.

I still feel a few decisions have either been overlooked or incorrectly awarded (the penalty for France vs Australia for example wasn't clear cut IMO, but then I'm not a professional referee, and it WAS reviewed by a panel of them), but in the instances of Sweden's penalty for example, it protected against a gross injustice.

[cabbageandribs1875]

a wrong wasn't righted last night with the clear push by the swiss gadgy with the equaliser, cheating VAR git Failure :)


http://www.goal.com/en/news/world-cu...l1jmp5xtuxxwn1


"The Miranda moment was very clear. The second play you can interpret but the first one you can't discuss - the people responsible for that must work within fairness. You have to be fair.

[Hibernian Verse]

Credit where it is due, this World Cup has been hugely successful so far.

[GreenCastle]

Long over due to have technology.

I still would have officialls looking at video replays make the decisions rather than the ref stopping the game and going across to side of pitch to have a look.

Rugby have it spot on with TMO and football still needs to give the refs microphones so they can explain decisions throughout games.

[JeMeSouviens]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I like it, but I can't see it being widely implemented outside of an international tournament (aside from perhaps the Champions League).

The cost (financial and personnel) of having something like this across all levels of the game would be prohibitive.

I still feel a few decisions have either been overlooked or incorrectly awarded (the penalty for France vs Australia for example wasn't clear cut IMO, but then I'm not a professional referee, and it WAS reviewed by a panel of them), but in the instances of Sweden's penalty for example, it protected against a gross injustice.

I think it will be operating in the CL and the big (ie. rich) European leagues within a couple of years. I doubt we'll have it in Scotland any time soon.

[Stevie Reid]

Really dislike it, and most of the stuff it is used for is still subjective anyway.

Goal line technology is all we needed.

[Sylar]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Really dislike it, and most of the stuff it is used for is still subjective anyway.

Goal line technology is all we needed.

Goal-line technology would have seen Sweden lose out on 3 points today.

How is that better?

[scuttle]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Every incident is automatically reviewed.

It's only when there's a clear mistake that the ref is asked to look again.

What about the swiss guys push last night ,that looked a clear mistake imo

[Mon Dieu4]

It's been more of a success than failure but I still don't like it, still stand by it will make the game too clinical the more it's refined and worked on, grey areas are part of what makes the game, I don't want it black and white

[blackpoolhibs]

I like it, although they do seem to be a bit slapdash in whats reviewed or not, im not sure it is.

I know radge said everything is reviewed, but there was a clear penalty in the Argentina game where we all thought it was a dive, apart from the player who was after watching the replay clearly chopped down.

[Sylar]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I like it, although they do seem to be a bit slapdash in whats reviewed or not, im not sure it is.

I know radge said everything is reviewed, but there was a clear penalty in the Argentina game where we all thought it was a dive, apart from the player who was after watching the replay clearly chopped down.

Beginning to question that myself - how that Belgian lad wasn't booked for a horrendous dive there is beyond me.

[Alfiembra]

VAR aside does anyone else think there will be a lot more penalties awarded domestically next season?
Seems the refs have been instructed to be particularly vigilant on the holding and pushing going on at set pieces/corners etc.

[Northernhibee]

I despise it. Another step to making it a sanitised sport for the rugby and cricket crowd.

[Stevie Reid]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Goal-line technology would have seen Sweden lose out on 3 points today.

How is that better?

That's a very bizarre sentence.

Do you mean that VAR was used to correctly award a penalty today? Fair enough - the referee and linesman should easily have been able to make that call though.

I don't like the addition of VAR to football. Goals are the most important thing in football, so I'm happy for technology to be used to determine if the ball crossed the line or not. I don't like it for subjective things.

[Hibbyradge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I despise it. Another step to making it a sanitised sport for the rugby and cricket crowd.

It's about getting more decisions right.

Plus there's a welcome side effect in that it'll make it a lot harder for referees to be accused of cheating.

[Sylar]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That's a very bizarre sentence.

Do you mean that VAR was used to correctly award a penalty today? Fair enough - the referee and linesman should easily have been able to make that call though.

I don't like the addition of VAR to football. Goals are the most important thing in football, so I'm happy for technology to be used to determine if the ball crossed the line or not. I don't like it for subjective things.

Yes, it was. But they missed it in real-time. For a number of reasons, officials miss decisions with the speed of the game, distance from play, sight-line obstructions etc.

Goals ARE the most important thing, and penalties are a signficant opportunity to score one - when they're marginal, or unclear, and are either wrongly awarded/not-awarded, they can have massive financial ramifications.

So getting those decisions correct is every bit as important as goalline technology IMO - use of VAR for every single throw-in, free kick, injury etc? Yeah, it could become excessive. But if it cuts out cheating, accusations of cheating, missing critical decisions, it's a good thing.

[Hibbyradge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That's a very bizarre sentence.

Do you mean that VAR was used to correctly award a penalty today? Fair enough - the referee and linesman should easily have been able to make that call though.

I don't like the addition of VAR to football. Goals are the most important thing in football, so I'm happy for technology to be used to determine if the ball crossed the line or not. I don't like it for subjective things.

The penalty decision wasn't subjective. It was clear cut and the referee and linesman had made a mistake.

Maradona would have been sent off for the hand of god incident if they had VAR.

People might enjoy England's misfortune, but it was blatant cheating.

Same for the Thierry Henry hand balls against Ireland. I'm glad some of the cheating will be stopped.

[Caversham Green]

Limited success for me, I think it needs a few tweaks.

I could see why the ref didn't give what was a stonewaller for Sweden, because on first sight it looked (to me) like the Korean had got the ball first, but on seeing the other angle it was a clear penalty. On the downside South Korea were on the attack when the game was stopped - if they'd got the ball upfield a bit quicker and scored there could have been a few problems. Likewise a booking or sending off offence in what is effectively a void passage of play eg handling the ball on the line at the other end.

I still wonder if an appeal system might work - Sweden would have made some sort of official appeal (like time outs in the American game) and the game is stopped immediately until the ref see the video and then makes his decision. That would carry its own problems which would have to be ironed out but to my mind voiding out a whole sequence of play doesn't hang right.

[Since90+2]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Limited success for me, I think it needs a few tweaks.

I could see why the ref didn't give what was a stonewaller for Sweden, because on first sight it looked (to me) like the Korean had got the ball first, but on seeing the other angle it was a clear penalty. On the downside South Korea were on the attack when the game was stopped - if they'd got the ball upfield a bit quicker and scored there could have been a few problems. Likewise a booking or sending off offence in what is effectively a void passage of play eg handling the ball on the line at the other end.

I still wonder if an appeal system might work - Sweden would have made some sort of official appeal (like time outs in the American game) and the game is stopped immediately until the ref see the video and then makes his decision. That would carry its own problems which would have to be ironed out but to my mind voiding out a whole sequence of play doesn't hang right.

An appeal system would be wide open for misuse by managers.

[Stevie Reid]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yes, it was. But they missed it in real-time. For a number of reasons, officials miss decisions with the speed of the game, distance from play, sight-line obstructions etc.

Goals ARE the most important thing, and penalties are a signficant opportunity to score one - when they're marginal, or unclear, and are either wrongly awarded/not-awarded, they can have massive financial ramifications.

So getting those decisions correct is every bit as important as goalline technology IMO - use of VAR for every single throw-in, free kick, injury etc? Yeah, it could become excessive. But if it cuts out cheating, accusations of cheating, missing critical decisions, it's a good thing.

Fair enough man, I just prefer it as it was. In football, tennis, cricket, rugby (not that I give a **** about the latter three!) I think technology being used to establish the binary things is a good step forward - I just don't feel that way about the other things. There's still been plenty controversy even when it is being used, so I'd prefer it not to be.

[Caversham Green]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

An appeal system would be wide open for misuse by managers.

That's one of the things that would have to be ironed out - maybe the threat of a penalty if the ref reckons the appeal was frivolous?

[Hibbyradge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That's one of the things that would have to be ironed out - maybe the threat of a penalty if the ref reckons the appeal was frivolous?

Or simply stop the clock while the appeal is being considered.

[Caversham Green]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Or simply stop the clock while the appeal is being considered.

That should happen anyway, but a manager could use it to stop a quick breakaway for example - no actual offence but the manager makes the appeal simply to stop play.

[Hibernian Verse]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I despise it. Another step to making it a sanitised sport for the rugby and cricket crowd.

As a fan of both football and rugby I can tell you that Rugby games are far better officiated than football games.

And I'd also ask you to not be so patronising towards fans of other sports, we're all Hibees on here (well most of us!).

[Northernhibee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

As a fan of both football and rugby I can tell you that Rugby games are far better officiated than football games.

And I'd also ask you to not be so patronising towards fans of other sports, we're all Hibees on here (well most of us!).

Well, if people like their sport lacking controversy then fair enough.

Nothing better than the debates of was it or was it not a goal/penalty/red card that comes from human decisions in the heat of the moment.

[percy veer]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The penalty decision wasn't subjective. It was clear cut and the referee and linesman had made a mistake.

Maradona would have been sent off for the hand of god incident if they had VAR.

People might enjoy England's misfortune, but it was blatant cheating.

Same for the Thierry Henry hand balls against Ireland. I'm glad some of the cheating will be stopped.

would they just not have been yellows?

[Hibbyradge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

would they just not have been yellows?

You're probably right, but it seems strange that deliberately using a hand to score is a yellow while stopping a goal with a hand is a red.