Var

[Hibbyradge]

Are there still people who don't want VAR?

Hibs could have lost that game tonight, despite Doidge being clearly onside both times.

Would the argument that the spontaneity of a goal celebration is ruined by VAR outweigh the fact that the spontaneity of what should have been 2 goals was ruined by the lack of VAR?

[hibbysam]

Are there still people who don't want VAR?

Hibs could have lost that game tonight, despite Doidge being clearly onside both times.

Would the argument that the spontaneity of a goal celebration is ruined by VAR outweigh the fact that the spontaneity of what should have been 2 goals was ruined by the lack of VAR?

100% I don’t want it. For the occasional time like tonight where it would help, there are a multitude of examples where the game would break down completely and bore us all to tears, looking for tiny issues with a goal or a millimetre offside.

We won regardless without it.

[Hibbyradge]

100% I don’t want it. For the occasional time like tonight where it would help, there are a multitude of examples where the game would break down completely and bore us all to tears, looking for tiny issues with a goal or a millimetre offside.



That's such an exaggeration. By far the majority of VAR decisions are made while the game continues and there is little or no delay.

The fact that we won tonight is irrelevant. We were forced into unnecessary extra time thereby risking injury to our players, and risking elimination from the competition.

Had VAR been in force, the goals would have been checked and we would have celebrated. I'd happily wait a few seconds for the correct decision rather than accept incompetence from the officials so there's no delays.

[1875Sean]

Knowing Scottish refs they would still make an meal of it with or without var

[hibbysam]

That's such an exaggeration. By far the majority of VAR decisions are made while the game continues and there is little or no delay.

The fact that we won tonight is irrelevant. We were forced into unnecessary extra time thereby risking injury to our players, and risking elimination from the competition.

Had VAR been in force, the goals would have been checked and we would have celebrated. I'd happily wait a few seconds for the correct decision rather than accept incompetence from the officials so there's no delays.

And the rest of the game is different and we may have lost 2-1. No chance do I want VAR anywhere near our game.

[Hibbyradge]

And the rest of the game is different and we may have lost 2-1. No chance do I want VAR anywhere near our game.

I get that you don't want it.

You prefer to tolerate wrong decisions, inept refereeing performances and the potential for unaccountable cheating to short delays.

I feel exactly the opposite way.

[hibbysam]

I get that you don't want it.

You prefer to tolerate wrong decisions, inept refereeing performances and the potential for unaccountable cheating to short delays.

I feel exactly the opposite way.

And you get just as many wrong decisions with VAR with huge delays in between and huge inconsistencies game by game.

You asked a question, I gave you an answer and you don’t like that. Pointless.

[Hibbyradge]

And you get just as many wrong decisions with VAR with huge delays in between and huge inconsistencies game by game.

You asked a question, I gave you an answer and you don’t like that. Pointless.

I accepted your answer, see above. I just take the opposite view.

However, we certainly don't get anywhere the same number of wrong decisions with VAR as without. There are some, but by far the majority of decisions are resolved correctly.

[The_Exile]

And you get just as many wrong decisions with VAR with huge delays in between and huge inconsistencies game by game.

Thats bollocks. Give me two examples from this season in the EPL.

[hibbysam]

Thats bollocks. Give me two examples from this season in the EPL.

Just two? Liverpool spurs game, Andy Robertson on Kane, Kane on Robertson, both red card offences. 0 overturned. That’s one single game.

[LunasBoots]

There will come a time where there isn't a choice but to have it as the rest of the world continues its spread of it.

[hibbysam]

There will come a time where there isn't a choice but to have it as the rest of the world continues its spread of it.

First step would be getting goal line technology in. It’s quite embarrassing that we don’t have that facility yet we’re chatting about VAR. One is factual and the other is subjective.

I’m not 100% against technology - my pet hate is turning all American with it though and having stop start games. Look at the Man Utd Villa one last week. They literally ran through every slow motion of every angle of every incident in the cross, the block, the potential offside in the middle, then potential handball, then after a few minutes checking everything, went back and told the ref to look at the very first incident. There should be a 20 second cut off, 2 replays. If that’s not clear enough move on. None of the ultra zoom slow mo’s that just indicate your trying to find fault with things.

[danhibees1875]

There will come a time where there isn't a choice but to have it as the rest of the world continues its spread of it.

Is there not a varccine yet?

[flash]

Incredible to me that people don't want disallowed goals that are a yard onside to be given.

[Jones28]

And you get just as many wrong decisions with VAR with huge delays in between and huge inconsistencies game by game.

You asked a question, I gave you an answer and you don’t like that. Pointless.

If you weren’t exaggerating then maybe your answer would be taken more seriously.

[Jones28]

VAR is an absolute must, I’m sick of games in this country hinging on officials who (if I’m being very generous) simply need more help to get things right.

It needs tweaked, but it’s relatively new and with a couple of changes I think it would improve the game massively. No more decisions like we saw last night where a goal and a chance were denied because of offside.

[hibbysam]

If you weren’t exaggerating then maybe your answer would be taken more seriously.

Exaggerating what? While watching games now, I still see multiple talking points and contentious decisions every game I watch that VAR decides not to intervene on. While watching the games before VAR I felt their refs were fairly decent and got most decisions correct. I don’t think VAR overturns a lot of bad decisions. It also affects the referee - who is less likely to make a decision knowing VAR is there, however VAR doesn’t get involved half the time as it’s not ‘clear and obvious’.

I’m not exaggerating when I say I feel watching games there’s just as many bad decisions now with VAR as there was without.

[bigwheel]

Not seen any of the replays - was there some wrong decisions last night. Doidges goal for example ? Looked inside at the game to me ..also wasn’t sure if Muellers run was inside also …

[hibbysam]

Not seen any of the replays - was there some wrong decisions last night. Doidges goal for example ? Looked inside at the game to me ..also wasn’t sure if Muellers run was inside also …

Doidge was onside, yard or two. Issue was the defender was coming out so quick that within a millisecond Doidge was yards off. Was a tough call and no doubt would’ve been overturned.

[bigwheel]

Doidge was onside, yard or two. Issue was the defender was coming out so quick that within a millisecond Doidge was yards off. Was a tough call and no doubt would’ve been overturned.

Cheers Sam [emoji106]

[Jones28]

Exaggerating what? While watching games now, I still see multiple talking points and contentious decisions every game I watch that VAR decides not to intervene on. While watching the games before VAR I felt their refs were fairly decent and got most decisions correct. I don’t think VAR overturns a lot of bad decisions. It also affects the referee - who is less likely to make a decision knowing VAR is there, however VAR doesn’t get involved half the time as it’s not ‘clear and obvious’.

I’m not exaggerating when I say I feel watching games there’s just as many bad decisions now with VAR as there was without.

You’re exaggerating the time it takes to make decisions. Some take longer than others but a lot of the time it’s within a minute or two the decision is made.

Football fans are funny creatures, some would rather scream a shout that the referee has got the decision wrong but are against bringing in a system to help them get more decisions correct.

[hibbysam]

You’re exaggerating the time it takes to make decisions. Some take longer than others but a lot of the time it’s within a minute or two the decision is made.

Football fans are funny creatures, some would rather scream a shout that the referee has got the decision wrong but are against bringing in a system to help them get more decisions correct.

I’ve never said it was more than a couple of minutes have I? But a couple of minutes completely kills the game. Players standing about, fans not having a clue what’s going on. All I said was if it was brought in there should be a 2 replay 20 second rule.

How many times does a ref get asked to check his own decision and stands by it? I genuinely think that would be 0 this year. The screen is a waste of time.

[Jones28]

I’ve never said it was more than a couple of minutes have I? But a couple of minutes completely kills the game. Players standing about, fans not having a clue what’s going on. All I said was if it was brought in there should be a 2 replay 20 second rule.

How many times does a ref get asked to check his own decision and stands by it? I genuinely think that would be 0 this year. The screen is a waste of time.

You said "huge", to me that isnt a couple of minutes...maybe I should ask my wife how long she thinks huge is :greengrin

[hibbysam]

You said "huge", to me that isnt a couple of minutes...maybe I should ask my wife how long she thinks huge is :greengrin

2 minutes is a huge chunk of time in football terms. Can you imagine the ball goes out of play and the keeper stands doing nothing for 2 minutes before taking the goal kick?

[Jones28]

2 minutes is a huge chunk of time in football terms. Can you imagine the ball goes out of play and the keeper stands doing nothing for 2 minutes before taking the goal kick?

Are you honestly saying you'd rather the status quo that could have seen us lose the game and be out the Scottish Cup last night due to some rubbish from the officials than wait for a decision to be made?

The TMO in rugby is an example of technology introduced and is now the norm and people accept it in the game because by and large the decisions are correct.

VAR needs tweaked, no question, and I would like to see and appeals system in place whereby captains get 3 appeals each half or something like that.

I would rather the take the time and at least give themselves a chance to get the decisions correct.

[Moulin Yarns]

2 minutes is a huge chunk of time in football terms. Can you imagine the ball goes out of play and the keeper stands doing nothing for 2 minutes before taking the goal kick?

I'm wondering who actually sits with a stopwatch to know how long each stoppage lasts.

[JimBHibees]

Definitely want it for blatant decisions as last night. Could have been out the cup because of it. Personally thought the ref was shocking. Doig shot saved goal kick wtf

[hibbysam]

I'm wondering who actually sits with a stopwatch to know how long each stoppage lasts.

There is a clock in the top left hand side of the screen that does it for you.

[hibbysam]

Are you honestly saying you'd rather the status quo that could have seen us lose the game and be out the Scottish Cup last night due to some rubbish from the officials than wait for a decision to be made?

The TMO in rugby is an example of technology introduced and is now the norm and people accept it in the game because by and large the decisions are correct.

VAR needs tweaked, no question, and I would like to see and appeals system in place whereby captains get 3 appeals each half or something like that.

I would rather the take the time and at least give themselves a chance to get the decisions correct.

That’s exactly what I’m saying. We won last night, there is no guarantee we would have had that goal been given. It’s not an exact science that way.

Comparing VAR with TMO is apples and pears. Rugby is a stop start sport. Scrums often take 3/4 minutes out of a game at a time. I just don’t want to come to a game and sit waiting on some fanny in an office trying their best to disallow a goal.

[Jones28]

That’s exactly what I’m saying. We won last night, there is no guarantee we would have had that goal been given. It’s not an exact science that way.

Comparing VAR with TMO is apples and pears. Rugby is a stop start sport. Scrums often take 3/4 minutes out of a game at a time. I just don’t want to come to a game and sit waiting on some fanny in an office trying their best to disallow a goal.

Righto, well we're not going to agree at all.

[Northernhibee]

100% don't want VAR. VAR is there to ultimately help referees make decisions and its effectiveness comes down to how much you believe that poor refereeing decisions come from incompetence as opposed to outright bias.

I don't believe it would make one bit of difference to incorrect decisions in the Scottish game.

I want a code for selecting referees that is transparent, open to accountability and fair.

[at last 61]

100% want var but I want a non Scottish var ref, how many times have the ref's got things wrong against us, and to save time if a player goes down with an injury and its not a really bad one, especially cramp should be treated off the pitch, save time

[JeMeSouviens]

VAR as per the Euros = :aok:
VAR as per English Prem = :dunno:

[brog]

With VAR there's 2 types of decisions to be made, subjective and non subjective, or factual. Offside, like goal line technology, falls into the latter category so I don't understand how anyone could be against that. I suspect on the more subjective decisions, in particular foul play, we would continue to suffer from OF bias, at least initially.

[WestEndHibee]

Personally think that VAR should have been introduced ages ago. The refs can then give the benefit of the doubt to the attacking team in play and there'd be far more drama in a match than in the horrifically boring 0-0 or 1-0 winter matches destroyed by a ref scared to let a team score for fear of getting it wrong.

Don't really understand why people complain about the breaks when, if used properly, would actually allow teams to get a breather ready to go again.

There's a lot I like football for but in keeping up with technology it needs to take a lesson from rugby that would now be a vastly inferior watch without video refs.

[hibbysam]

Personally think that VAR should have been introduced ages ago. The refs can then give the benefit of the doubt to the attacking team in play and there'd be far more drama in a match than in the horrifically boring 0-0 or 1-0 winter matches destroyed by a ref scared to let a team score for fear of getting it wrong.

Don't really understand why people complain about the breaks when, if used properly, would actually allow teams to get a breather ready to go again.

There's a lot I like football for but in keeping up with technology it needs to take a lesson from rugby that would now be a vastly inferior watch without video refs.

There is 30 players in rugby, vast majority of the time 15/20 of them are in an extremely small area, and the two touch judges are manning the full length of the line. Again, it’s a far more difficult sport to police than football. It’s not the same.

[Waxy]

I’d say we should now use VAR. Too much money involved not to.

[hibbysam]

I’d say we should now use VAR. Too much money involved not to.

The money to pay for it all the way down to league 2 is coming out the prize money for the top league. I’d rather we kept that money personally than pay for Cowdenbeath v Albion Rovers to have a video ref.

[Renfrew_Hibby]

The money to pay for it all the way down to league 2 is coming out the prize money for the top league. I’d rather we kept that money personally than pay for Cowdenbeath v Albion Rovers to have a video ref.

Surely it would just be in the top league. Don't think Forest Green Rovers v Port Vale is subjected to VAR.

[hibbysam]

Surely it would just be in the top league. Don't think Forest Green Rovers v Port Vale is subjected to VAR.

Press release last month I think was stating it would be in every SPFL game. Would be ridiculous when games in our pyramid can’t even have linesmen, amateur games are called off all over the shop for lack of referees, yet they’d find a potential 21 extra refs a week to sit in an office.

[Hibbyradge]

Press release last month I think was stating it would be in every SPFL game. Would be ridiculous when games in our pyramid can’t even have linesmen, amateur games are called off all over the shop for lack of referees, yet they’d find a potential 21 extra refs a week to sit in an office.

I've only read that it will be installed in premiership games and the later rounds of cup competitions.

Not only does it need several cameras, it needs pitchside monitors and a VAR office.

I very much doubt that there's ever been any intention for all 42 grounds had to have it.

[lord bunberry]

I can’t stand var, I hope it never comes in up here. It might work for offside goals, but for everything else I expect the incompetent clowns operating the var to back up the incompetent clown making the decision on the pitch. Var is for people sitting at home watching on tv, it’s brutal for the fans in the stadium.

[Hibbyradge]

I can’t stand var, I hope it never comes in up here. It might work for offside goals, but for everything else I expect the incompetent clowns operating the var to back up the incompetent clown making the decision on the pitch. Var is for people sitting at home watching on tv, it’s brutal for the fans in the stadium.

It's for the teams who have been the victim of a wrong decision.

There's masses of time lost by players feigning injury and deliberately wasting it than is ever lost by VAR.

I'm watching Everton v Villa and, so far, you wouldn't know VAR was in operation.

[HibbyDave]

Who do you suppose will be the VAR ref in a room somewhere?

Unless there is complete transparency with viewers able to listen to the refs conversation as they do in rugby then nothing will change.

Don’t hold your breath

[hibstag]

With VAR there's 2 types of decisions to be made, subjective and non subjective, or factual. Offside, like goal line technology, falls into the latter category so I don't understand how anyone could be against that. I suspect on the more subjective decisions, in particular foul play, we would continue to suffer from OF bias, at least initially.

This where I am good for offside or goaline stuff. I can't wait until we get a goal disallowed for a dubious foul in the build up v the old firm

[Hibbyradge]

Who do you suppose will be the VAR ref in a room somewhere?

Unless there is complete transparency with viewers able to listen to the refs conversation as they do in rugby then nothing will change.

Don’t hold your breath

If you think the referees are corrupt and that they'll continue to be corrupt despite the immediate TV evidence, then you're probably right.

If you think that referees are human and make mistakes which the TV evidence will allow them to remedy, then you're mistaken.

[MWHIBBIES]

Who do you suppose will be the VAR ref in a room somewhere?

Unless there is complete transparency with viewers able to listen to the refs conversation as they do in rugby then nothing will change.

Don’t hold your breath

Yeah, with the world watching, refs are going to say ''don't send him off for that headbutt, he plays for rangers''

It will make a huge, huge difference. Absolutely no doubt about it. They cannot make daft mistakes, and they will not risk their career when they have replays to show them up.

[Hibbyradge]

Yeah, with the world watching, refs are going to say ''don't send him off for that headbutt, he plays for rangers''

It will make a huge, huge difference. Absolutely no doubt about it. They cannot make daft mistakes, and they will not risk their career when they have replays to show them up.

That's 3 posts of yours in a row that I've agreed with now.

You've changed.

[MWHIBBIES]

That's 3 posts of yours in a row that I've agreed with now.

You've changed.

Or you're correct more often these days :wink:

[Hibbyradge]

Or you're correct more often these days :wink:

Ha ha. Very quick!

[basehibby]

It always seems to me that we lose more than we gain from poor decisions - so purely from that biased point of view I'd like to see technology used more to get things right. Certainly goal line technology would have seen us two goals to the good in derby matches this last decade (I think). So it's a YES from me.

[heretoday]

Sod VAR. It just holds up the game.

[HibbyDave]

If you think the referees are corrupt and that they'll continue to be corrupt despite the immediate TV evidence, then you're probably right.

If you think that referees are human and make mistakes which the TV evidence will allow them to remedy, then you're mistaken.


Yes I’m right😎😎

I just want full transparency. Can’t see why that’s an issue.

[LunasBoots]

I was against it but now for it, don't think it will be long before we have it.

[lord bunberry]

I think it could turn fans away from attending games and unlike the premiership there’s not someone on a waiting list to take their place.

[Hibs Giant]

I'm 100% in favour of var. The old firm would still get the 50/50 decisions, but it would surely eliminate the routine howlers.

[The Harp Awakes]

I don't think VAR will provide the silver bullet in relation to incompetent/biased decisions by refs, but anything that provides more scrutiny over decisions made in a game has to be welcomed.

[hibbysam]

I've only read that it will be installed in premiership games and the later rounds of cup competitions.

Not only does it need several cameras, it needs pitchside monitors and a VAR office.

I very much doubt that there's ever been any intention for all 42 grounds had to have it.

‘ Lower league clubs have been assured the estimated £60,000 yearly cost will be covered by Premiership clubs.’

That was the quote I’d read but looking at it again seems to suggest they are reassuring them they’re not paying for something they’re not using rather than clubs paying for the service for them. Apologies.

[MWHIBBIES]

Sod VAR. It just holds up the game.

The ball is in play for about 30 minutes these days. Game can't get much worse

[lord bunberry]

Does anyone in favour of var think it will improve your match day experience? I’m very much a go to the game fan, I was there on Thursday and I’ll be there on Wednesday. I’m not trying to make it an Uber fan argument, but in my opinion var doesn’t do anything for the fans that are in the stadium. What will happen is decisions will be changed and those of us sitting in the stadium will be clueless as to why it’s happened and the fans watching on the tv will have to text us dafties that stupidly shelled out to go to the game.

[JamesHFC]

Does anyone in favour of var think it will improve your match day experience? I’m very much a go to the game fan, I was there on Thursday and I’ll be there on Wednesday. I’m not trying to make it an Uber fan argument, but in my opinion var doesn’t do anything for the fans that are in the stadium. What will happen is decisions will be changed and those of us sitting in the stadium will be clueless as to why it’s happened and the fans watching on the tv will have to text us dafties that stupidly shelled out to go to the game.

The referee’s usually make a signal as to why they have decided to change or award a decision. I think VAR is needed in this country. There are people who are not for it but I think the reality is we will see it introduced sooner rather than later, especially if we continue to have players, fans and clubs calling out officiating frequently.

[lord bunberry]

The referee’s usually make a signal as to why they have decided to change or award a decision. I think VAR is needed in this country. There are people who are not for it but I think the reality is we will see it introduced sooner rather than later, especially if we continue to have players, fans and clubs calling out officiating frequently.
Scotland as a country has always tried to copy what has gone on in England, but this our chance to market our game differently

[Hibbyradge]

I think it could turn fans away from attending games and unlike the premiership there’s not someone on a waiting list to take their place.

No chance. VAR is far less intrusive than people think.

In fact, it often adds something to the game. Each set of supporters have their hopes raised and either realised or dashed once the decision is made.

That sense of injustice we feel when a referee or assistant made the wrong decision, possibly because they were unsighted or they just made a mistake, will be much less frequent.

Goals wrongly chalked off because the striker was too quick for the assistant, will be reinstated. Off the ball stamps, slaps and punches will be punished immediately rather than in retrospect when the result has already been determined.

It baffles me that all those benefits and more are on offer yet folk still don't want them. Why? Because we might have to wait a few seconds for the correct decision. Who said football fans are conservative (insert interrobang).

VAR's not going to ruin football at all. It'll change it a little bit, but for the better.

[greenlex]

No chance. VAR is far less intrusive than people think.

In fact, it often adds something to the game. Each set of supporters have their hopes raised and either realised or dashed once the decision is made.

That sense of injustice we feel when a referee or assistant made the wrong decision, possibly because they were unsighted or they just made a mistake, will be much less frequent.

Goals wrongly chalked off because the striker was too quick for the assistant, will be reinstated. Off the ball stamps, slaps and punches will be punished immediately rather than in retrospect when the result has already been determined.

It baffles me that all those benefits and more are on offer yet folk still don't want them. Why? Because we might have to wait a few seconds for the correct decision. Who said football fans are conservative (insert interrobang).

VAR's not going to ruin football at all. It'll change it a little bit, but for the better.
100% this.

[Hibbyradge]

Scotland as a country has always tried to copy what has gone on in England, but this our chance to market our game differently

I can imagine the slogan.

"Come to the SPFL. We don't do rules".

[Hibbyradge]

For decades, folk have been screaming for referees to be more accountable. VAR will be a huge step towards that.

Currently, the referee can make literally any decision they want and they NEVER have to justify it or change it. Very occasionally a ref will apologise for a bad decision but that's always after the fact and usually only when the "victim" was one of the uglies.

Now, their decisions will be scrutinised immediately and it will be extremely difficult to stick to an obvious howler when it's been analysed by several TV cameras.

Referees are unanimously in favour of introducing VAR. They want to make the correct decisions which, because they're human and it's a fast moving game, they're not always able to do. VAR will help them and help us.

[MWHIBBIES]

Does anyone in favour of var think it will improve your match day experience? I’m very much a go to the game fan, I was there on Thursday and I’ll be there on Wednesday. I’m not trying to make it an Uber fan argument, but in my opinion var doesn’t do anything for the fans that are in the stadium. What will happen is decisions will be changed and those of us sitting in the stadium will be clueless as to why it’s happened and the fans watching on the tv will have to text us dafties that stupidly shelled out to go to the game.

Hibs scoring a perfectly good goal after 30 minutes would've considerably improved my night.

[WeeRussell]

Does anyone in favour of var think it will improve your match day experience? I’m very much a go to the game fan, I was there on Thursday and I’ll be there on Wednesday. I’m not trying to make it an Uber fan argument, but in my opinion var doesn’t do anything for the fans that are in the stadium. What will happen is decisions will be changed and those of us sitting in the stadium will be clueless as to why it’s happened and the fans watching on the tv will have to text us dafties that stupidly shelled out to go to the game.

No it definitely won’t improve my match day experience and I agree with you entirely.

[Hibbyradge]

No it definitely won’t improve my match day experience and I agree with you entirely.

Do you think the Cove game would have been better or worse if VAR was in operation?

I guess if you like value for money then the lack of VAR gave us an extra 30 minutes of fairly crap and nervous football, otherwise we'd have won 2-0 in the 90 minutes.

[WeeRussell]

Do you think the Cove game would have been better or worse if VAR was in operation?

I guess if you like value for money then the lack of VAR gave us an extra 30 minutes of fairly crap and nervous football, otherwise we'd have won 2-0 in the 90 minutes.

30 mins of fannying about looking at monitors and putting lines on screens instead while the fans don’t know if it’s worth celebrating a goal instead? No thanks.

Fully aware you are completely in favour of VAR radge, we definitely won’t change each other’s minds.

For me it’s the main thing that separates football as a sport, that euphoria of a goal going in and the spontaneous celebration. Every goal in the English premier league now I’m waiting for them to question whether it counts.

It’s crap (in my opinion).

[ChilliEater]

In theory I love the idea of VAR, but we've had it over here in Australia for 2 or 3 seasons now and I'm not sure it's improved anything. I'd keep it for offsides - it can seem a bit over the top to analyse and re-analyse footage and then allow or disallow a goal on a question of millimetres, but at least it is inarguable - there is a a line you can draw where offside begins and ends. The issue is on penalties and red cards - challenges often look worse in slow motion and I've often thought - even in games where my team isn't playing, or has benefitted in games they are playing - that the officials have got the decision wrong even after VAR.

[GordonHFC]

Does the Scottish version automatically come with the 'Penalty to Rangers' screen?

[Hibbyradge]

30 mins of fannying about looking at monitors and putting lines on screens instead while the fans don’t know if it’s worth celebrating a goal instead? No thanks.

Fully aware you are completely in favour of VAR radge, we definitely won’t change each other’s minds.

For me it’s the main thing that separates football as a sport, that euphoria of a goal going in and the spontaneous celebration. Every goal in the English premier league now I’m waiting for them to question whether it counts.

It’s crap (in my opinion).

We won't change our minds but I find it astonishing that you'd prefer we had good goals disallowed rather than spend a few seconds checking the decision.

We weren't allowed the euphoria of the goal going in or the spontaneous celebration because Doidge was wrongly ruled off side twice.

But, until it's here and everyone takes it for granted, I'll remain astonished.

[Hibbyradge]

In theory I love the idea of VAR, but we've had it over here in Australia for 2 or 3 seasons now and I'm not sure it's improved anything. I'd keep it for offsides - it can seem a bit over the top to analyse and re-analyse footage and then allow or disallow a goal on a question of millimetres, but at least it is inarguable - there is a a line you can draw where offside begins and ends. The issue is on penalties and red cards - challenges often look worse in slow motion and I've often thought - even in games where my team isn't playing, or has benefitted in games they are playing - that the officials have got the decision wrong even after VAR.

I understand that. What about hand balls?

[WeeRussell]

We won't change our minds but I find it astonishing that you'd prefer we had good goals disallowed rather than spend a few seconds checking the decision.

We weren't allowed the euphoria of the goal going in or the spontaneous celebration because Doidge was wrongly ruled off side twice.

But, until it's here and everyone takes it for granted, I'll remain astonished.

It can’t be that astonishing mate. I know you’ve said most people you know in England are all for it, but the vast majority of football fans I know anywhere can’t be ar*ed with it.

It definitely splits opinion and certainly hasn’t won over the vast majority since it’s implementation almost 4 years ago.

[Hibbyradge]

It can’t be that astonishing mate.

I genuinely am baffled that anyone would prefer risking a defeat than allow the ref a second look at a decision because of the potential of a spontaneous celebration that may never happen later in the game.

[Hibbyradge]

I should add, that when I tell folk that we were denied a goal because of a bad decision, people here are incredulous that we don't have VAR.

It's far more widely accepted than you think.

[ChilliEater]

I understand that. What about hand balls?

Again - because it's so open to opinion on what's an "unnatural" position, it's hard to get agreement on what the correct decision is. The Josh Doig one against Celtic, replays look like the Celtic player may have brought it down on his arm, and it may have hit Doig on the chest before it hit his arm, and his arm is not in a strange position, and it was clearly ball to hand and not hand to ball, but I doubt the decision would have been overturned. Celtic fans will be convinced it was penalty, we'd be convinced it wasn't, but if you try to view it neutrally, either giving it or disallowing it, either looks like an understandable decision.

I've seen plenty of VAR decisions here that have left me shaking my head. It is no guarantee of getting the decision right. Having said all that, on balance I'm still in favour, just don't expect "bad" decisions to disappear. It would have improved our recent derby record though - Griffiths free kick, Shaw's and Forster's goals at Tynie would all have stood.

Go to about 4min 40s on this and see what you think about the penalty decision ;-) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VK9XlXdNc6Q

[Hibbyradge]

[
Go to about 4min 40s on this and see what you think about the penalty decision ;-) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VK9XlXdNc6Q[/QUOTE]

Unlike a clash of heads when both players hit each other, the defender's head hits the back of the striker's head as he was waiting for the ball to arrive.

He didn't mean it, and he got hurt in the process, but is that not still a foul?

I realise there are still be some controversial VAR decisions, but the obvious mistakes are more or less a thing of the past.

Any consultant doing a decision "force field" will have the benefits of VAR far outweighing any negatives.

[hibbysam]

Another horrendous VAR decision in the Liverpool game with the player well offside in the lead up to the goal. Piss poor.

[Hibbyradge]

Another horrendous VAR decision in the Liverpool game with the player well offside in the lead up to the goal. Piss poor.

The goal would have been given without VAR so the argument is whether the referee was right that the player who jumped for the ball, but missed it, was offside.

He would only be off if he "clearly attempted to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent". The referree thought not.

It's not a VAR issue.

[hibbysam]

The goal would have been given without VAR so the argument is whether the referee was right that the player who jumped for the ball, but missed it, was offside.

He would only be off if he "clearly attempted to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent". The referree thought not.

It's not a VAR issue.

It never is a VAR issue. It’s clearly offside. He clearly makes a play for the ball, he clearly impacts the game as it leaves the space for the goalscorer. VAR is supposed to fix referee errors. It’s not done so yet again so it’s pointless.

[Hibbyradge]

It never is a VAR issue. It’s clearly offside. He clearly makes a play for the ball, he clearly impacts the game as it leaves the space for the goalscorer. VAR is supposed to fix referee errors. It’s not done so yet again so it’s pointless.

That's what I said. It's not a VAR issue.

The referee doesn't think the player became active so he's not offside, but at least he had the chance to reconsider.

We can have a different opinion to the referee, but it's his that counts.

No VAR needed for Palace's goal.

[ancient hibee]

You would hope that VAR would have given us the stonewaller penalty in the LC final.

[Callum_62]

30 mins of fannying about looking at monitors and putting lines on screens instead while the fans don’t know if it’s worth celebrating a goal instead? No thanks.

Fully aware you are completely in favour of VAR radge, we definitely won’t change each other’s minds.

For me it’s the main thing that separates football as a sport, that euphoria of a goal going in and the spontaneous celebration. Every goal in the English premier league now I’m waiting for them to question whether it counts.

It’s crap (in my opinion).Has there ever been a game of football that been stopped for 30mins on var checks?

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[hibbysam]

That's what I said. It's not a VAR issue.

The referee doesn't think the player became active so he's not offside, but at least he had the chance to reconsider.

We can have a different opinion to the referee, but it's his that counts.

No VAR needed for Palace's goal.

The referee never had a chance to reconsider. It wasn’t reviewed on the field. The VAR official decided not to. It’s his job to apply the laws of the game and the laws are clear that that was offside.

It’s the exact thing (outwith the timing part) that I’ve a massive issue with. Debatable calls are never shown to the ref to consider, or discussed with him. Hence why there’s a 100% overturn stat when sent to the pitch side monitor. If people accept that VAR is to be in place then the games should effectively be re-referee’d to allow the man in the middle to make his own decisions - not rely on a random guy in a video room to pick and choose when he gets involved leading to zero consistency.

[lord bunberry]

I genuinely am baffled that anyone would prefer risking a defeat than allow the ref a second look at a decision because of the potential of a spontaneous celebration that may never happen later in the game.
You’re painting a very one sided argument where we will only benefit from decisions. There’s going to be plenty times when we lose out as well, and when that happens the fans in the stadium are going to be really pissed off. A last minute winner in a derby match being ruled out for a foul in the build up won’t have everyone leaving the stadium praising var, they’ll be annoyed.

[Hibbyradge]

You’re painting a very one sided argument where we will only benefit from decisions. There’s going to be plenty times when we lose out as well, and when that happens the fans in the stadium are going to be really pissed off. A last minute winner in a derby match being ruled out for a foul in the build up won’t have everyone leaving the stadium praising var, they’ll be annoyed.

I realise that there are negatives as well as positives and I've said so several times, but I've also said that the benefits clearly outweigh them.

I can accept bad luck or a decision that disadvantages us if it's correct, but I abhor injustice and unfairness.

If we lose out because of a correct VAR application, I'll be disappointed but not angry like I am when we're done by bad decisions.

Anyway, it's coming in next season so we'll all have to hope that they've learned from the EPL experience and it's implemented as smoothly as possible.

Yes, I realise that's another discussion altogether!

[Alfred E Newman]

Another farcical VAR decision.

[Callum_62]

Another farcical VAR decision.You reckon?

Goalie slides out and into the attacker and probaly stops him getting the ball

I don't get carra saying no pen

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Zambernardi1875]

Never a penalty that’s shocking

[DaveF]

Nonsense decision in the Liverpool game.

Jota fell into the keeper. He clearly changes directio to do so.

[blackpoolhibs]

I originally wanted it, but now i dont. I dont mind goaline tech and penalty decisions, but the offside decisions just do my head in. And dont get me on cheering when a goal is scored, i dont.

I dont enjoy a goal now until the ref has made them kick off again.

[hibbysam]

Here we go, 2 full minutes before even asking the ref to go and look, another full minute to give the decision. It’s not a penalty for me, Jota looked like he’d stepped into the keeper rather than the other way around but 3 minutes to make that decision is mental.

[jgl07]

For decades, folk have been screaming for referees to be more accountable. VAR will be a huge step towards that.

Currently, the referee can make literally any decision they want and they NEVER have to justify it or change it. Very occasionally a ref will apologise for a bad decision but that's always after the fact and usually only when the "victim" was one of the uglies.

Now, their decisions will be scrutinised immediately and it will be extremely difficult to stick to an obvious howler when it's been analysed by several TV cameras.

Referees are unanimously in favour of introducing VAR. They want to make the correct decisions which, because they're human and it's a fast moving game, they're not always able to do. VAR will help them and help us.
It's a question of which version of VAR you are referring to.

There have been several iterations of VAR in the English Premier League. Thee first run had VAR interferring everywhere. Then they went though a spell when VAR was very 'light touch' and was very unlikely to change the on-field decision unless the referee agreed. Now it seems to involve asking the referee if they wish to stand by a contentious decision.

[weecounty hibby]

That is a shocker of a decision in the Palace game. jota knocked the ball too far ahead with a poor touch then stepped into the keeper. Not a good decision at all. And it took them 2 minutes to make a poor decision

[Callum_62]

That is a shocker of a decision in the Palace game. jota knocked the ball too far ahead with a poor touch then stepped into the keeper. Not a good decision at all. And it took them 2 minutes to make a poor decisionThe goalie was sliding on his knees

I thought pen straight away and haven't changed my mind

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[WeeRussell]

I genuinely am baffled that anyone would prefer risking a defeat than allow the ref a second look at a decision because of the potential of a spontaneous celebration that may never happen later in the game.

Not that simple though is it. It undoubtedly changes the experience of watching a game, and that’s just on tv, and for me it ruins it.

You could use all sorts of technology and time reviewing to try and get everything spot-on (where do you draw the line, pardon the pun). Or you could leave it as it was.

As it is, we have millions of pounds of technology, stoppages in every game to use computers.. and more arguments about decisions than ever before.

[hibbysam]

The goalie was sliding on his knees

I thought pen straight away and haven't changed my mind

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

The player still makes a step to his right (away from the ball) to get that contact though. The keeper is allowed to slide.

[weecounty hibby]

The goalie was sliding on his knees

I thought pen straight away and haven't changed my mind

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

Jota stepped towards him. He knocked the ball to the left and stepped to the right.

[WeeRussell]

Has there ever been a game of football that been stopped for 30mins on var checks?

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

I wouldn’t imagine so. I may have been exaggerating a little due to radge using our extra time against Cove as an example of VAR is a good thing.

[WeeRussell]

I should add, that when I tell folk that we were denied a goal because of a bad decision, people here are incredulous that we don't have VAR.

It's far more widely accepted than you think.

Is it?

You say people you know think it’s great. I say almost everyone I speak to thinks the opposite. I doubt either of us are lying.

[MKHIBEE]

That is a shocker of a decision in the Palace game. jota knocked the ball too far ahead with a poor touch then stepped into the keeper. Not a good decision at all. And it took them 2 minutes to make a poor decision

Not a penalty for me but it really bugs me when the referee is invited to have a look on the screen. He has made a decision in real time, either the VAR team should overule the original decision or let it stand. Farcical.

[hibbysam]

Is it?

You say people you know think it’s great. I say almost everyone I speak to thinks the opposite. I doubt either of us are lying.

I also believe if every game in a competition round can’t have VAR then it should be in place for any. Our game had a disallowed goal as did Hearts yesterday, us having ours overturned and hearts not would be an injustice.

[May21/05/16]

I just seen that Liverpool penalty and that's never pen the problem is not VAR its the referees that think that's a penalty is the problem I'm all for var

Sent from my SM-A908B using Tapatalk

[hibbysam]

I just seen that Liverpool penalty and that's never pen the problem is not VAR its the referees that think that's a penalty is the problem I'm all for var

Sent from my SM-A908B using Tapatalk

Not once did they show the angle from behind Jota to the ref which showed him changing the angle of his run (unless I missed it within the 35 replays of the same angles over and over again), stepping out to his right to initiate contact.

[Hibbyradge]

I also believe if every game in a competition round can’t have VAR then it should be in place for any. Our game had a disallowed goal as did Hearts yesterday, us having ours overturned and hearts not would be an injustice.

I think that's the intention. VAR will come into play in the later rounds, presumably that means the semis and final. :dunno:

I hate to go all Arsene Wenger on you, but I didn't see the penalty incident today because I'd nipped out to the dump (it had just shut 🙄) but I heard the arguments on Radio 5 live.

From what I heard, it's not VAR that's the problem, it's the way it's used.

However, I'll leave others to argue the merits or otherwise as I'm making this thread my own and that's not a good thing.

[hibbysam]

I think that's the intention. VAR will come into play in the later rounds, presumably that means the semis and final. :dunno:

I hate to go all Arsene Wenger on you, but I didn't see the penalty incident today because I'd nipped out to the dump (it had just shut 🙄) but I heard the arguments on Radio 5 live.

From what I heard, it's not VAR that's the problem, it's the way it's used.

However, I'll leave others to argue the merits or otherwise as I'm making this thread my own and that's not a good thing.

In my opinion there are so many problems with it that I can’t see any way in which it would be a benefit to Hibs. Week after week it’s shown down south to still favour the top sides. That game today was embarrassing for me.

Goal line - all for it. Offsides I don’t mind, although I’d change the law (one toe being an inch in front of another toe isn’t an ‘advantage’ to me), clear off the ball violent conduct which the ref hasn’t been able to see yup, although it very rarely happens. Subjective decisions isn’t for me as it leads to serious inconsistencies.

And don’t get me started on the VAR ref watching it for 2 minutes before passing the buck watching the same replay 100 times before telling the ref to go.

[Lancs Harp]

In my opinion there are so many problems with it that I can’t see any way in which it would be a benefit to Hibs. Week after week it’s shown down south to still favour the top sides. That game today was embarrassing for me.

Goal line - all for it. Offsides I don’t mind, although I’d change the law (one toe being an inch in front of another toe isn’t an ‘advantage’ to me), clear off the ball violent conduct which the ref hasn’t been able to see yup, although it very rarely happens. Subjective decisions isn’t for me as it leads to serious inconsistencies.

And don’t get me started on the VAR ref watching it for 2 minutes before passing the buck watching the same replay 100 times before telling the ref to go.

Can understand your point but just out of interest where would you draw your line?

[hibbysam]

Can understand your point but just out of interest where would you draw your line?

Mine would be the old daylight, deepest part of defenders body vs deepest of strikers. Offside rule is there to stop players gaining an advantage and unfortunately it’s gone too far, players are essentially level but for their arse cheek yet get punished for it.

[Scouse Hibee]

Nonsense decision in the Liverpool game.

Jota fell into the keeper. He clearly changes directio to do so.

Stonewaller😁😂

[lord bunberry]

The goalie was sliding on his knees

I thought pen straight away and haven't changed my mind

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

He would’ve missed Jota if Jota hadn’t changed direction to initiate the contact.

[WeeRussell]

I also believe if every game in a competition round can’t have VAR then it should be in place for any. Our game had a disallowed goal as did Hearts yesterday, us having ours overturned and hearts not would be an injustice.

Yep - I would just have it nowhere near any game of football in any competition ever 😁 but I fully accept we’re too far in now for that to happen.

And I agree no issue with goal line technology if it’s simply alerting the referee that the ball has gone over the line and doesn’t involved stopping games and overturning decisions constantly.

[Irish_Steve]

Stonewaller😁😂

Why wasn’t the goalie sent off ;)

[Lancs Harp]

In my humble opinion it shouldnt have been a penalty but thinking about it how relevant is Jota being able or not able to get to the ball regrdless of being hit by the keeper? For instance if a ball was drifting out of play and no one could possibly catch the ball and a defender 5 yards away in the penalty area boots/contacts a striker would that not be a penalty? If the offence occured while the ball was still actually in play? In other words is actually being able to catch the ball a red herring in whether an offence has occured or not? Just asking the question.

[Callum_62]

In my humble opinion it shouldnt have been a penalty but thinking about it how relevant is Jota being able or not able to get to the ball regrdless of being hit by the keeper? For instance if a ball was drifting out of play and no one could possibly catch the ball and a defender 5 yards away in the penalty area boots/contacts a striker would that not be a penalty? If the offence occured while the ball was still actually in play? In other words is actually being able to catch the ball a red herring in whether an offence has occured or not? Just asking the question.I don't see why it should make any difference

A foul is a foul surley?

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Nailsea Hibby]

100% I don’t want it. For the occasional time like tonight where it would help, there are a multitude of examples where the game would break down completely and bore us all to tears, looking for tiny issues with a goal or a millimetre offside.

We won regardless without it.



Would be good in games v smeltic / huns.
:greengrin

[Irish_Steve]

In my humble opinion it shouldnt have been a penalty but thinking about it how relevant is Jota being able or not able to get to the ball regrdless of being hit by the keeper? For instance if a ball was drifting out of play and no one could possibly catch the ball and a defender 5 yards away in the penalty area boots/contacts a striker would that not be a penalty? If the offence occured while the ball was still actually in play? In other words is actually being able to catch the ball a red herring in whether an offence has occured or not? Just asking the question.

Yip, if you commit a foul in the box no matter where the ball is (as long as it’s in play), it’s a penalty. A goalie could punch a striker even if the ball is in the opposite box and it would still be a penalty

[WeeRussell]

In my humble opinion it shouldnt have been a penalty but thinking about it how relevant is Jota being able or not able to get to the ball regrdless of being hit by the keeper? For instance if a ball was drifting out of play and no one could possibly catch the ball and a defender 5 yards away in the penalty area boots/contacts a striker would that not be a penalty? If the offence occured while the ball was still actually in play? In other words is actually being able to catch the ball a red herring in whether an offence has occured or not? Just asking the question.

This is where I’m at and too. “He had lost control of the ball” or “wasn’t getting it anyway” doesn’t mean you can just do why you want to him.

[ChilliEater]

[
Go to about 4min 40s on this and see what you think about the penalty decision ;-) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VK9XlXdNc6Q

Unlike a clash of heads when both players hit each other, the defender's head hits the back of the striker's head as he was waiting for the ball to arrive.

He didn't mean it, and he got hurt in the process, but is that not still a foul?

I realise there are still be some controversial VAR decisions, but the obvious mistakes are more or less a thing of the past.

Any consultant doing a decision "force field" will have the benefits of VAR far outweighing any negatives.[/QUOTE]

On the example I gave, and I chose it for this reason - there's an argument that you are right, the defender fouled the striker, there's also an argument that it's an accidental head clash and should be play on (or stop for treatment and then a drop ball), and there's also an argument that the striker is backing into a defender just standing his ground and it should be a defensive free kick. Stick 10 neutral football fans in a room watching that and you won't get unanimous agreement on the right decision. VAR doesn't solve that. Here it was supposed to be only used to correct clear errors by the ref, who in this particular incident waved play on before the VAR assistant got in his ear and he awarded the spot kick. Imagine that was Hibs v Rangers - what do you think the decision would be :wink:

As I said before though, on balance I'm in favour of VAR, just not sure how best to implement it - where there is a clear yes/no decision, like a ball crossing the line, then definitely should be used. Decisions more open to interpretation, it will still raise arguments.

[hibbysam]

Unlike a clash of heads when both players hit each other, the defender's head hits the back of the striker's head as he was waiting for the ball to arrive.

He didn't mean it, and he got hurt in the process, but is that not still a foul?

I realise there are still be some controversial VAR decisions, but the obvious mistakes are more or less a thing of the past.

Any consultant doing a decision "force field" will have the benefits of VAR far outweighing any negatives.

On the example I gave, and I chose it for this reason - there's an argument that you are right, the defender fouled the striker, there's also an argument that it's an accidental head clash and should be play on (or stop for treatment and then a drop ball), and there's also an argument that the striker is backing into a defender just standing his ground and it should be a defensive free kick. Stick 10 neutral football fans in a room watching that and you won't get unanimous agreement on the right decision. VAR doesn't solve that. Here it was supposed to be only used to correct clear errors by the ref, who in this particular incident waved play on before the VAR assistant got in his ear and he awarded the spot kick. Imagine that was Hibs v Rangers - what do you think the decision would be :wink:

As I said before though, on balance I'm in favour of VAR, just not sure how best to implement it - where there is a clear yes/no decision, like a ball crossing the line, then definitely should be used. Decisions more open to interpretation, it will still raise arguments.[/QUOTE]

Nah your example is another thing I hate in football. Very rarely is it an accidental clash of heads and play on. If someone is in a position and another effectively headers them, it’s a foul. If one player flicks the ball on and the other is a second late and headers them, it’s a foul. Heads should be treated the same as feet, if your late to a tackle it’s a foul, if your late to a header it’s a foul. Too often it goes unpunished.

[Hibbyradge]

Nah your example is another thing I hate in football. Very rarely is it an accidental clash of heads and play on. If someone is in a position and another effectively headers them, it’s a foul. If one player flicks the ball on and the other is a second late and headers them, it’s a foul. Heads should be treated the same as feet, if your late to a tackle it’s a foul, if your late to a header it’s a foul. Too often it goes unpunished.

I agree.

[Hibbyradge]

On the example I gave, and I chose it for this reason - there's an argument that you are right, the defender fouled the striker, there's also an argument that it's an accidental head clash and should be play on (or stop for treatment and then a drop ball), and there's also an argument that the striker is backing into a defender just standing his ground and it should be a defensive free kick. Stick 10 neutral football fans in a room watching that and you won't get unanimous agreement on the right decision. VAR doesn't solve that. Here it was supposed to be only used to correct clear errors by the ref, who in this particular incident waved play on before the VAR assistant got in his ear and he awarded the spot kick. Imagine that was Hibs v Rangers - what do you think the decision would be :wink:



You could put 10 neutral fans in the room to discuss just about any unusual decision and you won't get agreement.

That's the referee's unenviable job.

VAR is there to highlight possible mistakes, not clear errors otherwise every time VAR asked the ref to have a look, the decision would be changed. No real need for pitch side monitors if that was the case.

The ref should only change his decision if he thinks there was a clear mistake. I don't think it's always used like that, but in the example you gave, I think the ref was correct to give the penalty.

It's like when keepers used to come flying out through the air to punch the ball with absolutely no regard for anyone else in front of them.

They'd take out as many players as needed to get to the ball to punch it, even if they punch the opposition forwards too. That's a foul and referees are starting to give penalties when it happens.

[WeeRussell]

You could put 10 neutral fans in the room to discuss just about any unusual decision and you won't get agreement.

That's the referee's unenviable job.

VAR is there to highlight possible mistakes, not clear errors otherwise every time VAR asked the ref to have a look, the decision would be changed. No real need for pitch side monitors if that was the case.

The ref should only change his decision if he thinks there was a clear mistake. I don't think it's always used like that, but in the example you gave, I think the ref was correct to give the penalty.

It's like when keepers used to come flying out through the air to punch the ball with absolutely no regard for anyone else in front of them.

They'd take out as many players as needed to get to the ball to punch it, even if they punch the opposition forwards too. That's a foul and referees are starting to give penalties when it happens.

I think most of what you say here, in theory, is fair enough. Not withstanding the fact I’m still not a fan of VAR. I’m sure a lot more people would come round if it could be run more smoothly and not as imposing as we see it (admittedly there has been improvement in this, at the euros for example).

On your third paragraph though - I think I’ve only seen once where the referee didn’t change their decision having looked at the monitor when being asked. Commentators usually mention the fact that we all know what happens when they’re asked to take a look.

[greenlex]

I think most of what you say here, in theory, is fair enough. Not withstanding the fact I’m still not a fan of VAR. I’m sure a lot more people would come round if it could be run more smoothly and not as imposing as we see it (admittedly there has been improvement in this, at the euros for example).

On your third paragraph though - I think I’ve only seen once where the referee didn’t change their decision having looked at the monitor when being asked. Commentators usually mention the fact that we all know what happens when they’re asked to take a look.
Ex ref Dermot watsisface on Sky this morning couldn’t believe the ref changed his mind after var asked him to look at the Liverpool pen again yesterday.

[Hibbyradge]

I think most of what you say here, in theory, is fair enough. Not withstanding the fact I’m still not a fan of VAR. I’m sure a lot more people would come round if it could be run more smoothly and not as imposing as we see it (admittedly there has been improvement in this, at the euros for example).

On your third paragraph though - I think I’ve only seen once where the referee didn’t change their decision having looked at the monitor when being asked. Commentators usually mention the fact that we all know what happens when they’re asked to take a look.

I don't know how often they look and don't change, but the monitors are there to allow for that possibility.

I'm not a fan of VAR either, but I despise the current situation which condones incompetence and mistakes.

VAR isn't the panacea for refereeing mistakes, but it will go a long way to reducing the frequency of them.

[hibbysam]

I don't know how often they look and don't change, but the monitors are there to allow for that possibility.

I'm not a fan of VAR either, but I despise the current situation which condones incompetence and mistakes.

VAR isn't the panacea for refereeing mistakes, but it will go a long way to reducing the frequency of them.

100% of calls this season in the premier league have been overturned.

[WeeRussell]

I don't know how often they look and don't change, but the monitors are there to allow for that possibility.

I'm not a fan of VAR either, but I despise the current situation which condones incompetence and mistakes.

VAR isn't the panacea for refereeing mistakes, but it will go a long way to reducing the frequency of them.

I was under the impression you were a huge fan of VAR!

All my arguing for nothing.. 😂

[Hibbyradge]

I was under the impression you were a huge fan of VAR!

All my arguing for nothing.. 😂

What I mean is, I wish we didn't need it because it's notperfect, but we do.

[Hibbyradge]

100% of calls this season in the premier league have been overturned.

Is that a recorded stat somewhere?

If that's true, there seems little need for the pitch side monitors.

[MKHIBEE]

Is that a recorded stat somewhere?

If that's true, there seems little need for the pitch side monitors.
100% of all instances where referees have been invited to look at the incident again on the pitch side monitors have had the original decision overturned

[Hibbyradge]

100% of all instances where referees have been invited to look at the incident again on the pitch side monitors have had the original decision overturned

Yes, I was interested to see the report about that.

[hibbysam]

Yes, I was interested to see the report about that.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.espn.co.uk/football/english-premier-league/story/4452736/how-var-decisions-have-affected-every-premier-league-club-in-2021-22%3Fplatform%3Damp

[Bushwoof]

Would be good in games v smeltic / huns.
:greengrin

I doubt it.

Every goal scored against them would be scrutinised to see if a foul could be spotted in the build-up, and I'd bet it wouldn't be too hard for Beaton in the VAR room to find one. And we wouldn't have any cause for complaint.

I don't want VAR anywhere near the game. I too believe that it only (possibly) improves the experience if you're an armchair viewer, and that's not what football should be about, despite the efforts of those in charge at higher levels to make it so. We've benefited more than been disadvantaged from offside decisions anyway.

Goal-line technology is a no-brainer though.

[Hibbyradge]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.espn.co.uk/football/english-premier-league/story/4452736/how-var-decisions-have-affected-every-premier-league-club-in-2021-22%3Fplatform%3Damp

Thanks.

Those are interesting stats. I'm surprised there has only been 78 VAR interventions. There must have been treble that number of games played. :dunno:

[hibbysam]

Thanks.

Those are interesting stats. I'm surprised there has only been 78 VAR interventions. There must have been treble that number of games played. :dunno:

I think (could be completely wrong) that’s just number of times it has chosen to change a decision (offside) or send referee to monitor. Obviously VAR gets involved at every goal and checks a lot more incidents that then end up with ‘play on’.