Norwegian clubs come to their senses and vote to discontinue VAR

[Carheenlea]

Norwegian clubs have seen sense and voted to abolish VAR, joining their neighbours Sweden who saw the folly of VAR right from the start and steered a wide berth and wisely never got involved.

Yesterday’s shambles in Dingwall was further evidence of decisions getting worse through time rather than better, and we see discussions on dreadful decisions in the SPL on an almost weekly basis now.

Can we see Scotrish clubs following suit?

[hibsbollah]

Far too sensible from the nordics.
Almost like thats a national stereotype:greengrin

[Nicho87]

It’s quite incredible for years most clubs debated and discussed video technology

When you think back selfishly on our unlucky decisions

Griffiths free kick
Kujabi cup final penalty outside the box
Falkirk handball in play offs
Straight of the top of my head in recent times you’d think all three incidents would sort them out

I have never been less confident with VAR and the professionals who run it

Corrupt to the core and the boys in Glasgow decide on what colour of the city they land on.

I’d just bite the bullet and would only want goal line technology involved

Everything else gone

[BILLYHIBS]

Enjoyed last week’s game against Clydebank was like a blast from the past the game just flowed with no VAR

[Alfred E Newman]

I've started to watch some of the VAR free English Championship games and though the quality isn't fantastic I find them more entertaining to watch.

[Centre Hawf]

Am i right in saying one of the issues for FA’s getting rid of VAR is they will lose the pathway to allow their officials to do UEFA and FIFA games?

[Billy Whizz]

Am i right in saying one of the issues for FA’s getting rid of VAR is they will lose the pathway to allow their officials to do UEFA and FIFA games?

Possibly right. Presume also they’ll need VAR to play in Europe

[Carheenlea]

Cato Haug, the chairman of Norsk Topfotball, said clubs had agreed that VAR, of which the implementation has caused a strong backlash among fans, is unworkable in its current form. “We see the technology has potential,” he said. “But through today’s discussion and subsequent voting, we see the majority of our clubs believe the current version of VAR does not work well enough.”

The decision to recommend that VAR is scrapped was reached after votes by club members to that effect. Clubs are member-run in Norway and each held a meeting in which the subject was tabled.

Nineteen of the 32 voted to remove VAR, with the explicit expectation that Norsk Topfotball would go along with that outcome at its board meeting on Wednesday. There had been concerns that democracy may not be upheld, with insiders at a number of clubs known to favour keeping VAR, but they have honoured their supporters’ wishes.

[Soldiersteve]

Enjoyed last week’s game against Clydebank was like a blast from the past the game just flowed with no VAR

:wink:

[Smartie]

Not defending VAR, and certainly not the Caledonian implementation of it.

But do the poor / questionable / wrong decisions even get close to outnumbering the ones it has got right? Or getting close enough to scrap it?

I must admit, I do enjoy the flow of a game without VAR when I watch it, but I don’t ever really have skin in the game that would see a team I favour being on the end of a monumentally poor decision, the type that VAR would tidy up straight away.

The fact of the matter is - the calls that cause most controversy are the borderline decisions. Every time one goes against you it stings and you remember it. These situations are annoying whether it is simply the ref on the day making it or VAR.

[Carheenlea]

Not defending VAR, and certainly not the Caledonian implementation of it.

But do the poor / questionable / wrong decisions even get close to outnumbering the ones it has got right? Or getting close enough to scrap it?

I must admit, I do enjoy the flow of a game without VAR when I watch it, but I don’t ever really have skin in the game that would see a team I favour being on the end of a monumentally poor decision, the type that VAR would tidy up straight away.

The fact of the matter is - the calls that cause most controversy are the borderline decisions. Every time one goes against you it stings and you remember it. These situations are annoying whether it is simply the ref on the day making it or VAR.

But VAR isn’t tidying up monumentally poor decisions?

The poor decisions are increasing by the week - the complete opposite of what we were promised VAR would bring us in the first place.

You could tolerate the overbearing and imposing presence on match day enjoyment if we were seeing poor decisions being eradicated, or corrected, but when the decisions are getting worse you have to feel that we should be seriously considering taking a similar course of action as the Norwegians have done.

[Islington Hibs]

Football is a spontaneous game. Referees sometimes make mistakes. Some referees are better than others that’s life. VAR ruins the spontaneity, it also regularly makes mistakes and often awards/ disallows on the most pedantic of reasons. It ruins the flow of the game and hence the spectacle and atmosphere.

I would get rid of it and simply accept we are all fallible. Occasionally mistakes happen but the current VAR is the worst of all worlds.

If they must keep VAR one variant could be to follow the example of tennis. Allow perhaps one opposition challenge to a decision a game. If it is upheld they keep the challenge. If it’s not that’s their challenge for the game.

[Smartie]

But VAR isn’t tidying up monumentally poor decisions?

The poor decisions are increasing by the week - the complete opposite of what we were promised VAR would bring us in the first place.

You could tolerate the overbearing and imposing presence on match day enjoyment if we were seeing poor decisions being eradicated, or corrected, but when the decisions are getting worse you have to feel that we should be seriously considering taking a similar course of action as the Norwegians have done.

By and large, it is.

It’s also making decisions with which people disagree, often subjective ones which boil down to opinion.

I’ve not seen the decisions from yesterday yet but looking at the match day thread - even amongst those watching the game through green tinted specs, there are people who are seeing the decisions both ways.

The ones when they appear to have got it wrong stick in the mind whereas the ones they got right get quickly forgotten.

[one day maybe...]

Football is a spontaneous game. Referees sometimes make mistakes. Some referees are better than others that’s life. VAR ruins the spontaneity, it also regularly makes mistakes and often awards/ disallows on the most pedantic of reasons. It ruins the flow of the game and hence the spectacle and atmosphere.

I would get rid of it and simply accept we are all fallible. Occasionally mistakes happen but the current VAR is the worst of all worlds.

If they must keep VAR one variant could be to follow the example of tennis. Allow perhaps one opposition challenge to a decision a game. If it is upheld they keep the challenge. If it’s not that’s their challenge for the game.

I’d go as far as to say one appeal each half which would carry over if not used into the next half. Most teams sit with iPads watching a live stream or at least I think they do, so could make an almost instant decision.

[Speedy]

Similar to tennis for me as well. One challenge per half. If your challenge is successful then you keep it for that half.

And back to the original intention of only clear and obvious errors. Not trawling through 45 seconds of footage at various angles to see if there was a bawhair offside or a minor handball/tug of the shirt.

[A Hi-Bee]

can var and invest more in goal line technology. var is killing our game.

[greenlex]

But VAR isn’t tidying up monumentally poor decisions?

The poor decisions are increasing by the week - the complete opposite of what we were promised VAR would bring us in the first place.

You could tolerate the overbearing and imposing presence on match day enjoyment if we were seeing poor decisions being eradicated, or corrected, but when the decisions are getting worse you have to feel that we should be seriously considering taking a similar course of action as the Norwegians have done.
Isn’t it? Is it not the case that the contentious ones are highlighted? Is it the case that the cut n dried ones are just that. The decision is made and on we go with little or no debate thus not highlighted. We really need to get in play audio between officials on the park and in the caravan where ever it is.

[NORTHERNHIBBY]

Think it would help if there was a proper definition of "clear and obvious ".

[KeithTheHibby]

The version we have up here is extremely slow and amateur at best. More investment required.

[JohnM1875]

By a mile the biggest issue up here is still the standard of referee and not var.

[Carheenlea]

Think it would help if there was a proper definition of "clear and obvious ".

They don’t know themselves I suspect.

A catchy buzz-phrase conjourd up by their PR to assist with the promotion of the venture to get more people on their side, but nobody is able to properly explain the sound bite.

[hibsbollah]

By a mile the biggest issue up here is still the standard of referee and not var.

It’s a moot distinction because the latter makes the former even worse.

[JohnM1875]

It’s a moot distinction because the latter makes the former even worse.

So we should focus on improving our refs surely? They'll still be absolutely pish without var.

[ehf]

Think it would help if there was a proper definition of "clear and obvious ".

They mean the same thing. “Clear and serious” would be better.

[HarpOnHibee]

I don't believe ditching VAR is the solution here. The technology itself isn't at fault. It merely gives officials the opportunity to review situations and decisions. It's the way that it's being used that is rotten. That rot will still very much be here if we ditch VAR. Only difference is, referees and officials will go back to not being called out nearly as much without it.

[Joe6-2]

We were cheated many a time before VAR, I genuinely thought it would lead to less biased refereeing, how wrong I was, the incompetence/cheating is just more obvious now!

[Speedy]

They mean the same thing. “Clear and serious” would be better.

Fair point that the mean the same thing. I've always interpreted it as clearly visible and obviously wrong.

That's the challenge though - it is an ambiguous phrase.

[H18 SFR]

If there was full disclosure and VAR communication was live fed into stadiums and broadcasters it would improve overnight because they couldn’t hide behind the firewall that currently protects them.

[NORTHERNHIBBY]

They mean the same thing. “Clear and serious” would be better.

I think there's something in that, perhaps in terms of unfair advantage. If a player is offsides by the margin of a skin of dubbin on his boots, then that's onside IMO and it's the offside law that needs to change to cater for how inflexible VAR is.

[HoboHarry]

By a mile the biggest issue up here is still the standard of referee and not var.

There will be plenty of high quality referees in Scotland but because they live outwith Glasgow and Lanarkshire they don't stand a chance. That the clubs stand by and allow this makes them just as guilty as the rest of the Scottish football authorities.

[Bobby's Cinema]

Football is a spontaneous game. Referees sometimes make mistakes. Some referees are better than others that’s life. VAR ruins the spontaneity, it also regularly makes mistakes and often awards/ disallows on the most pedantic of reasons. It ruins the flow of the game and hence the spectacle and atmosphere.

I would get rid of it and simply accept we are all fallible. Occasionally mistakes happen but the current VAR is the worst of all worlds.

If they must keep VAR one variant could be to follow the example of tennis. Allow perhaps one opposition challenge to a decision a game. If it is upheld they keep the challenge. If it’s not that’s their challenge for the game.
Yes. Takes away the joy of it all. It's like we need reminding it's a game and we're not going to be here forever. Forgotten what it's like to be in the moment. Hate it.

[Itsnoteasy]

Possibly right. Presume also they’ll need VAR to play in Europe

Norwegian & Swedish teams play in Europe so surely that can't be the reason.

[Up-the-slope]

would have liked VAR in ladies match just now as hibs made it 3-1 against Glasgow for it to be flagged off.... lookedtight

[Hibees1973]

I've no problem with VAR.

It's the guys implementing it, Refs & VAR guys in the studios who I have the issue with.

Clear lack of consistency over penalties and hairline/dubious offsides.

[snedzuk]

Norwegian & Swedish teams play in Europe so surely that can't be the reason.

It was mentioned on the radio that the issue is that UEFA wont consider referees for bigger games (with VAR) if their home nation does not have VAR.

[DIXIHIBS]

I hate it. As others have said it takes the spontaneity out of the game. The last few games at ER it seems like every goal is checked with VAR. Our refs are very poor but now everyone just argues about VAR instead of the refs. A recent survey in England showed the vast majority of fans attending games hate it, but vast majority of armchair fans like it. We all know who wins that race. It's here to stay imho.

[greenlex]

I hate it. As others have said it takes the spontaneity out of the game. The last few games at ER it seems like every goal is checked with VAR. Our refs are very poor but now everyone just argues about VAR instead of the refs. A recent survey in England showed the vast majority of fans attending games hate it, but vast majority of armchair fans like it. We all know who wins that race. It's here to stay imho.

Every goal is checked everywhere when VAR is in play.

[Irish_Steve]

The one that really gets me is when the game is stopped for a penalty check because the ball brushed someone's finger nail.

We have had more than one given against us and to me, it shows someone is actually looking for things to bring up. If the ref doesn't see it and more importantly oppositions don't appeal for it than it should be just play on

[LaMotta]

The one that really gets me is when the game is stopped for a penalty check because the ball brushed someone's finger nail.

We have had more than one given against us and to me, it shows someone is actually looking for things to bring up. If the ref doesn't see it and more importantly oppositions don't appeal for it than it should be just play on

Don't think whether an opposition player appeals for something or not should be part of any criteria for awarding or not awarding a penalty. Seen people claiming County shouldn't have got the first penalty yesterday because nobody claimed for it. It shouldn't matter if a foul has been committed - that's the whole point of VAR to spot things that have been missed.

[Alfred E Newman]

The one that really gets me is when the game is stopped for a penalty check because the ball brushed someone's finger nail.

We have had more than one given against us and to me, it shows someone is actually looking for things to bring up. If the ref doesn't see it and more importantly oppositions don't appeal for it than it should be just play on

Yesterday is the perfect example of that. Other than the VAR squad sitting in front of monitors in Glasgow, Cadden was probably the only person at the game that knew the ball had brushed his hand on the way through.

[matty_f]

Not defending VAR, and certainly not the Caledonian implementation of it.

But do the poor / questionable / wrong decisions even get close to outnumbering the ones it has got right? Or getting close enough to scrap it?

I must admit, I do enjoy the flow of a game without VAR when I watch it, but I don’t ever really have skin in the game that would see a team I favour being on the end of a monumentally poor decision, the type that VAR would tidy up straight away.

The fact of the matter is - the calls that cause most controversy are the borderline decisions. Every time one goes against you it stings and you remember it. These situations are annoying whether it is simply the ref on the day making it or VAR.

I’m in favour of VAR and making it better, the set up we have feels brutal but if you take yesterday’s game as an example - the referee doesn’t (as far as I can tell) see the handball so doesn’t give a penalty.

VAR obviously do see it, and because it’s subjective they need to get get referee to make a decision on it. The referee viewed it and decided it’s a penalty.

For me, he called it wrong but I’ve spoken to neutrals who thought it was a stonewaller - if you agree with that then a wrong was made right by VAR. Obviously if you don’t agree then you’ll feel like it was an injustice, but the referee made the call so whichever way it landed, as with loads of decisions, one set of fans are left frustrated.

The second penalty is given first by the referee, with or without VAR we concede that one. Everyone said they didn’t want VAR re-refereeing games, so you ask if it was a clear and obvious error, and because there’s contact that the referee saw, then you have to say it’s not.

VAR has fixed loads of referee errors since it was implemented, we have far fewer games hinging on a referee mistake than pre-VAR but the issue is nobody talks about the ones they get right - the ones that are contentious get disproportionate attention and so the perception of VAR is that it’s fundamentally flawed.

Between that and people fundamentally not understanding how it’s used and so getting frustrated at it, makes it seem far worse than it is.

It needs to be better, no doubt, and they have to make it better for fans at the game.

The VAR review YouTube show is good to understand the process and decision making, and the VAR panel is another positive step.

When we lose games, I want it to be fair and because the other team were better - not because of wild refereeing decisions. VAR moves us closer to that.

[matty_f]

Every goal is checked everywhere when VAR is in play.

If you’re in the stadium early enough, there’s a good breakdown of VAR, when and how it’s used on the big screens and PA system.

[SickBoy32]

Would love us to get ourselves organised and bin this nonsense.

Has been an awful introduction and is slowly squeezing out any remaining joy of the sport.

[Centre Hawf]

Norwegian & Swedish teams play in Europe so surely that can't be the reason.

Officials doing games in Europe, not teams playing.

[SickBoy32]

Officials doing games in Europe, not teams playing.

You mean we have to suffer (and pay for) the charade of VAR, to facilitate our corrupt / useless officials getting trips abroad ? 😂

Another incentive for us as fans to push for the immediate removal of VAR from our game.

[Centre Hawf]

You mean we have to suffer (and pay for) the charade of VAR, to facilitate our corrupt / useless officials getting trips abroad ? 😂

Another incentive for us as fans to push for the immediate removal of VAR from our game.

Pretty much. The SFA etc are pretty obsessed with the idea of maintaining some sort of decent level of stature within the game, having FIFA officials are part of that.

[HoboHarry]

Pretty much. The SFA etc are pretty obsessed with the idea of maintaining some sort of decent level of stature within the game, having FIFA officials are part of that.

Except Scottish officials don't get invited to major international events like Euros and World Cups. I'm curious though how many CL ties have been officiated by Scottish referees this season I wonder.

[Big90inOz]

One or two Captain appeals per game for a review, if review is successful they keep the appeal if unsuccessful then they lose the appeal. Teams get 10-15 seconds to advise the ref once play stops.
They have to find a way to keep the game moving and bring back spontaneity instead of constantly stopping the game to look at something 20 times to see if there was an "obvious" error.

[Danderhall Hibs]

I think this is a backwards move by Norway. Make it better, help the fans understand the process.

[Tyler Durden]

Except Scottish officials don't get invited to major international events like Euros and World Cups. I'm curious though how many CL ties have been officiated by Scottish referees this season I wonder.

I think Nick Walsh has had one.

He's mainly been in Europa League where he's averaging something like 7 yellows per game. He had an Ajax game where he gave 2 reds and last week he had a game (USG vs Braga) where he showed 9 yellows and 4 reds! Absolutely awful referee.

[overdrive]

I think Nick Walsh has had one.

He's mainly been in Europa League where he's averaging something like 7 yellows per game. He had an Ajax game where he gave 2 reds and last week he had a game (USG vs Braga) where he showed 9 yellows and 4 reds! Absolutely awful referee.

I agree he's an awful referee but how are those stats in themselves proof that he is a poor referee? Maybe those reds (and yellows) were deserved? I've not seen the games in question so can't comment either way BTW. What is he meant to do? Not card someone because it would make him look like a poor official? We as fans are usually screaming that we want consistency. We will only get that if players are carded when appropriate.

[matty_f]

I agree he's an awful referee but how are those stats in themselves proof that he is a poor referee? Maybe those reds (and yellows) were deserved? I've not seen the games in question so can't comment either way BTW. What is he meant to do? Not card someone because it would make him look like a poor official? We as fans are usually screaming that we want consistency. We will only get that if players are carded when appropriate.

Agreed. You need context with stats otherwise they don’t really tell you anything of the situation other than the bare numbers.

[Tyler Durden]

I agree he's an awful referee but how are those stats in themselves proof that he is a poor referee? Maybe those reds (and yellows) were deserved? I've not seen the games in question so can't comment either way BTW. What is he meant to do? Not card someone because it would make him look like a poor official? We as fans are usually screaming that we want consistency. We will only get that if players are carded when appropriate.

Those stats aren't proof. I'm assuming most folk have seen Nick Walsh though - just yesterday he gave a ridiculous red card.

These sort of examples may suggest a referee who struggles to control a game, often makes matters worse and then just throws out cards like confetti.

[CentreLine]

Got to go back to a previous post and suggest again the SFA should look to having VAR managed and operated from any of the other UEFA countries. Pictures can be beamed anywhere. It might lead to a few seconds extra delay and mistakes will be made but the suggestion of bias will be pretty much eradicated so why not?

[erin go bragh]

It’s quite incredible for years most clubs debated and discussed video technology

When you think back selfishly on our unlucky decisions

Griffiths free kick
Kujabi cup final penalty outside the box
Falkirk handball in play offs
Straight of the top of my head in recent times you’d think all three incidents would sort them out

I have never been less confident with VAR and the professionals who run it

Corrupt to the core and the boys in Glasgow decide on what colour of the city they land on.

I’d just bite the bullet and would only want goal line technology involved

Everything else gone

Yes and throw in Shaws goal at the PBS and Forsters not offside goal at the same venue.
Keep the goal line technology and get VAR tf.

[Danderhall Hibs]

Goal line technology is hardly ever required.

[overdrive]

Yes and throw in Shaws goal at the PBS and Forsters not offside goal at the same venue.
Keep the goal line technology and get VAR tf.

We don't have goal line technology in Scotland like they do in England and elsewhere. We use VAR to determine if a ball has crossed the line. So if we ditch VAR, we ditch the technology available to determine if the ball has crossed the line. If we keep VAR for that, we might as well keep using VAR for everything.

The SFA say goal line technology is unaffordable, though it was trialed in the latter stages of the League Cup a few seasons ago. Not sure why they trialed it if it was always going to be unaffordable.

[Viva_Palmeiras]

VAR needs to pass the “Ronseal test” - of doing what it says on the tin.

im sure if VAR (not unlike Brexit) probably means different things to different people.
along the way there has been some unintended consequences so a review is fair.

seems to me it acts as another layer on which he big guys get an opportunity to wriggle out - or point to precedents being set as to why their case for a decision being given in their favour.

i think we’re prob damned if we do/dont.

Maybe we just keep the goal line technology… can that not be instantaneous like ice hockey so we can keep living in the moment?

[norwayhibs]

VAR hasn’t been binned here yet , the elite serie teams and the championship teams have had a vote and I think 19 out of the 36 teams would like to see it binned. The Norwegian FA have a meeting in march with all clubs represented, it will be discussed and voted on at that meeting, with the NFA having the final say.

[Onion]

By a mile the biggest issue up here is still the standard of referee and not var.

It felt marginally better when refs made terrible decisions pre-VAR. VAR has just increased suspicion that there is more to it that simple incompetence.

VAR has been weaponised by Scottish referees to make sure they get the results the OF need.

[blackpoolhibs]

VAR in theory should work, but when you have the incompetant cheats who ref and run VAR in Scotland, its never going to work especially when those doing it dont give a sheite who watches them.

[Donegal Hibby]

One thing I keep hearing here from fans who support English premier teams is how much more they’ve enjoyed watching the championship because of no VAR which is something I have too .

[matty_f]

VAR in theory should work, but when you have the incompetant cheats who ref and run VAR in Scotland, its never going to work especially when those doing it dont give a sheite who watches them.

I think it works far more than it doesn’t and we get far more correct decisions than wrong.

It’s far from infallible though and unfortunately we still get the crazy decisions from time to time, but it’s apparent that they’re trying to learn from them to improve it.

One example is the Motherwell goal that was disallowed against Rangers. Everyone (other than maybe Rangers fans) thought the goal should have stood.

The referee in real time gives the foul and describes to VAR that the striker had his arm or hand (I can’t remember which) on Butland’s shoulder, stopping him getting a clean contact on the ball.

When you watch it, that’s what you see - the debate is whether or not the contact is a foul and, for my money, Rangers got away with one.

From a VAR process perspective, what they see is what the referee said he saw and so there’s no clear and obvious error, it’s the referee’s decision (because we don’t want games re-refereed by VAR) to give the foul.

That is an example of a decision that people say VAR got wrong, but it didn’t - the referee might have got it wrong but there was nothing VAR would have shown him that was different to what he’d described.

[Kato]

By a mile the biggest issue up here is still the standard of referee and not var.Agreed. The talent pool 12 miles around Glasgow is just too shallow. Needs to spread out to the whole of Scotland.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Smartie]

I think it works far more than it doesn’t and we get far more correct decisions than wrong.

It’s far from infallible though and unfortunately we still get the crazy decisions from time to time, but it’s apparent that they’re trying to learn from them to improve it.

One example is the Motherwell goal that was disallowed against Rangers. Everyone (other than maybe Rangers fans) thought the goal should have stood.

The referee in real time gives the foul and describes to VAR that the striker had his arm or hand (I can’t remember which) on Butland’s shoulder, stopping him getting a clean contact on the ball.

When you watch it, that’s what you see - the debate is whether or not the contact is a foul and, for my money, Rangers got away with one.

From a VAR process perspective, what they see is what the referee said he saw and so there’s no clear and obvious error, it’s the referee’s decision (because we don’t want games re-refereed by VAR) to give the foul.

That is an example of a decision that people say VAR got wrong, but it didn’t - the referee might have got it wrong but there was nothing VAR would have shown him that was different to what he’d described.

It was interesting to hear the picking apart of our first goal at Tynecastle a few weeks ago, in a similar vein.

They took absolute pelters for the time it took for the goal to be given but when it’s a moment as significant as that, it’s important they get it right.

The linesman had been fairly insistent that the Hibs player had impeded Gordon - not an unreasonable thing to think, from his position.

The ref had given the goal and had been corrected by the linesman. VAR then took a bit of time to pick through it, eventually (and correctly) decided that the ref had been correct all along.

I thought it was good officiating all round - ref gets the decision right, linesman flags up what might have been a problem, VAR clarifies it.

If there’s no VAR, I think that goal gets nonsensically ruled out. Are we really saying that we’d prefer that situation?

With VAR and with football in general you’re sometimes just going to have to accept that subjective decisions are going to be made with which you’re going to disagree. Saturdays decisions were a couple of those types of decision.

[Kato]

It was interesting to hear the picking apart of our first goal at Tynecastle a few weeks ago, in a similar vein.

They took absolute pelters for the time it took for the goal to be given but when it’s a moment as significant as that, it’s important they get it right.

The linesman had been fairly insistent that the Hibs player had impeded Gordon - not an unreasonable thing to think, from his position.

The ref had given the goal and had been corrected by the linesman. VAR then took a bit of time to pick through it, eventually (and correctly) decided that the ref had been correct all along.

I thought it was good officiating all round - ref gets the decision right, linesman flags up what might have been a problem, VAR clarifies it.

If there’s no VAR, I think that goal gets nonsensically ruled out. Are we really saying that we’d prefer that situation?

With VAR and with football in general you’re sometimes just going to have to accept that subjective decisions are going to be made with which you’re going to disagree. Saturdays decisions were a couple of those types of decision.So they go to all that bother for a decision that might favour us yet don't mention their obvious error at the first pen on Saturday.

On 3secs exactly.

https://youtu.be/cWws6YL_uaI?si=zxkzhfMKjrDm3Llv

[matty_f]

It was interesting to hear the picking apart of our first goal at Tynecastle a few weeks ago, in a similar vein.

They took absolute pelters for the time it took for the goal to be given but when it’s a moment as significant as that, it’s important they get it right.

The linesman had been fairly insistent that the Hibs player had impeded Gordon - not an unreasonable thing to think, from his position.

The ref had given the goal and had been corrected by the linesman. VAR then took a bit of time to pick through it, eventually (and correctly) decided that the ref had been correct all along.

I thought it was good officiating all round - ref gets the decision right, linesman flags up what might have been a problem, VAR clarifies it.

If there’s no VAR, I think that goal gets nonsensically ruled out. Are we really saying that we’d prefer that situation?

With VAR and with football in general you’re sometimes just going to have to accept that subjective decisions are going to be made with which you’re going to disagree. Saturdays decisions were a couple of those types of decision.
That’s a good example - and worth noting that not a soul in that away end hesitated to celebrate when the ball hit the net, only when the flag went up .(like in the pre-var days) did things calm down before we got to celebrate it all over again.

VAR definitely helped my Boxing Day, no doubt about it.

[Phil MaGlass]

Scotland will probably do away with VAR aswell as it is making our refs and officials look REEEEAAALLLLY BAD and WAYYY out of their league.

[Carheenlea]

Scotland is maybe just too small a country for VAR to really work effectively without underlying prejudice, particularly from an organisation who displays prejudice against officials making a pathway to the top if they are not seen to be from the favoured area.

Football is such a major part of Scottish culture that a high percentage of the population has skin in the game.

I know for a fact that I couldn’t be trusted to referee matches involving certain clubs without prejudice, or operate VAR.

[Viva_Palmeiras]

Scotland is maybe just too small a country for VAR to really work effectively without underlying prejudice, particularly from an organisation who displays prejudice against officials making a pathway to the top if they are not seen to be from the favoured area.

Football is such a major part of Scottish culture that a high percentage of the population has skin in the game.

I know for a fact that I couldn’t be trusted to referee matches involving certain clubs without prejudice, or operate VAR.

Perhaps we should embrace the chaos and spin the obvious bias wheel…

Maybe more teams outside the Glasgow2 could fund officials.

Similar to “Its a Knockout” teams could opt to play their ”joker” team of official for certain games to an agreed number.

If teams opt to play their jokers in the same match the non-Glasgow2 team is given the decision.

[KWJ]

I think it works far more than it doesn’t and we get far more correct decisions than wrong.

It’s far from infallible though and unfortunately we still get the crazy decisions from time to time, but it’s apparent that they’re trying to learn from them to improve it.

One example is the Motherwell goal that was disallowed against Rangers. Everyone (other than maybe Rangers fans) thought the goal should have stood.

The referee in real time gives the foul and describes to VAR that the striker had his arm or hand (I can’t remember which) on Butland’s shoulder, stopping him getting a clean contact on the ball.

When you watch it, that’s what you see - the debate is whether or not the contact is a foul and, for my money, Rangers got away with one.

From a VAR process perspective, what they see is what the referee said he saw and so there’s no clear and obvious error, it’s the referee’s decision (because we don’t want games re-refereed by VAR) to give the foul.

That is an example of a decision that people say VAR got wrong, but it didn’t - the referee might have got it wrong but there was nothing VAR would have shown him that was different to what he’d described.


:agree:

Another more memorable for us version of this is the ridiculous penalty Vargas got for diving at Tynecastle in the derby last season. VAR did the right thing in calling Clancy over to take another look at it with their view of it not being a foul. The VAR system can't help if the referee makes a shocker during play and is too stubborn to spot his own failings when shown to his face.

It's not perfect but I prefer having VAR than not having it. And as others have said, they do get more right than they get wrong.

[Smartie]

:agree:

Another more memorable for us version of this is the ridiculous penalty Vargas got for diving at Tynecastle in the derby last season. VAR did the right thing in calling Clancy over to take another look at it with their view of it not being a foul. The VAR system can't help if the referee makes a shocker during play and is too stubborn to spot his own failings when shown to his face.

It's not perfect but I prefer having VAR than not having it. And as others have said, they do get more right than they get wrong.

That was an absolute abomination imo, for exactly the reasons you mention.

[Spike Mandela]

Ultimately I prefer decisions go be correct rather than 'honest mistakes'. VAR should help with ensuring the vast majority of decisions are correct even if fans find the outcome unpalatable.

Where I have issues in this coumtry is that I don't believe the way VAR is used is equitable for all clubs and that two clubs in particular have VAR used more stringently in their favour.

[Hibbyradge]

Ultimately I prefer decisions go be correct rather than 'honest mistakes'. VAR should help with ensuring the vast majority of decisions are correct even if fans find the outcome unpalatable.

Where I have issues in this coumtry is that I don't believe the way VAR is used is equitable for all clubs and that two clubs in particular have VAR used more stringently in their favour.

Possibly, but without VAR, refereeing decisions would favour them even more.

[HibbyDave]

I like VAR. The problem in Scotland is simply that we only have one or two cameras at the match. In EPL they have a min of 22 camera angles I think.

[weecounty hibby]

Var is awful. Keep for offsides, goal line decisions but that was a disgrace today. 16000+ fans, 22 playes, 2 linesmen and a referee all confused as VAR re referees the game. Never a pen and I've no idea who what where it was meant to be against and the possible red against Bowie was just as bad

[Carheenlea]

Dundee Utd statement

https://www.dundeeunitedfc.co.uk/news/8796/Dundee-United-Withdraws-Representation-from-KMI-Panel-and-Calls-for-VAR-Reform.html?key=dufc

Might start the ball rolling for reform in Scotland.

[Danderhall Hibs]

Dundee Utd statement

https://www.dundeeunitedfc.co.uk/news/8796/Dundee-United-Withdraws-Representation-from-KMI-Panel-and-Calls-for-VAR-Reform.html?key=dufc

Might start the ball rolling for reform in Scotland.

I don’t think they’re complaining about VAR - they’re complaining that the non referee panel disagreed with decisions that had favoured them.