Var

[hibbysam]

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

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

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]

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

I agree.

[Hibbyradge]

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

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]

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

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]

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

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]

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

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]

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

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]

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

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]

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

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]

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

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]

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

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]

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

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]

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

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]

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

Would be good in games v smeltic / huns.

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]

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

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.

[hibbysam]

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

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.

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’.