What's new

The VAR Thread

Krule

Carpe Diem
Jun 4, 2017
4,534
8,686
Just reading the differing views and opinions on here with certain match incidents convinces me about the avalanche of debate which will accompany it's introduction to the premiership.
Dark times ahead methinks.....(n)
 

nailsy

SC Supporter
Jul 24, 2005
30,536
46,628
What I will say is that the offside is very tight so there's no way that you can blame the ref or the linesman for not spotting it in real time. I don't really like the way they have to look at offsides in slow motion and pause the play and look at half a dozen angles to try and decide if it's offside or not. If they can't make a decision when the incident is played in real time a few times they should give the benefit of the doubt to the attacking player.
 

WalkerboyUK

Well-Known Member
Jun 8, 2009
21,658
23,476
The biggest problem is that VAR isn’t applicable below the PL, so there will be inconsistency in decisions between top flight and lower leagues.

Also, going back to last night, a defender is taught to play the ball regardless of the situation. Imagine if the defender left the ball because she believed it’s offside, Lloyd put it in and then the ref still decided she was onside in the first place... Defender would never get selected again.

Look at the Brazil v Australia own goal. If the striker isn’t there the keeper calls the defender to leave it. In the moment, the defender had to react because she can’t be certain offside will be called. How can anyone say that the striker hasn’t interfered?? She runs with every intention of getting the ball and shooting.

It’s another rule that needs to be tweaked.
 
Last edited:

WalkerboyUK

Well-Known Member
Jun 8, 2009
21,658
23,476
My counter argument would be she hasn't "clearly attempted to play the ball" yet at this moment. She's about to, but she hasn't yet. You can hate it, but that's how refs are told to interpret this.

FFa6QwJ.png

She is running towards the ball - if the Chile striker the other night was offside for running towards the ball, not touching it, but the ball going in, then Lloyd is also offside.
 

nailsy

SC Supporter
Jul 24, 2005
30,536
46,628
She is running towards the ball - if the Chile striker the other night was offside for running towards the ball, not touching it, but the ball going in, then Lloyd is also offside.

The rule for this is subjective anyway:

"Clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent"

What does close mean? According to the dictionary definition:

"Only a short distance away or apart in space or time."

If you look that image the ball is a few feet away so you could argue that it's not close in distance, but how long would it take the ball to reach her from the place where the ball is touched by the defender? Half a second? That's close. So the players position, her run towards the ball, and the time it would take the ball to reach her all impact on the decision the defender has to make.

As I mentioned earlier you don't get the full picture just by looking at a still image on a screen.
 

'O Zio

Well-Known Member
Dec 27, 2014
7,405
13,785
The biggest problem is that VAR isn’t applicable below the PL, so there will be inconsistency in decisions between top flight and lower leagues.

That's one argument that just doesn't stack up to me to be honest. I agree with you if talking about it being within the same competition, like we had with the FA Cup where some matches had it and some didn't - that to me doesn't seem particularly fair. But if it's completely separate competitions I don't see why it matters. Whether or not Man Utd vs. Liverpool is decided by a VAR decision has no bearing on e.g. Macclesfield Town's season because they're not in competition with each other so I don't see how that can really be called unfair. I think you just have to have either ALL games within that competition using it or none of them. But between PL and League 2 is no different to PL vs Bundesliga or something really
 

BuryMeInEngland

Polish that cock lads
May 24, 2012
11,043
27,441
The biggest problem is that VAR isn’t applicable below the PL, so there will be inconsistency in decisions between top flight and lower leagues.

Also, going back to last night, a defender is taught to play the ball regardless of the situation. Imagine if the defender left the ball because she believed it’s offside, Lloyd put it in and then the ref still decided she was onside in the first place... Defender would never get selected again.

Look at the Brazil v Australia own goal. If the striker isn’t there the keeper calls the defender to leave it. In the moment, the defender had to react because she can’t be certain offside will be called. How can anyone say that the striker hasn’t interfered?? She runs with every intention of getting the ball and shooting.

It’s another rule that needs to be tweaked.

Exactly. Always play to the whistle.
 

nailsy

SC Supporter
Jul 24, 2005
30,536
46,628
I was thinking about my problem with VAR and offsides the other day and it's that they go into great detail trying to find out if the attacker is in front of the defender, but they don't seem to pay as much attention to when the ball was played through. Do they look at when the first contact occurs, or when the ball leaves the foot? That could be the difference between onside or offside.

I thought I'd come in here and post this yesterday, and then heard them say the exact same thing on Football Weekly :grumpy:

Their idea about changing the offside rule so that you're onside if any part of your body is level with the last defender is a good one. Being offside by an inch or two under the current rules just feels wrong.
 

SteveH

BSoDL candidate for SW London
Jul 21, 2003
8,642
9,313
I was thinking about my problem with VAR and offsides the other day and it's that they go into great detail trying to find out if the attacker is in front of the defender, but they don't seem to pay as much attention to when the ball was played through. Do they look at when the first contact occurs, or when the ball leaves the foot? That could be the difference between onside or offside.

I thought I'd come in here and post this yesterday, and then heard them say the exact same thing on Football Weekly :grumpy:

Their idea about changing the offside rule so that you're onside if any part of your body is level with the last defender is a good one. Being offside by an inch or two under the current rules just feels wrong.

These types of situation will all need to be reviewed over time.
Var is asking many questions regarding the current rules!
 

Yid-ol

Just-outside Edinburgh
Jan 16, 2006
31,097
19,276
So I am guessing VAR isn't for clear and obvious errors anymore and more scrutinizing any small error.
 

buckley

Well-Known Member
Sep 15, 2012
2,595
6,073
My fear is that the really skilful players will start to kick the ball towards the opposing players arm and VAR will let the referees go scot free from making decisions . Easy way out just let VAR decide if the ball hits the arm or not and the refs won't have to decide if the ball striking the players arm was( A )the ball struck the players arm but not on purpose
(B) the ball was touched on purpose by the player or ( C ) A player kicked the ball towards the players arm with the intent of gaining a penalty. In the case of (C) I would if enough clear evidence of trying to gain a penalty by kicking the ball against the arm so as to gain a penalty I would give the offending player a red card and hopefully that would stop too many trying it on.
 

John48

Well-Known Member
Aug 31, 2015
2,249
3,143
Have to say after watching it's use in the WWC I'm getting a little worried. Don't think it's the system, but the people using it. In todays game White's goal was ruled off for handball, but they took no account of the defender jostling her from behind & probably causing the ball to hit her arm, so no handball for me & the goal should have stood.
 

Trotter

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2009
2,169
3,312
Have to say after watching it's use in the WWC I'm getting a little worried. Don't think it's the system, but the people using it. In todays game White's goal was ruled off for handball, but they took no account of the defender jostling her from behind & probably causing the ball to hit her arm, so no handball for me & the goal should have stood.

But those are not the laws of the game now, and you are totally incorrect to say goal should have stood.
It is not even an opinion decision, goal cannot stand.
I disagree that it is the people using system (although has been on a couple of occasions with poor referees at WWC), it is more an issue that fans (especially in England) do not know the handball laws, because Premier League has been refereed differently to rest of world for last couple of years. Famous quote from last years World Cup FInal from Collina. "It was a penalty everywhere in the World apart from Croatia and England"
In fact the major reason handball laws have been written as they are now, is to force the Premier League in line with the rest of the world, they have given us no wriggle room.
This would have been handball even before law changes, but now law irrefutably rules that goal out.
 
Last edited:

king_yid

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2004
1,145
1,787
I welcomed VAR, but the way things are going it is taking enjoyment out of the game. Especially with the inconsistency and the doubt of celebrating a goal.
 

TheBlueRooster

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2005
3,817
4,701
IMO the offside law should be changed to clear daylight (ir similar term) between the attacking and defending players and not millimetres of a foot being ahead of play. If any part of the body is level it's onside.
 

Led's Zeppelin

Can't Re Member
May 28, 2013
7,333
20,178
IMO the offside law should be changed to clear daylight (ir similar term) between the attacking and defending players and not millimetres of a foot being ahead of play. If any part of the body is level it's onside.

Agreed.

The idea behind the offside rule, like handball, fouls and so on, is simply to prevent a team from getting an unfair advantage. Having a toe a millimetre over an imaginary line is not an unfair advantage and shouldn’t be penalised.
.
The offside rule is the prime example of a rule that seems to have become detached from its original purpose. It’s now a rule for its own sake and goes against the free-flowing spirit of the game. A rule that requires computer technology to enforce, rather than just using it on the rare occasions when the referee misses something obvious, is a bad rule.

VAR is potentially a great thing, but only when it is used to improve the game, not as a means of reinforcing pedantry beyond the ability of the unaided human eye to see.
 

TheBlueRooster

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2005
3,817
4,701
Agreed.

The idea behind the offside rule, like handball, fouls and so on, is simply to prevent a team from getting an unfair advantage. Having a toe a millimetre over an imaginary line is not an unfair advantage and shouldn’t be penalised.
.
The offside rule is the prime example of a rule that seems to have become detached from its original purpose. It’s now a rule for its own sake and goes against the free-flowing spirit of the game. A rule that requires computer technology to enforce, rather than just using it on the rare occasions when the referee misses something obvious, is a bad rule.

VAR is potentially a great thing, but only when it is used to improve the game, not as a means of reinforcing pedantry beyond the ability of the unaided human eye to see.

I agree with the handball law a goal shouldn't stand if it is scored with the hand regardless if it's accidental. Or if handball leads directly to a goal.

A penalty should only be given if handball obviously stops a goal being scored eg stopping an on target shot or a pass that stops an obvious goal scoring opportunity.

VAR should only be used if the ref asks for it to confirm his decision or to check a goal is scored legally ie clear offside. Or correct identification for a sending off, not for every iffy decision.
 
Top