NYboro
Well-known member
I'd rather live with a lower percentage of "correct" decisions than put up with the abomination of VAR.
F*CK VAR
- Thread starter viv_andersons_nana
- Start date
BoroMart
Well-known member
That's fine, it's a sport I want as close to correct (no quotes needed, because they are correct not so called correct). The process can be improved so that it's less intusive.
The % correct figure is a bit misleading really because most decisions are clear and obvious and there is no ambiguity. If VAR and referees both consistently agree on 75% of decisions, without the need for review then it is only the other 25% that are relevant. Referees pre-VAR were getting 40-50% of the contentious/subjective decisions correct and now with VAR they are getting 80-90%. That's statistically far more significant than only talking about a couple of percent.
Those big decisions are the ones that most affect the outcome of the game so it is just plain wrong to claim that it is not worth it.
The way VAR works is similar because for 90% of the time you don't even realise it is there. People only see the negatives like how VAR causes goals to be disallowed but they completely forget that because of VAR there are far more opportunities to score goals because linesmen aren't incorrectly flagging people as offside. It also improves behaviour and you can see that because there is far less pushing, grabbing and shirt-pulling from set-pieces in the PL than you see in the championship where there is no VAR. Other things like encroachment at penalties and keepers stepping off their lines has reduced massively. There are far fewer off the ball incidents where players are taking digs at each other or head butts etc. Anything that is reviewable by VAR has led to players modifying their behaviours. Take VAR away and they all come back.
Those big decisions are the ones that most affect the outcome of the game so it is just plain wrong to claim that it is not worth it.
The way VAR works is similar because for 90% of the time you don't even realise it is there. People only see the negatives like how VAR causes goals to be disallowed but they completely forget that because of VAR there are far more opportunities to score goals because linesmen aren't incorrectly flagging people as offside. It also improves behaviour and you can see that because there is far less pushing, grabbing and shirt-pulling from set-pieces in the PL than you see in the championship where there is no VAR. Other things like encroachment at penalties and keepers stepping off their lines has reduced massively. There are far fewer off the ball incidents where players are taking digs at each other or head butts etc. Anything that is reviewable by VAR has led to players modifying their behaviours. Take VAR away and they all come back.
NYboro
Well-known member
Alternatively, allow retrospective punishment.
You can't retrospectively award a penalty for shirt-pulling or disallow one for encroachment. The match is over and the result is set.
NYboro
Well-known member
You could issue cards and bans and avoid suffering VAR.
BoroMart
Well-known member
It's here to stay mate, you might as well get used to it
How would that benefit the losing team in a cup final?
Muttley
Well-known member
You are looking at it from the wrong angle.
Football is an entertainment. You are viewing it as something more than that. It isn't.
VAR makes the experience of watching a game live in the stadium worse. Perceptively worse. I'm not even convinced it makes the TV experience any better? But for those who the concept of correctness overrules the desire to be entertained I actually feel slightly sorry for you.
TeaCider
Well-known member
I'd sooner Middlesbrough won a final fairly than lost a final entertainingly through an incorrect decision.
I was raging with the decision on Monday night, but that was down to incompetent refereeing rather than VAR as a concept.
A good VAR official would have ensured Simon Hooper went to the monitor and corrected a blatantly incorrect decision.
Man United got an undeserved point because VAR didn't intervene, and it spoiled the match, it wasn't entertaining watching a goalkeeper wipe out an opposition player off the ball and have 3 incompetent referees decide there was nothing wrong with it.
I'm sure Man United fans are happy that they stole a result, but everyone else was just ***ed off by it.
The Card Cheat
Well-known member
Is it though? The people who are responsible for making those decisions are the same people who tell us they are correct. I think it's a myth that is possible to tell if someone is centimetres offside, to do that you must identify the millionth of a second that the ball leaves the boot of the assisting player, which is completely subjective.
I'd also question whether it's really worth stopping the game for up to 5 minutes and affecting the celebrations of literally every goal scored to see if someone has gained 0% advantage because one part of their body possibly is offside by the tiniest of margins.
I'd say absolutely not.
BoroMart
Well-known member
It's 100% accurate within an imperceivable degree of error. You can't ask for more than that.
If you want to be purely absolute, no boot EVER touches a ball, EVER, so therefore no one is ever offside, but we perceive that a boot kicks a ball, so it's perceivable passing that instigates the decision on offside.
Well no, you are looking at it from the wrong side. Football is a sport/game and the purpose is to decide who wins/is the best. The entertainment comes from watching the competition between the teams. Wrestling at the olympics is a competition, WWE is entertainment. Football is still a competition, we've not delved into WWE style fake competition yet. Maybe you would prefer something like SoccerAid? Sky and all the other stuff that go alongside the actual football on the periphery are the entertainment but the actual football is still just a sport and the result being decided based on the rules is entertainment enough. Allowing the rules to be applied randomly and haphazardly might give the broadcasters something to talk about but it lessens the competition, it doesn't enhance it.
BoroMart
Well-known member
Football is a sport that has been monetised for entertainment.
changingman
Well-known member
I agree it was once entertainment (i.e. the perception of fans/spectators was paramount), however at the top of the pyramid it is now a business, pure and simple.
Incorrect decisions can and do cost millions to these businesses, hence they're keen to reduce them and protect their assets.
Just like in any business, the risk of uncontrolled external factors needs to be mitigated. Var is one way of doing this.
BoroMart
Well-known member
but the big clubs have always had a refereeing bias, and VAR reduces that. So I'm not sure VAR is to their benefit as it can over turn those biases.
Muttley
Well-known member
How silly of me thinking I was supposed to be entertained by football! What a fool I have been.
I shall endeavour to study my spreadsheets and statistics more closely so that I can join the exalted cognoscenti!
Of course football is an entertainment, it competes for our leisure money. I could choose to go watch a film or attend a gig, perhaps go hang gliding or any other frippery that is not essential to my life. You really have bought into the line ""Some people believe football is a matter of life and death, I am very disappointed with that attitude. I can assure you it is much, much more important than that." Shankly was pulling journo's plonker when he said that (it is also a slight misquote). It was devilment, he was a life long socialist and believed no such thing.
I'm confident that Shankly would hate VAR as much as I do.
I shall endeavour to study my spreadsheets and statistics more closely so that I can join the exalted cognoscenti!
Of course football is an entertainment, it competes for our leisure money. I could choose to go watch a film or attend a gig, perhaps go hang gliding or any other frippery that is not essential to my life. You really have bought into the line ""Some people believe football is a matter of life and death, I am very disappointed with that attitude. I can assure you it is much, much more important than that." Shankly was pulling journo's plonker when he said that (it is also a slight misquote). It was devilment, he was a life long socialist and believed no such thing.
I'm confident that Shankly would hate VAR as much as I do.
EuropaParmo
Well-known member
I don't care that VAR improves the decisions slightly/significantly (depending on your viewpoint) at the detriment of the overall game. No one will ever convince me it is better.
The best thing about being in the championship is that I can celebrate a goal knowing it's a goal. That's gone when you are in the money league
The best thing about being in the championship is that I can celebrate a goal knowing it's a goal. That's gone when you are in the money league
No, you are still not getting it. Football is entertaining, it is not an entertainment.
Entertainment is a form of activity that holds the attention and interest of an audience or gives pleasure and delight. It can be an idea or a task, but it is more likely to be one of the activities or events that have developed over thousands of years specifically for the purpose of keeping an audience's attention.
Football happens whether people are watching or not. It is not specifically for the audience. It is a sport/game/competition and watching it play out without a script is what makes it entertaining.
WilliamMunny
Well-known member
I'm sure right now there are boys and girls up and down the country playing football and dreaming one day of becoming a professional entertainer (as opposed to winning a World Cup/Premier League/Champions League).
Football is competitive sport and is only entertaining to the masses due to the competition to be the best. I know plenty of people watch non-league football, but the majority are drawn to the drama of watching the best players compete to win trophies.