Simple VAR vote to gauge opinion

[mercury_redstone7]

I’ve always liked VAR but admit that officials in this country seem to be getting worse at running it. I think it’s good for the game especially when so much money is involved however I am completely and utterly of the incessant ******* and moaning surrounding VAR so I wouldn’t care less if they got rid.

I’d then laugh at everyone kicking off about bad referee errors when they’re trying to make decisions in real time. Or when a linesman gets an offside decision wrong.

I think the refereeing community want rid of it, they aren't getting the back handers like they were. VAR stops them in their tracks.

 

[ForssAwakens]

A very similar amount to the system we had in place for a hundred and fifty years. Proof of that is the league we've been in for years. The odd wrong decision, a few which are subjective, but undoubtedly much, much less controversy and unhappiness from fans, players and managers.

Is that your gut feeling or is there any statistical evidence to back that

Spanishmain put a link on showing increase and there has been several other studies posted on previous var threads showing an increase

 

[The Card Cheat]

Is that your gut feeling or is there any statistical evidence to back that

Spanishmain put a link on showing increase and there has been several other studies posted on previous var threads showing an increase

But those stats will be based on what the refereeing authorities decide what is right and wrong. For example they'll probably count the terrible penalty decision against Wolves yesterday as being right because there was the tiniest most minimal contact. They'll count the decision to disallow Rodriguez's goal against Bournemouth, which took an unbelievable 5 minutes before they realised they couldn't actually tell as being the right decision.
They'll count the decision to allow Newcastle's goal despite clear evidence to the contrary as being right, as it was "inconclusive".
What is undeniable is the vast, vast majority of fans absolutely do not want it, most hate it. The game belongs to the supporters, everything and everyone else can do one.

 

[dooderooni]

It's mostly interpretation so absolutely no difference to how it was before VAR.
Matters of absolute fact like goal line technology can stay, but having a 5 minute committee meeting and still getting the decision wrong is stupid.
Call me old fashioned, but I'd prefer referees and assistants to try and improve and I'd be more than happy to let them make decisions in real time.
As fans we'll always discuss and main about decisions that go against our team, but that sense of injustice is just part of the game and it shapes you as a fan.
We've been in the Championship long enough to see the effect of VAR on officiating even though it's not used in our games. I honestly believe it has changed the game for the worst and the best thing is to bin it and invest the money in recruiting officials and making sure that players and coaches learn to accept decisions and not create toxic atmosphere on the pitch. Loads of other sports seem to be able to do it so why should footballers be any different.

 

[Johnny Vincents Motorbike]

once again we re using it to 'split the atom; - its become the most corrupt link in football.

let the ref, ref!

VAR should get used about 3 times across all prem games on each match week.

i didnt see any use for it yesterday in the brentford/west ham game, nor the sheff utd/wolves game - it should have been used once in the skunks /arsenal game and that was for the Willock line/ball decision, there was no need for it either in the fulham / manu goal - the ref give a goal for McTominays opener - that should be the end of the matter.

games are being decided, managers employment and players futures are being decided by faceless amateurs, playing on an arcade game and getting paid for it - its become a very disruptive farce open to absolute corruption.

 

[hobblewobble]

Var had the chance to send bruno guimaraes off, it did nothing for a premeditated assault on an opponent!

 

[ThePrisoner]

VAR should get used about 3 times across all prem games on each match week.

Allow two appeals per side per match. If a side loses two appeals then they can't appeal again. As already implemented in other sports.

 

[mercury_redstone7]

We have an obsession from referees to keep it 11 v 11 no matter what for some strange reason.

 

[spanishman]

That first link is just a catalogue of incidents and doesn't give any clue as to how accurate decisions were and how minor some of the infringements that went punished were.

In the first few lines
"Total overturns: 116
Rejected overturns: 4"

I am assuming an overturn is a changed decision. With the vast majority of the overturns being correct. Even if they are by small margins.

 

[Frozen Horse]

So change it from someone not being able to see if any part of the ball has passed the line to someone not being able to see if any part of the ball has touched the line?

Makes sense...

My point is they are stood on the right side of the ball to see if any part of the ball crosses the line, and the wrong side to see if all of the ball crosses the line.

 

[Rofesleg]

None of it is important. It's football, a game.

Maybe not to you and some others, but football is important to a lot of people.

And in the context of football VAR is an important thing.

 

[Scrote]

In the first few lines
"Total overturns: 116
Rejected overturns: 4"

I am assuming an overturn is a changed decision. With the vast majority of the overturns being correct. Even if they are by small margins.

But that doesn't say what was overturned. If 112 were for a toenails breadth offside change then the original decision from the linesman was good enough.

If they were for a red-card challenge that the ref completely missed then VAR served a purpose.

The lack of clarity tells it's own story.

Is that your gut feeling or is there any statistical evidence to back that

Spanishmain put a link on showing increase and there has been several other studies posted on previous var threads showing an increase

There still haven't been any studies showing an increase between pre-VAR and post-VAR correct decisions. The main study people tend to use shows a very small in game increase (7%) when the refs and linos know they have VAR backing them up.

My point is they are stood on the right side of the ball to see if any part of the ball crosses the line, and the wrong side to see if all of the ball crosses the line.

Yeah, I was being a tad facetious. I don't think it would make that much difference on the very marginal calls though. WIthout the equivalent of goal-line technology there'll always be room for argument.

 

[FishofContemplation]

VAR is only ever going to be as good as the decisions taken around subjective incidents, such as fouls, especially in the box.

I'm surprised that rules that are a matter of fact, such as whether the ball crossed the line in the game yesterday, aren't covered by the technology. Tennis uses it.

We had it at the World Cup so it exists. PL isn’t using it for some reason.

 

[spanishman]

But that doesn't say what was overturned. If 112 were for a toenails breadth offside change then the original decision from the linesman was good enough.

If they were for a red-card challenge that the ref completely missed then VAR served a purpose.

The lack of clarity tells it's own story.


There still haven't been any studies showing an increase between pre-VAR and post-VAR correct decisions. The main study people tend to use shows a very small in game increase (7%) when the refs and linos know they have VAR backing them up.



Yeah, I was being a tad facetious. I don't think it would make that much difference on the very marginal calls though. WIthout the equivalent of goal-line technology there'll always be room for argument.

The rules are the rules. At present they apply to all of football. Even if it is a toenail offside it is offside.

As others have mentioned, there is a discussion to be had about specific adaptation of the rules of football. For the small percentage of matches that have VAR.

I would be happy to see many small amendments (improvements?) that are specific to matches with VAR. As an addendum to the rules of football. Rather than have the exact same rules for VAR and none VAR matches.

 

[FishofContemplation]

I wouldn't go as far as saying that it's ruining the game. however football was doing fine without it, it hasn't eliminate controversy and I'd be happy if it were scrapped completely.

Worth remembering that Newcastle's goal yesterday would have been given without var too.

For what it worth, I think the ball was in, but it was a foul.

I do wonder if it would help if the rule were of any part of the ball crosses the line it's considered out? Just increase pitches by the diameter of the ball.

The current rule depends on linesmen being able to see the far side of the ball from where they have to stand. Wouldn't help much with goal line decisions, but maybe with side lines.

I don’t follow this at all. Why would you need to see the far side of the ball? It’s not the far side that has to cross the line. The current rule requires you to be able to see the rearmost extremity of the circumference, which you can do equally well from either side, and the change would require you to be able to see the foremost extremity of the circumference, ditto.

 

[viv_andersons_nana]

The rules are the rules. At present they apply to all of football. Even if it is a toenail offside it is offside.

As others have mentioned, there is a discussion to be had about specific adaptation of the rules of football. For the small percentage of matches that have VAR.

I would be happy to see many small amendments (improvements?) that are specific to matches with VAR. As an addendum to the rules of football. Rather than have the exact same rules for VAR and none VAR matches.

How many more small amendments would you be willing to accept? The handball law has already been adjusted numerous times just to accommodate the use of VAR. We’re now at a point whereby fans, players, managers and even officials don’t know what handball is any more.

The overall point about minimal, decimal point offsides, subjective tackles and contact, it doesn’t matter how many times the laws are tweaked. We will always, always have the sort of nonsense we saw yesterday surrounding decisions because some people just can’t accept either - a)a mistake, b)a decision going against their team or c)many of the laws of the game are subjective and open to interpretation.

Each time they tweak a law they make it less clear and harder to enforce with any degree of consistency. A handball one week isn’t given the next, a penalty or red card one week isn’t even a foul the next. One bloke flicks someone’s cheek and gets a red, one elbows someone else and there’s not even a free kick. This is WITH VAR.

If you *feel* like referees are somehow worse or making more mistakes than they did before VAR was in use, well maybe it’s because the laws of the game are being constantly tweaked, adjusted, butchered in the case of handball, to the point where it’s almost impossible to referee a game of top-level football. There is far, far too much credence given to referees and far, far too much pressure and discussion around decisions they’ve made.

It needs stripping back, not further complicating just to accommodate VAR.

There were people, loads of people, loads of us, who said this would happen. It’s an absolute mess as it is and isn’t going to get any better any time soon because those who insist on it’s inclusion just can’t seem to accept that it doesn’t work in its current form and the majority of football supporters are against it.

 

[spanishman]

How many more small amendments would you be willing to accept? The handball law has already been adjusted numerous times just to accommodate the use of VAR. We’re now at a point whereby fans, players, managers and even officials don’t know what handball is any more.

The overall point about minimal, decimal point offsides, subjective tackles and contact, it doesn’t matter how many times the laws are tweaked. We will always, always have the sort of nonsense we saw yesterday surrounding decisions bevstse some people just can’t accept either - a)a mistake, b)a decision going against their team or c)many of the laws of the game are subjective and open to interpretation.

Each time they tweak a law they make it less clear and harder to enforce with any degree of consistency. A handball one week isn’t given the next, a penalty or red card one week isn’t even a foul the next. One bloke flicks someone’s cheek and gets a red, one elbows someone else and there’s not even a free kick. This is WITH VAR.

If you *feel* like referees are somehow worse or making more mistakes than they did before VAR was in use, well maybe it’s because the laws of the game are being constantly tweaked, adjusted, butchered in the case of handball, to the point where it’s almost impossible to referee a game of top-level football. There is far, far too much credence given to referees and far, far too much pressure and discussion around decisions they’ve made.

It needs stripping back, not further complicating just to accommodate VAR.

There were people, loads of people, loads of us, who said this would happen. It’s an absolute mess as it is and isn’t going to get any better any time soon because those who insist on it’s inclusion just can’t seem to accept that it doesn’t work in its current form and the majority of football supporters are against it.

I think we just need to agree to differ on this subject.

 

[BoroMart]

Perhaps some stats might inform your answer? Here are a couple of examples.

How VAR decisions have affected every Premier League club in 2022-23

We're collating a league table of overturned VAR decisions in 2022-23. Who will benefit most over the course of the Premier League season?

www.google.co.uk

"VAR has been viewed as a broad success by many people within the world of soccer. To keep our focus on the UK, according to the Premier League website, the introduction of VAR in 2019/20 increased the percentage of correct key match decisions from 82% the previous season to 94%".

Taken from https://jobsinfootball.com/blog/does-var-improve-soccer/#:~:text=VAR has been viewed as,the previous season to 94%.

Man City, Man Utd, spurs and arsenal four of the biggest clubs have all lost out to var correcting decisions. Big clubs with big fans bases kicking up a stink that their traditional bias is being undone by the laws of the game being applied correctly more often, that’s where the media obsession comes from

 

[Chris_Boro]

How many more small amendments would you be willing to accept? The handball law has already been adjusted numerous times just to accommodate the use of VAR. We’re now at a point whereby fans, players, managers and even officials don’t know what handball is any more.

The overall point about minimal, decimal point offsides, subjective tackles and contact, it doesn’t matter how many times the laws are tweaked. We will always, always have the sort of nonsense we saw yesterday surrounding decisions bevstse some people just can’t accept either - a)a mistake, b)a decision going against their team or c)many of the laws of the game are subjective and open to interpretation.

Each time they tweak a law they make it less clear and harder to enforce with any degree of consistency. A handball one week isn’t given the next, a penalty or red card one week isn’t even a foul the next. One bloke flicks someone’s cheek and gets a red, one elbows someone else and there’s not even a free kick. This is WITH VAR.

If you *feel* like referees are somehow worse or making more mistakes than they did before VAR was in use, well maybe it’s because the laws of the game are being constantly tweaked, adjusted, butchered in the case of handball, to the point where it’s almost impossible to referee a game of top-level football. There is far, far too much credence given to referees and far, far too much pressure and discussion around decisions they’ve made.

It needs stripping back, not further complicating just to accommodate VAR.

There were people, loads of people, loads of us, who said this would happen. It’s an absolute mess as it is and isn’t going to get any better any time soon because those who insist on it’s inclusion just can’t seem to accept that it doesn’t work in its current form and the majority of football supporters are against it.

The amendments for VAR would need to be specifically for reasons for the onfield ref to review their decision. Clear and obvious error shouldn't be purely based of the referee's instant interpretation which then completely restricts what VAR can then look at.

VAR laws should be more black and white, if that contradicts the onfield decision, then the ref should look at the monitor at which point the normal interpretations applies. This allows for consistency.

VAR right now is stuck in the middle of all the grey areas that the rules of football allow for interpretation. This has caused all the confusion and inconsistent decisions.

This may have the side effect of more things being reviewed and time out the game but it's taking ages already.

 

[Scrote]

The rules are the rules. At present they apply to all of football. Even if it is a toenail offside it is offside.

Yes. It's black and white. But no one was complaining about marginal decisions pre-VAR. It was the glaringly obvious ones.

Using VAR at the micrometre scale is what causes the problems with delays etc. And like yesterday, despite all the technology they "couldn't find a TV angle to draw a line", That brings the whole offside lines technology into question as it's all supposed to be fully calibrated across the pitch.

Man City, Man Utd, spurs and arsenal four of the biggest clubs have all lost out to var correcting decisions. Big clubs with big fans bases kicking up a stink that their traditional bias is being undone by the laws of the game being applied correctly more often, that’s where the media obsession comes from

Strange that you miss out Liverpool..?