Forum | VAR by Garv | TWTD.co.uk

Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread

VAR 20:25 - Sep 30 with 3714 views

Can we dispell the myth that offside is 'factual' now?

VAR was a funny experiment gone wrong. Let's draw a line shall we? Pun intended.

Poll:

Pick a goal to win the derby in stoppage time...

VAR on 20:29 - Sep 30 with 2600 views

BasingstokeBlue

So - do you trust the refs and linos instead?

Poll:

What do you think of the three stars being relocated?

VAR on 20:35 - Sep 30 with 2585 views

Garv

VAR on 20:29 - Sep 30 by BasingstokeBlue
So - do you trust the refs and linos instead?

Yes.

I'll add that we're too far gone now. I know realistically that VAR is here to stay in one form or another, but it should never have happened.

The argument that is going round and round on sky sports right now will keep happening. It won't stop, and technology won't stop it.

Poll:

Pick a goal to win the derby in stoppage time...

VAR on 20:41 - Sep 30 with 2541 views

BasingstokeBlue

VAR on 20:35 - Sep 30 by Garv
Yes. I'll add that we're too far gone now. I know realistically that VAR is here to stay in one form or another, but it should never have happened. The argument that is going round and round on sky sports right now will keep happening. It won't stop, and technology won't stop it.

"Technology won't stop it" ...

It *IS* the technology.

Poll:

What do you think of the three stars being relocated?

VAR on 20:48 - Sep 30 with 2527 views

MattinLondon

VAR on 20:35 - Sep 30 by Garv
Yes. I'll add that we're too far gone now. I know realistically that VAR is here to stay in one form or another, but it should never have happened. The argument that is going round and round on sky sports right now will keep happening. It won't stop, and technology won't stop it.

VAR was introduced because managers, players and fans repeatedly criticised referees for making the wrong decisions and refusing to accept that humans make errors. Refs aren’t there to get everything right but instead to act as an impartial adjudicator.

Goal line technology works because it gives instant results whereas VAR takes an age.

Personally I’ll keep VAR but limit outside interference. Let managers have three challenges per game. If they make a silly challenge then that’s down to them but if that means that they can’t challenge later on in the match then that’s their fault.

VAR on 20:51 - Sep 30 with 2508 views

BlueBadger

In a very real way, Factual is frequently offside. It's his pills that do it.

[Post edited 30 Sep 2023 20:58]

	I'm one of the people who was blamed for getting Paul Cook sacked. PM for the full post.
Poll:	Do we still want KM to be our manager
Blog:	From Despair to Where?

VAR on 20:53 - Sep 30 with 2492 views

CrayonKing

VAR on 20:48 - Sep 30 by MattinLondon

The problem seems to be that VAR introduces more humans in to the process and thus more potential for human error!

VAR on 20:55 - Sep 30 with 2481 views

USA

VAR on 20:35 - Sep 30 by Garv
Yes. I'll add that we're too far gone now. I know realistically that VAR is here to stay in one form or another, but it should never have happened. The argument that is going round and round on sky sports right now will keep happening. It won't stop, and technology won't stop it.

Just scrap the offside rule. End of problem

VAR on 21:08 - Sep 30 with 2452 views

Trequartista

VAR on 20:53 - Sep 30 by CrayonKing
The problem seems to be that VAR introduces more humans in to the process and thus more potential for human error!

VAR tries to be objective about decisions which are subjective, so it's no surprise it doesn't work.

Poll:

Who do you blame for our failure to progress?

VAR on 21:22 - Sep 30 with 2391 views

pointofblue

VAR on 21:08 - Sep 30 by Trequartista
VAR tries to be objective about decisions which are subjective, so it's no surprise it doesn't work.

The issue for Liverpool was not subjective - he was onside.

Poll:

Who would you play at right centre back on Saturday?

VAR on 21:46 - Sep 30 with 2333 views

thatbdude

VAR on 21:22 - Sep 30 by pointofblue
The issue for Liverpool was not subjective - he was onside.

The same could be said for the red cards. Both the refs and VAR were poor in that game

Poll:

Who going down?

VAR on 22:01 - Sep 30 with 2287 views

Garv

VAR on 20:48 - Sep 30 by MattinLondon

I still blame Warnock. It was his "my team (Cardiff) suffered from a bad offside decision therefore there must be technology in football" that saw VAR eventually come in.

Agree with everything you say apart from the suggestion of challenges. Just think that opens the door for more technicalities and confusion/controversy.

Poll:

Pick a goal to win the derby in stoppage time...

VAR on 22:02 - Sep 30 with 2282 views

mutters

VAR on 20:48 - Sep 30 by MattinLondon

Similar to the NFL. Each team has three timeouts, and a coach can challenge any ruling on the field. If the challenge is correct and the onfield decision is reversed then no timeout is lost, if the challenge is rejected then the team loses one timeout

Appreciate we don't have timeouts in football but I like the idea in principle.

The one challenge I can see is how long you have to make a challenge. In the NFL you get to the next snap of the ball to challenge.

Poll:

At what price would you sell our 32 year old Leading Scorer Murphy this summer?

VAR on 22:05 - Sep 30 with 2268 views

Plums

VAR on 21:46 - Sep 30 by thatbdude
The same could be said for the red cards. Both the refs and VAR were poor in that game

The first red was correct. Really frustrating that Sky allow their pundits to obfuscate that.
They've made a right mess of the offside though - despite the fact the commentator initially justified the incorrect decision.

[Post edited 30 Sep 2023 22:07]

	It's 106 miles to Portman Road, we've got a full tank of gas, half a round of Port Salut, it's dark... and we're wearing blue tinted sunglasses.
Poll:	Which recent triallist should we have signed?

-1

VAR on 22:41 - Sep 30 with 2191 views

Trequartista

VAR on 21:22 - Sep 30 by pointofblue
The issue for Liverpool was not subjective - he was onside.

I was making a more general point about, for example, penalty decisions. Offsides are more objective, and this example was clearly onside, but there's still a lot of nonsense with lines and centimetres, which are meaningless as the foot that played the ball is contact with the ball for several milliseconds.

The whole thing is absurd, we are playing with different rules between Premier League and Championship, we use technology for some parts of the game but not others.

Either referee the whole thing with a computer or have humans referee the whole thing.

Poll:

Who do you blame for our failure to progress?

VAR on 23:35 - Sep 30 with 2095 views

Bent_double

VAR on 22:05 - Sep 30 by Plums
The first red was correct. Really frustrating that Sky allow their pundits to obfuscate that. They've made a right mess of the offside though - despite the fact the commentator initially justified the incorrect decision. [Post edited 30 Sep 2023 22:07]

No, his foot slipped off the top of the ball, absolutely no intention, not even a yellow, certainly not a red.

Poll:

So what do we think will happen with MM and the Aston Villa job?

VAR on 23:41 - Sep 30 with 2081 views

Bury_St_Edmundson

VAR on 23:35 - Sep 30 by Bent_double
No, his foot slipped off the top of the ball, absolutely no intention, not even a yellow, certainly not a red.

Yellow for impact
no red for intent

VAR on 23:43 - Sep 30 with 2076 views

Whos_blue

VAR on 22:05 - Sep 30 by Plums
The first red was correct. Really frustrating that Sky allow their pundits to obfuscate that. They've made a right mess of the offside though - despite the fact the commentator initially justified the incorrect decision. [Post edited 30 Sep 2023 22:07]

I'm not so sure. I think the red was harsh. I didn't think he was reckless nor particularly out of control.
I thought his foot had to travel a little way until it made contact.
What really annoyed me was the way VAR had freeze framed the worse possible angle as the ref approched the screen, clearly pushing him to upgrade to a red. There was so much more to the incident than that.
Would we have been happy to see one of ours sent off in a similar fashion?

Distortion becomes somehow pure in its wildness.

VAR on 23:45 - Sep 30 with 2075 views

Plums

VAR on 23:35 - Sep 30 by Bent_double
No, his foot slipped off the top of the ball, absolutely no intention, not even a yellow, certainly not a red.

Thank you for making the point superbly. 'Intent' has no part in the decision.
There was no option but to give a red for endangering the opponent.

Serious foul play

A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.

Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.

[Post edited 30 Sep 2023 23:46]

	It's 106 miles to Portman Road, we've got a full tank of gas, half a round of Port Salut, it's dark... and we're wearing blue tinted sunglasses.
Poll:	Which recent triallist should we have signed?

-1

VAR on 23:55 - Sep 30 with 2051 views

Plums

VAR on 23:43 - Sep 30 by Whos_blue

Harsh? Definitely. But also correct.
If one of ours was off for the same, I'd definitely be disappointed but you cannot blame the official for applying the law. As I've posted elsewhere. 'Must' leaves no option.

Serious foul play

A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.

Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.

	It's 106 miles to Portman Road, we've got a full tank of gas, half a round of Port Salut, it's dark... and we're wearing blue tinted sunglasses.
Poll:	Which recent triallist should we have signed?

VAR on 23:56 - Sep 30 with 2047 views

Whos_blue

VAR on 23:45 - Sep 30 by Plums

[Post edited 30 Sep 2023 23:46]

That definition makes it seem even more harsh to me.
I didn't see "excessive force" "brutality" nor a "lunge".
Still, it's opinions that give us plenty to discuss here.

Distortion becomes somehow pure in its wildness.

VAR on 00:01 - Oct 1 with 2037 views

Plums

VAR on 23:56 - Sep 30 by Whos_blue
That definition makes it seem even more harsh to me. I didn't see "excessive force" "brutality" nor a "lunge". Still, it's opinions that give us plenty to discuss here.

It definitely endangered the opponent. Once it does that, the rest of the clause is irrelevant.

	It's 106 miles to Portman Road, we've got a full tank of gas, half a round of Port Salut, it's dark... and we're wearing blue tinted sunglasses.
Poll:	Which recent triallist should we have signed?

VAR on 08:36 - Oct 1 with 1889 views

Wickets

VAR on 20:29 - Sep 30 by BasingstokeBlue
So - do you trust the refs and linos instead?

Good point of course we just cant go back . The Lino got it wrong before VAR ignored his mistake . 2 questions why did Lino raise his flag as that isn't the instruction , Why then didn't VAR check the decision ?

VAR on 08:50 - Oct 1 with 1868 views

Pique

VAR on 20:48 - Sep 30 by MattinLondon

While I have some sympathy with the challenge system idea, the problem with it is that it might actually encourage spurious challenges sometimes. What would be to stop managers throwing in a VAR challenge every time the opposition score in the hope that a minor infraction gets picked up?

VAR on 08:53 - Oct 1 with 1852 views

Kieran_Knows

I just think our officials are completely clueless on it. Watch German or French football and they’re almost spot on with every decision, and in quick time. We seem to spend about 3 minutes trying to draw a line on a screen.

Poll:

We’ve got super KM, he knows exactly what we need. Woolfie at the back…

VAR on 08:58 - Oct 1 with 1840 views

Vaughan8

VAR on 22:05 - Sep 30 by Plums
The first red was correct. Really frustrating that Sky allow their pundits to obfuscate that. They've made a right mess of the offside though - despite the fact the commentator initially justified the incorrect decision. [Post edited 30 Sep 2023 22:07]

Hmmmm. On the replay, in slow-motion, it did look bad. However in real.tome it didn't look that bad. Those things always look worse slowed down.

Clearly just going for the ball. 99% of other players would have done the same in that situation. I think.it was harsh.

Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread