A&H

VAR Vote

Kes said:
That's just as I alluded to earlier but lends no weight to your argument that we're better off with VAR gone.

As someone has already pointed out, HW has to apologise occasionally owing to errors in the process which is let's face it, still in need of tweaking. This is borne out of an assumption that because we now have cameras, every decision made is gonna be 100% correct.

HW would be apologising a damned sight more often if it was left to just the 3 on field with one fleeting look at an incident. How do you think the notion of VAR (and why) was first conceived? Was it because the camera showed that referees were always spot on? :rolleyes:

Sure, just get rid of VAR and let's go back to how it was. Except we'll STILL have tv cameras that don't lie. ...
Click to expand...
It would be better off without VAR as it would bring a flow back to the game and allow fans to actually celebrate. Would there still be mistakes? Yes. Would they be more palatable than a mistake in which both the onfield officials and VAR have messed up? Absolutely.

VAR in it's current guide does not work and isn't close to working. Just look at the discussion yourself & @David G are having. I agree with you that it was a C&O error last night and should have resulted in a penalty, but the stats people are waving around will probably show the decision as being correct. Simply for the reason that they didn't see it as being C&O.

C&O is just like the phrase 'what the game expects'; it is all waffle that someone once dreamt up, but doesn't actually know what any of it means.
 
A&H International
Runner Ref said:
It would be better off without VAR as it would bring a flow back to the game and allow fans to actually celebrate. Would there still be mistakes? Yes. Would they be more palatable than a mistake in which both the onfield officials and VAR have messed up? Absolutely.

VAR in it's current guide does not work and isn't close to working. Just look at the discussion yourself & @David G are having. I agree with you that it was a C&O error last night and should have resulted in a penalty, but the stats people are waving around will probably show the decision as being correct. Simply for the reason that they didn't see it as being C&O.

C&O is just like the phrase 'what the game expects'; it is all waffle that someone once dreamt up, but doesn't actually know what any of it means.
Click to expand...

Not dreamt up at all - it follows the same principle in cricket of umpires call.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kes
Runner Ref said:
It would be better off without VAR as it would bring a flow back to the game and allow fans to actually celebrate. Would there still be mistakes? Yes. Would they be more palatable than a mistake in which both the onfield officials and VAR have messed up? Absolutely.

VAR in it's current guide does not work and isn't close to working. Just look at the discussion yourself & @David G are having. I agree with you that it was a C&O error last night and should have resulted in a penalty, but the stats people are waving around will probably show the decision as being correct. Simply for the reason that they didn't see it as being C&O.

C&O is just like the phrase 'what the game expects'; it is all waffle that someone once dreamt up, but doesn't actually know what any of it means.
Click to expand...
We're obviously never going to agree on this (which is fine).

Going back to how it was pre-VAR just isn't an option. There would be more mistakes, whether "palatable" or not which, in a multi-billion pound industry will never be acceptable. It would also result in even more criticism and scepticism around the ability of referees, especially when the Sky/MOTD cameras can gleefully highlight "mistakes" after numerous replays and camera angles. We're then totally back at square one, looking at the reasons for which VAR was introduced in the first place!!

Moving forward with improvement is the way ahead. Not taking a retrograde step backwards.
 
Kes said:
We're obviously never going to agree on this (which is fine).

Going back to how it was pre-VAR just isn't an option. There would be more mistakes, whether "palatable" or not which, in a multi-billion pound industry will never be acceptable. It would also result in even more criticism and scepticism around the ability of referees, especially when the Sky/MOTD cameras can gleefully highlight "mistakes" after numerous replays and camera angles. We're then totally back at square one, looking at the reasons for which VAR was introduced in the first place!!

Moving forward with improvement is the way ahead. Not taking a retrograde step backwards.
Click to expand...

That’s a fair and reasonable view to have & we await the introduction of semi-automated offsides (just hope that it will hit the ground running so to speak without teething issues).
 
David G said:
Not dreamt up at all - it follows the same principle in cricket of umpires call.
Click to expand...
Yes it was dreamt up, as there is no agreed definition or principle that people understand. The fact yourself and Kes have just been disagreeing over something being or not being clear is proof of that
 
Kes said:
We're obviously never going to agree on this (which is fine).

Going back to how it was pre-VAR just isn't an option. There would be more mistakes, whether "palatable" or not which, in a multi-billion pound industry will never be acceptable. It would also result in even more criticism and scepticism around the ability of referees, especially when the Sky/MOTD cameras can gleefully highlight "mistakes" after numerous replays and camera angles. We're then totally back at square one, looking at the reasons for which VAR was introduced in the first place!!

Moving forward with improvement is the way ahead. Not taking a retrograde step backwards.
Click to expand...
Sometimes you have to take 2 steps backwards to take 1 step forwards. VAR has been a complete and utter disaster. This isn't a PGMOL thing, this is a general football thing, as I'm yet to see a federation role it out successfully.

Football in someways is a very very arrogant sport. As @GraemeS has pointed out on many occasions, Rugby & Cricket have managed fairly successfully to bring in a version of VAR. Yet football decided to ignore this and invent their own version. A version in which they keep tying themselves in knots over.
 
Last edited:
Runner Ref said:
VAR has been a complete and utter disaster.
Click to expand...
Still disagree. It's been controversial is all.
Runner Ref said:
Football is someways is a very very arrogant sport. As @GraemeS has pointed out on many occasions, Rugby & Cricket have managed fairly successfully to bring in a version of VAR. Yet football decided to ignore this and invent their own version. A version in which they keep tying themselves in knots over.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
So, they should hold up their hands, admit that and then look to achieve a means by which it is more fit for purpose.
It'd be even more "arrogant" to insist that whilst rugby and cricket are using VAR cameras to try and get stuff right, football just simply doesn't need one!!
 
Runner Ref said:
Football is someways is a very very arrogant sport. As @GraemeS has pointed out on many occasions, Rugby & Cricket have managed fairly successfully to bring in a version of VAR. Yet football decided to ignore this and invent their own version. A version in which they keep tying themselves in knots over.
Click to expand...

this this and a thousand times this
 
David G said:
Not at all, we all know that there are many replays from different angles as well as slow motion. Was there an error, yes I believe there was. Was there a clear and obvious error made by the Referee at the time of the decision he made for the reasons he did. No, I don’t believe there was.
Click to expand...
Your answer (whilst it appears in keeping with VAR's decision not to intervene) doesn't make any sense to me I'm afraid.

To have a player brought down in the PA by way of an opponent's studs briefly raking down the back of his Achilles and not award the penalty is about as clear and obvious as it gets for me. Just because he got the "Casemiro challenge aspect" right isn't a reason to just ignore the rest. The "penalty" contact came first so it's my belief that's where the "clear & obvious" protocol is flawed and needs changing.
 
Kes said:
Still disagree. It's been controversial is all.

Agreed.
So, they should hold up their hands, admit that and then look to achieve a means by which it is more fit for purpose.
It'd be even more "arrogant" to insist that whilst rugby and cricket are using VAR cameras to try and get stuff right, football just simply doesn't need one!!
Click to expand...
I'd say it has been a failure as it has brought more emphasis and hatred towards match officials. Anything that does that cannot be seen as a good thing.

If they had enough humility to come out and say they have messed it up and want to make major changes, I'd be all up for it. But sadly they are too busy coming up with stupid trials that will never work. Then you have PGMOL changing their mind every other week on where the bar sits for intervention.
 
David G said:
Not at all, we all know that there are many replays from different angles as well as slow motion. Was there an error, yes I believe there was. Was there a clear and obvious error made by the Referee at the time of the decision he made for the reasons he did. No, I don’t believe there was.
Click to expand...
What would a definition or example of C&O be for you?
 
Runner Ref said:
Sometimes you have to take 2 steps backwards to take 1 step forwards. VAR has been a complete and utter disaster. This isn't a PGMOL thing, this is a general football thing, as I'm yet to see a federation role it out successfully.

Football in someways is a very very arrogant sport. As @GraemeS has pointed out on many occasions, Rugby & Cricket have managed fairly successfully to bring in a version of VAR. Yet football decided to ignore this and invent their own version. A version in which they keep tying themselves in knots over.
Click to expand...

Football didn’t altogether ignore, but had different challenges, whereas, whilst predominantly VAR is suited to rugby and cricket because of their stop/start nature, football doesn’t often have this luxury. Also, it should be remembered how long it took VAR/bunker officials to upgrade the yellow to red to SA Captain in the World Cup Final (much longer than any VAR referral in football).
 
David G said:
Football didn’t altogether ignore, but had different challenges, whereas, whilst predominantly VAR is suited to rugby and cricket because of their stop/start nature, football doesn’t often have this luxury. Also, it should be remembered how long it took VAR/bunker officials to upgrade the yellow to red to SA Captain in the World Cup Final (much longer than any VAR referral in football).
Click to expand...
So you agree VAR is suited to other sports other than football? Kind of proves my point.......:rolleyes:

So a one off decision took a while for them to come up with, and we got the inside comms as to why this decision was made. Yet with VAR, decisions pretty consistently take a long while to be checked and no spectator/viewer is given any insight into what they're discussing. At least until HW does a monthly 30 minute show.
 
Runner Ref said:
What would a definition or example of C&O be for you?
Click to expand...

Maradona hand of god which is why VAR was conceived in the first place and VAR has gone much beyond that (probably to justify the cost of implementing). I don’t think there are many clear and obvious errors by PL Referees. The 3rd decision in the Everton v Forest game should have gone to VAR, but the 2 previous decisions that Forest considered were clear and obvious errors were not and nor was the Wolves offside incident. I do accept that there have been a few including Spurs v Liverpool earlier in the season and some since, but I haven’t viewed them.
 
Runner Ref said:
So you agree VAR is suited to other sports other than football? Kind of proves my point.......:rolleyes:

So a one off decision took a while for them to come up with, and we got the inside comms as to why this decision was made. Yet with VAR, decisions pretty consistently take a long while to be checked and no spectator/viewer is given any insight into what they're discussing. At least until HW does a monthly 30 minute show.
Click to expand...

That’s a fair reflection of my thinking though there has to be something in place to avoid the Maradona hand of god type incidents. They solved the Lampard type incidents with goal line technology and the jury is out with semi automated offsides. Rugby supporters are a different breed to football supporters - even if a VAR decision was properly reflected inside the ground, I think the offended team/supporters would still object. However, PL accept that things have to improve inside the ground with VAR outcomes.
 
David G said:
Maradona hand of god which is why VAR was conceived in the first place and VAR has gone much beyond that (probably to justify the cost of implementing). I don’t think there are many clear and obvious errors by PL Referees. The 3rd decision in the Everton v Forest game should have gone to VAR, but the 2 previous decisions that Forest considered were clear and obvious errors were not and nor was the Wolves offside incident. I do accept that there have been a few including Spurs v Liverpool earlier in the season and some since, but I haven’t viewed them.
Click to expand...
So how are there still C&O errors being missed? This is my point. Referees will always get things wrong, most if not all people accept this. But now we have a situation where the decisions are wrong, despite 4 officials in the ground and min 2 people in the booth are watching it.

If VAR was brought in because of the hand of god, was the cost of it really needed? An absolute rarity of an incident, along with the Henry handball.

If they want to keep the opportunity for referees to view replays, do a challenge-based system. This gives the clubs an element of control and also accountability if a 'C&O' incident was missed. I'd put my house on it that AT would have given a penalty for the 3rd appeal in the Everton vs Forest game, but he wasn't given the chance as Attwell decided it somehow wasn't C&O.
 
Runner Ref said:
So how are there still C&O errors being missed? This is my point. Referees will always get things wrong, most if not all people accept this. But now we have a situation where the decisions are wrong, despite 4 officials in the ground and min 2 people in the booth are watching it.

If VAR was brought in because of the hand of god, was the cost of it really needed? An absolute rarity of an incident, along with the Henry handball.

If they want to keep the opportunity for referees to view replays, do a challenge-based system. This gives the clubs an element of control and also accountability if a 'C&O' incident was missed. I'd put my house on it that AT would have given a penalty for the 3rd appeal in the Everton vs Forest game, but he wasn't given the chance as Attwell decided it somehow wasn't C&O.
Click to expand...

A few are still being missed, but stats say only a maximum of 4%. If VAR passes the 6th June vote by clubs I reckon that will get down by a few more % next season, but I don’t think we can ever expect zero tolerance.

I tend to agree with your final para, though not easy to implement cos more time delay with captains/managers deciding whether they want to refer.
 
David G said:
A few are still being missed, but stats say only a maximum of 4%. If VAR passes the 6th June vote by clubs I reckon that will get down by a few more % next season, but I don’t think we can ever expect zero tolerance.

I tend to agree with your final para.
Click to expand...
Those stats are released by the Premier League, of course they'll make then look good. They're in panic mode because of the struggles with VAR, so they need to make it look credible. Then you consider who is it that decides these figures?
 
Runner Ref said:
Those stats are released by the Premier League, of course they'll make then look good. They're in panic mode because of the struggles with VAR, so they need to make it look credible. Then you consider who is it that decides these figures?
Click to expand...

We know who makes the decisions to create the stat - The Independent Key Match Incident Panel that consists of 5 members viz 3 ex players/coaches, 1 x PGMOL & 1 x EFL.
 
David G said:
We know who makes the decisions to create the stat - The Independent Key Match Incident Panel that consists of 5 members viz 3 ex players/coaches, 1 x PGMOL & 1 x EFL.
Click to expand...
Yep, exactly. We had a discussion the other week in regards to the appeals panel and how it doesn't make sense that non-referees are in essence marking referees. That didn't go down very well. But now it seems okay, because the figures they released backs VAR....
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top