Premier League to vote on scrapping VAR

[UlleyMiller]

It's never been used correctly. It should only ever be used as a means to overturn decisions when there's a 'clear and obvious' error. Not marginal offsides, and only ever if you have enough evidence to overturn in a very short window.

Used correctly, great tool. Used how it has been, games ruined.

[Ronners]

It's never been used correctly. It should only ever be used as a means to overturn decisions when there's a 'clear and obvious' error. Not marginal offsides, and only ever if you have enough evidence to overturn in a very short window.

Used correctly, great tool. Used how it has been, games ruined.

It's not offsideish, your either offside or you're not however marginal, it's like a goal, the ball is either all over the line or it's not, however marginal that is. UTM

[Masbroughstreet]

It's not offsideish, your either offside or you're not however marginal, it's like a goal, the ball is either all over the line or it's not, however marginal that is. UTM

It was never like though as offside could never be completely accurate. Remember when players used to be classed as 'level'? Nobody moaned if a toenail was beyond the last defender. The lines can never be drawn completely accurately, for me if the offside isn't clearly visible to the naked eye and lines have to be drawn then it should just be classed as level and therefore onside.

Before VAR would anyone have complained the Coventry winner in the FA Cup semi was offside?

[Brin]

Get rid. Those sat up in the room still don’t know how to use it, plus they intervene when it’s not called for. Plus the embarrassing amount of time they spend making a decision.

[UlleyMiller]

It's not offsideish, your either offside or you're not however marginal, it's like a goal, the ball is either all over the line or it's not, however marginal that is. UTM

It's absolutely miles away from the ball crossing a goal line - that's a static line, painted, and a set camera position. Offside relies on a moving camera on two focal points, the ability to clearly show when a ball has left the foot of the passer, and super-imposed lines, and that's before you get to the nonsense around elbows or backsides being slightly offside... cricket have got this right by allowing an "umpire's call" for situations they know the tech falls short. Football bodies know about the tech limitations but choose to ignore them.

[UlleyMiller]

It was never like though as offside could never be completely accurate. Remember when players used to be classed as 'level'? Nobody moaned if a toenail was beyond the last defender. The lines can never be drawn completely accurately, for me if the offside isn't clearly visible to the naked eye and lines have to be drawn then it should just be classed as level and therefore onside.

Before VAR would anyone have complained the Coventry winner in the FA Cup semi was offside?

We'd have talked/argued about it for years... which is what made sport great. People love a bit of controversy. The minute you can make a reasonable case for a decision going either way, that's when VAR should be removed from the equation.

[frogmiller]

Would the 'top' refs be able to cope without their safety blanket?

good point CAM! I think tht they've become too reliant on VAR so they make less crucial decisions and leave it to the man in the office

[Jimmy Badfellow]

Should be kept and worked on.I can't see what people's problem is with it.Don't they want fairness when there are people's career's on the line and millions of pounds involved. Interpretation over certain decisions will always be open to debate but offside is offside,whether it's a metre or a millimetre.Is tennis wanting to scrap hawkeye? Is cricket wanting to scrap all their various toys? Rugby Union and Rugby League seem perfectly happy with their video refs. It's always football isn't it. Too many people have probably lost so much content in order to talk bo**o*cks in the pub due to so many incidents being categorically clarified by technology.

[Ronners]

It's absolutely miles away from the ball crossing a goal line - that's a static line, painted, and a set camera position. Offside relies on a moving camera on two focal points, the ability to clearly show when a ball has left the foot of the passer, and super-imposed lines, and that's before you get to the nonsense around elbows or backsides being slightly offside... cricket have got this right by allowing an "umpire's call" for situations they know the tech falls short. Football bodies know about the tech limitations but choose to ignore them.

I'm not denying the offsides aren't difficult to judge, i refereed and ran lines for 15 years in local football, but surely the VAR way is far better than having a linesman have to watch the ball being kicked, sometimes with his head and body turned to watch when the ball is kicked, and then turn his head back to try and determine if he thinks a player was offside at the time the ball was kicked. UTM

[UlleyMiller]

I'm not denying the offsides aren't difficult to judge, i refereed and ran lines for 15 years in local football, but surely the VAR way is far better than having a linesman have to watch the ball being kicked, sometimes with his head and body turned to watch when the ball is kicked, and then turn his head back to try and determine if he thinks a player was offside at the time the ball was kicked. UTM

Completely agree. Running a line is immensely difficult when it comes to offsides, and VAR is better. It's miles from perfect though, and there are studies online on its limitations (many supported by key figures in the game). I'd rather a working VAR system than none, but they have to be clear about the marginal calls where technology leaves any doubt (two lines touching each other in a recent game, for example) and adopt a tolerance.