Var

[Scum-Triumphant]

So now it has had its first weekend in then EPL what do you think. Wolves manager didn’t like it and even Man City fans said that although they won 5-0 they were looking at the screen before celebrating.
Phil Neville said it cost him in the World Cup final but it is ultimately getting decisions right and that is what everyone wants.
It isn’t for me though. That feeling of the Ball hitting the net when you are in the moment cannot be replicated. I’d like to see it used sparingly for clear errors. Not for every goal or handball.

[frogmiller]

In this world of equality that we're having forced upon us then we'll look back in 20 years and tell our kids what it used to be like.

The TV has forced it on us or the TV pundit who has. The officials who have been consantly conned by players falling over at the slightest touch have been critisized by everyone for the way they handle a game. The game is too fast for just 3 officials now so the cameras do the work for them. As long as they don't continuantly rely on RAV I think that it will be accepted.

I doubt that it'll get down as low as our level for some years so we'll have real football as it's always been. But that's down to money and the fact that the Prem club owners say that there's so much money resting on a decision then it'll be interesting to see the first club to sue VAR.

The snapping of the netting as the ball thwacks it is a terrific sound followed imediatly afterwards with the cheer can't be replicated as you rightly say Scum.

[Grist_To_The_Mill]

I don’t like it.

[Timbertop]

Scrap it. Killing that moment of euphoria.

[Scum-Triumphant]

Phil Neville’s main argument was that all the clubs voted it in.
I don’t remember the fans getting a say. The only ones that enjoy it are the sky sports generation.

[flourbasher]

I think it would be better to have 8/9 officials all reporting to the ref placed in strategic positions similar to where sky put their cameras for a live match.
Even if VAR was used for just that and not debatable goals.
Having a good look for shirt pulling, fouls, arms all over the place at corners etc.
Loads of shirt pulling on smudge by their captain and RB.
If the players knew someone was watching their particular zone they might think twice if the ball isn't near them but they might concede a free kick in s dangerous place.
I'm not advocating stop start matches just a deterant to stamp out all the cheating
Might be s better way to introduce a new idea

[Paul Waring]

Some good points made here. Originally football didn't have even referees and captains were expected to ensure fair behaviour, eventually delegating this to two umpires (1 from each side) and finally introducing referees, initially as a timekeeper with deciding vote and later sole arbiter of decisions.
All these and later changes are ultimately a response to cheating, gamesmanship and dishonesty.
VAR is inconceivable were football still primarily watched by people attending the actual game. But nowadays the average TV audience for a Prem game is 15 to 20 times the number in the ground. These TV viewers are brought up on freeze frame, replays, minute analysis of action and VAR is for many simply a natural extension. It's daft if TV viewers can see that decisions are wrong but the ref can't.

[frogmiller]

I did see that the ref wanted a real time replay on an incident for a red card. He chose not to give the red but I've seen them given for it.

The good thing that will change the game more than VAR and that is the sin bin that is going to be trialed.

[CAMiller]

Some good points made here. Originally football didn't have even referees and captains were expected to ensure fair behaviour, eventually delegating this to two umpires (1 from each side) and finally introducing referees, initially as a timekeeper with deciding vote and later sole arbiter of decisions.
All these and later changes are ultimately a response to cheating, gamesmanship and dishonesty.
VAR is inconceivable were football still primarily watched by people attending the actual game. But nowadays the average TV audience for a Prem game is 15 to 20 times the number in the ground. These TV viewers are brought up on freeze frame, replays, minute analysis of action and VAR is for many simply a natural extension. It's daft if TV viewers can see that decisions are wrong but the ref can't.

Excellent point about it being 'made for TV'.

How's it working for Cricket? All the technology they use came in after we departed the UK and I've not seen much TV cricket since. Baseball here is going the same way and 2-3 minute reviews of decisions are infuriating.

[frogmiller]

Excellent point about it being 'made for TV'.

How's it working for Cricket? All the technology they use came in after we departed the UK and I've not seen much TV cricket since. Baseball here is going the same way and 2-3 minute reviews of decisions are infuriating.

Cricket is suited to VAR as is Tennis and rugby.

Someone made a good point about the tolerance of the Harkeye used in cricket. The snickometre also works but there is only speradic action in cricket where as football is a flowing game that doesn't have natural stops unless the ball goes out of play. All other stops are caused by decisions made by officials