Your verdict on VAR

[swaledale]

What are your thoughts on how VAR has been used this season?

I was in favour of VAR, the game has become so fast, there is so much TV coverage and many players are adept at "gaming" the system that I thought it long overdue that football followed the footsteps of Rugby, Cricket and other sports. I could see it preventing clear "injustices" or the Henry hand ball goal for France.

However, as per usual the premier League have IMO implemented it in an inconsistent and incompetent fashion, such that instead of it being an aid and support to the on field referee, it is in fact undermining them and creating controversy that didn't exist before.

The principle of it being used where there is clear doubt seems to have gone by the wayside, with very marginal "offside" decisions being given. Referees decisions are being overruled often wrongly, IMO the referee should call for the use of VAR, when they are uncertain about a decision, not VAR call into question a decision. It seems that the ultimate referree is now those sat behind the VAR screens not the referee, this isn't good for their decision making or good for the game. They should also use the screens at the side of the pitch to judge for themselves.

I would also have given managers say 4 challenges per game, whereby they could request a VAR review. The supporters should also be given an explanation as to whats behind every decision.

For me a chance to improve the game has been bungled and its actually spoiling the game.

[MadAmster]

As ever, a great idea spolit by those charged with implementation and usage.

The rules for its use are crystal clear. VAR will be used for 'clear and obvious errors'; in four areas - Goals, penalties, straight red cards and mistaken identity.

An offside big toe is neither clear nor obvious IMO. Therein lies the problem. Where do you "draw the line"? What distance offside would be deemed to be clear and obvious? Hard one to answer. Offside is offside after all. Minefield. I don't envy the refs. IMO it is the ref who should have the last word. If the VAR thinks there is something to be looked at, then the ref should go and look at the video. That is what happens in the Netherlands. It seems that isn't happening in the EPL.

[Geoff Parkstone]

The ruling on the field stands. It needs tweaking, some reconsideration and redefinition. In its current form its getting less fit for purpose but the concept remains sound.

They need to sort out issues highlighted in the Everton / Spuds game: the non penalty and sons dismissal when it seems it was the other guy who broke the Everton players leg. And also more communication to crowd.

The NFL seems to have got it mostly right but it's taken many years of practice, and they still ****ed up in the NFC championship game and needed to tinker with the rules.

Rome wasn't built in a day

[ramAnag]

In RL...not certain about RU...which has been using a form of VAR for many years, the referee gives his ‘on field’ decision and then, if there is any uncertainty, asks the video ref if there is any reason to overturn it. If it isn’t obvious that the decision should be overruled then it stands and that seems to have been a lot less contentious than the football equivalent.
Likewise its use in cricket with the use of ‘umpire’s call’ there seems to be less fuss although I can think of a few batsmen who may think differently.
Last weekend alone it is possible to think of at least three instances where the proper use of VAR should have, imo, led to different decisions...the Liverpool ‘equaliser’ should have stood, Everton should have been awarded a penalty and Son should not have received a red card.
Maybe it is something to do with using the system in front of much bigger and arguably more ‘emotional’, vociferous and less ‘forgiving’ crowds, but something is clearly wrong as we don’t appear to have the same problem in any other sports that are governed by video officials.

[mistaram]

In RL...not certain about RU...which has been using a form of VAR for many years, the referee gives his ‘on field’ decision and then, if there is any uncertainty, asks the video ref if there is any reason to overturn it. If it isn’t obvious that the decision should be overruled then it stands and that seems to have been a lot less contentious than the football equivalent.
Likewise its use in cricket with the use of ‘umpire’s call’ there seems to be less fuss although I can think of a few batsmen who may think differently.
Last weekend alone it is possible to think of at least three instances where the proper use of VAR should have, imo, led to different decisions...the Liverpool ‘equaliser’ should have stood, Everton should have been awarded a penalty and Son should not have received a red card.
Maybe it is something to do with using the system in front of much bigger and arguably more ‘emotional’, vociferous and less ‘forgiving’ crowds, but something is clearly wrong as we don’t appear to have the same problem in any other sports that are governed by video officials.

Spot on RA but difference is both Rugby and cricketers accept decisions a lot better Footballers will challenge every decision of the ref . There are some very good points with VAR ,times I've thought players were inside only to be proved wrong ,but whatever happened to giving the benefit of any doubt to attacker .As has been said on other posts I think the ref should go to the screen every time otherwise not much point in having him, he can easily get a second opinion from the 4th official or the lino on that side of the pitch Great idea but needs a rethink imo

[macstheman]

In itself VAR is a technology which can benefit the game and has done so in other sports. However, our sport is run by tossers who manage to balls up anything and everything they touch and they have once again achieved a high level of incompetence in applying VAR!!
So, yes, VAR is good but becomes a bout of diarrhea in the hands of morons!!

[ramAnag]

‘Spot on RA but difference is both Rugby and cricketers accept decisions a lot better.’

Fans too, mista and that might be having an influence on decision making. You only have to look at how rival rugby and cricket followers can sit side by side while this is now unheard of in football.

I’m not that convinced by Atkinson as a ref but in his defence I wouldn’t be so surprised if he sent Son off to diffuse such an inflammatory situation at Goodison and remove an obviously distressed player from proceedings. If he didn’t and he changed yellow to red because of the severity of the injury then that would, imo, be ridiculous.

[mistaram]

‘Spot on RA but difference is both Rugby and cricketers accept decisions a lot better.’

Fans too, mista and that might be having an influence on decision making. You only have to look at how rival rugby and cricket followers can sit side by side while this is now unheard of in football.

I’m not that convinced by Atkinson as a ref but in his defence I wouldn’t be so surprised if he sent Son off to diffuse such an inflammatory situation at Goodison and remove an obviously distressed player from proceedings. If he didn’t and he changed yellow to red because of the severity of the injury then that would, imo, be ridiculous.

RA I'm not sure why he sent him off It was a bit reckless because he had just been fouled himself You may be right he may have given red to get him away from the situation ,especially as the crowd were baying for blood . Just one of those terrible accidents that happen on the football match If he hadn't have fallen into the defender it would never have happened Fortunately it seems the operation went well and he's due to make a full recovery Hope so he's a lovely footballer

[Trickytreesreds]

I believe VAR should be restricted to off the ball incidents and whether the ball crossed the line or not. That's it.

Cuts out the cheating, makes the score fair.
Everything else, goes back to as it was.

[mistaram]

I believe VAR should be restricted to off the ball incidents and whether the ball crossed the line or not. That's it.

Cuts out the cheating, makes the score fair.
Everything else, goes back to as it was.

Yes Tricky I think your right Theve over complicated it Pretty sure the linesman get offside right almost every time It is good for of the ball incident ,should make players think twice if know there's a good chance they will be spotted