O/T - Worst thing ever in football?

[Andy_Faber]

I know it’s a pain that removes the spontaneous celebration of football, but it does often mean that the right decision is reached, and one does have to wonder why there are not similar problems with its equivalent in cricket, tennis and rugby where it’s been used for much longer.

IMO

In cricket, the type of game is different to footy, cricket is a set-piece game where folk are used to a stop-start progression. I think it’s added to the spectacle

In Tennis it’s actually speeded up play, the players appear to trust and really like it. Again it’s a set piece sport

I think it spoils rugby for the ‘at the venue’ fan, it certainly does me and anyone I’ve been with, but then again so does the time scrums take to enact. Chapeau to RL for solving that one

Unmentioned, NFL have cracked it after many years of experimenting but it’s a bloody expensive system

[swaledale]

Seeing as this has popped up again, and seeing as I watched my first fif**** minutes of Match Of The Day for years last week, I'd argue that the worst thing is actually VAR. That was the dominant and almost sole subject of discussion, Jesus how boring.

I agree, somehow (typically of the British) we have over egged VAR, into something it was never meant to be, it doesn't seem to be applied in the same way in Europe?

I thought it was to clear up clear mistakes, not be a second referee on marginal decisions. But I guess the guys and gals at Stockley park have to justify their existence. The refereeing of the game should pass virtually unnoticed, now its centre stage. Completely spoilt the game IMO.

[MadAmster]

Said it before, and no doubt I'll say it again, how VAR was designed is good. Hoe it has been implemented in England is awful.

[SithHappens]

Said it before, and no doubt I'll say it again, how VAR was designed is good. Hoe it has been implemented in England is awful.

Don't think it's just England. There have been issues elsewhere too. Wasn't it in Germany where half time came and the players were in the changing rooms but then got called out because var had awarded a penalty?

[swaledale]

Don't think it's just England. There have been issues elsewhere too. Wasn't it in Germany where half time came and the players were in the changing rooms but then got called out because var had awarded a penalty?

Haven't heard that Sith, but that sounds like mismanagement rather than VAR, did someone forget to tell the ref?

[Ramshank72]

Said it before, and no doubt I'll say it again, how VAR was designed is good. Hoe it has been implemented in England is awful.

Picking on your expertise if I may - Is it meant to be a check of a clear and obvious "refereeing mistake", or a check for a clear and obvious "foul". I feel the former is easier to judge, as the latter brings you into the grey areas of the various laws.

[swaledale]

I had thought it was clear and obvious referee errors, VAR isn't supposed to be a second referee of a game, just a way of avoiding obvious errors made by a referee.

[MadAmster]

VAR (Video Assistant Referee) is a system that can only intervene in a football match for four specific "match-changing" situations: goals (including potential fouls or offsides leading to a goal), penalties (including potential fouls leading to a penalty), direct red card incidents (but not second yellow cards), and mistaken identity. VAR assists the referee by identifying "clear and obvious errors" or "serious missed incidents" within these four categories, which can lead to an on-field review by the referee or an overturn of the original decision, though the on-field referee always has the final say.

It's not a cure all though. Refs will make mistakes or miss things. When any of the 4 situations occurs, VAR will have a look. Let's take a goal being scored as an example. Did the scorer foul anyone in the lead up to the goal? Was a teammate of the scorer's, or the scorer himself, in an offside position and influencing the game (offside and in the keeper's line of sight for instance). Was there a foul by a teammate missed in the build up? Etc.. To the naked eye, it might seem like there;s a lot for the VAR to consider. I don't know the make up of the VAR team in England but in Holland there is the VAR and 3 assistants. Each with their own "sphere of influence". If any of them spot something, it's looked at, the #1 VAR makes a decision and either says carry on or advises the on foeld ref to have a look at the video.

Take the Fulham goal the other day. Player does a fancy turn and, on the exact piece of the pitch where he is going to put his foot, an opponent has put his foot in that exact place. ref awards goal. One of the VAR team says, is that a foul, ref is advised to have a look and he calls a foul. It wasn't. He was putting his foot down in the "right" place. Goal should have stood.

Reminds me of Hamer's goal v Derby at Sheff U last season. Edge of the box, Osborn went for the ball. Hamer I think it was stood on Ossie's foot/leg and fell over. Never a foul. ref gave it. VAR can't look at it as it's not one of the 4 situations they are tasked with looking at. Hamer takes a cracking free kick, Ossie, all 5 foot 9 of him is placed as the outside player in the wall. Hamer puts it over Ossie's head and into the top right corner. If Ossie had jumped or if we'd had a 6 foot plus bloke there it wouldn't have gone in. VAR couldn't advise the ref to review video of the non foul as it's "not relevant to the goal" as it was a decision that VAR can't look at. Ridiculous.

[Andy_Faber]

There's a quirk in the NFL system where most decisions can't be reviewed after the next play has started. My team the Bills 'hurried up' a number of times last year to avoid scrutiny of what they obviously considered a dubious prior play. That can't happen under VAR by rule, but there's another irritating thing that has crept into the game that would sort of prevent it anyway - the almost-extinction of the 'quick free-kick'. In NFL the attacking team doesn't have to wait for a whistle, in footy, although I don't believe there's a rule (MA please advise), teams looking to press on by taking a free kick quickly are almost always called back by referees if the kick is from a remotely 'dangerous' position. Another means of delaying the game and denying the fan of action/excitement

[MadAmster]

You can take a free kick immediately after the referee signals a foul has been committed, as long as the ball is stationary and at the spot of the foul. The opposing players must be 9.15 meters (10 yards) away from the ball, not retreating immediately or purposely getting in the way should be yellow carded but hardly ever is. A free kick can be taken immediately to exploit the opposing team's lack of defensive positioning, even if they are still setting up a wall.

Most quick free kicks that get called back are either because the ball was not stationary or the kick wasn't taken from the right (exact) spot the foul occurred. Another frequent reason is the ref was wanting to book or speak to a player (in this case he'll usually signal a ceremonial free kick by pointing to his whistle.

The "ceremonial free kick" is signalled by the ref, usually if he's going to card or have a strong word with one or more players. Unfortunately, there are very many of these, these days, where the defending team decide it's too close to allow a free hit and they mess about preventing a quick free kick and the ref then signals a "ceremonial". Far too many of them and totally unnecessary. Defending players would argue they are "merely moving in a straight line from where they were to where they are supposed to be at a free kick from that position... IMO they are merely rule bending.

More things that are in the football book of the dark arts... they need stamping out.

[SithHappens]

Haven't heard that Sith, but that sounds like mismanagement rather than VAR, did someone forget to tell the ref?

It was a while back so not sure.

[SithHappens]

No fan of VAR but Sky, MOTD etc have spent years, and increasingly so as technology improved, pulling referee performances apart, as have managers.

How about we go back to the good old days with no VAR but broadcasters, players, managers accept that referees, just like everyone else, are prone to errors and keep quiet and stick to talking about the players.

Let us fans be the ones moaning about being robbed when having our after match pint.

I'd rather a mistake be made than the emotions of the game being ripped apart because a goal is scored and disallowed minutes later.

[ramAnag]

No fan of VAR but Sky, MOTD etc have spent years, and increasingly so as technology improved, pulling referee performances apart, as have managers.

How about we go back to the good old days with no VAR but broadcasters, players, managers accept that referees, just like everyone else, are prone to errors and keep quiet and stick to talking about the players.

Let us fans be the ones moaning about being robbed when having our after match pint.

I'd rather a mistake be made than the emotions of the game being ripped apart because a goal is scored and disallowed minutes later.

But you can rarely put the genie back in the bottle, Sith. We have the technology and every single decision can now be viewed in UHD slo-mo. Like it or not every decision is now exposed to intense scrutiny and I actually think the officials get a remarkably high percentage right, but with such hitech scrutiny available we probably need VAR, albeit with better interpretation of what is clear to see.

[SithHappens]

But you can rarely put the genie back in the bottle, Sith. We have the technology and every single decision can now be viewed in UHD slo-mo. Like it or not every decision is now exposed to intense scrutiny and I actually think the officials get a remarkably high percentage right, but with such hitech scrutiny available we probably need VAR, albeit with better interpretation of what is clear to see.

Of course if all else fails clubs can issue statements openly accusing VAR officials of cheating. That will always help.

[Andy_Faber]

But you can rarely put the genie back in the bottle, Sith. We have the technology and every single decision can now be viewed in UHD slo-mo. Like it or not every decision is now exposed to intense scrutiny and I actually think the officials get a remarkably high percentage right, but with such hitech scrutiny available we probably need VAR, albeit with better interpretation of what is clear to see.

I disagree, it?s not about right or wrong it?s about the disruption to the game and the ?theft? (strong word) of that adrenaline rush that we in the lower leagues get when a goal is scored. Personally I?d scrap it but there?s money involved now so no chance