VAR - World Cup

[Airborn Pie]

Did you miss this thread?

http://boards.footymad.net/showthread.php?t=38218326

Yes, did miss that and it seems, to coin a recent phrase 'questionably legal', surely, once the final whistle has gone, that is that?

I'm sure that a ref cannot restart a game once the whistle has gone but again, I think it reflects more on refs than it does on VAR?

[MAD_MAGPIE]

It’s a f-VAR-ce from what I’ve seen of it. It’s here to stay regardless, but there is a lot that needs to be done to improve it to make it fit for purpose in my opinion.

The Tottenham V Rochdale game showed it at its worse. Goals disallowed, far too much time wasted, the crowd or nobody watching knowing what was going off, plus a referee that would not take responsibility and easily passed decisions over to f-VAR-ce.

The thing is that people seem to overlook is humans are still involved in the decision making process. It’s not intelligent technology that makes the decision (e.g FIFA computer game) it’s relying upon another referee to view the footage and make the call.

Offsides could easily be managed by intelligent software by the players having electronics on them (which they have for data analysis anyway), and goal line technology could also be based on intelligent software. That’s two areas of match officials work that could easily be sorted.

As long as humans are involved in the decision making process there will always be talking points and contraversy because it’s subject to the referee or officials interpretation of what they see. I’d go as far to say apart from simple decisions the same would go for intelligent software.

[Airborn Pie]

It’s a f-VAR-ce from what I’ve seen of it. It’s here to stay regardless, but there is a lot that needs to be done to improve it to make it fit for purpose in my opinion.

The Tottenham V Rochdale game showed it at its worse. Goals disallowed, far too much time wasted, the crowd or nobody watching knowing what was going off, plus a referee that would not take responsibility and easily passed decisions over to f-VAR-ce.

The thing is that people seem to overlook is humans are still involved in the decision making process. It’s not intelligent technology that makes the decision (e.g FIFA computer game) it’s relying upon another referee to view the footage and make the call.

Offsides could easily be managed by intelligent software by the players having electronics on them (which they have for data analysis anyway), and goal line technology could also be based on intelligent software. That’s two areas of match officials work that could easily be sorted.

As long as humans are involved in the decision making process there will always be talking points and contraversy because it’s subject to the referee or officials interpretation of what they see. I’d go as far to say apart from simple decisions the same would go for intelligent software.

The problem with using it in football, is that there are too many scenarios where a referees interpretation is needed and there is absolutely, no consistency.

It's not like cricket, did it take an edge, did it pitch outside the line etc, these are easy and require no interpretation. It seems to have been brought in with very little thought to the practicalities, they seem to have taken nothing from it's use in Rugby or cricket and football referees, remain unique, in not having to explain their decisions, to anyone.

VAR could be great for the game, it's being made unneccessarily bad by poor management and even poorer refereeing.

[Airborn Pie]

It’s a f-VAR-ce from what I’ve seen of it. It’s here to stay regardless, but there is a lot that needs to be done to improve it to make it fit for purpose in my opinion.

The Tottenham V Rochdale game showed it at its worse. Goals disallowed, far too much time wasted, the crowd or nobody watching knowing what was going off, plus a referee that would not take responsibility and easily passed decisions over to f-VAR-ce.

The thing is that people seem to overlook is humans are still involved in the decision making process. It’s not intelligent technology that makes the decision (e.g FIFA computer game) it’s relying upon another referee to view the footage and make the call.

Offsides could easily be managed by intelligent software by the players having electronics on them (which they have for data analysis anyway), and goal line technology could also be based on intelligent software. That’s two areas of match officials work that could easily be sorted.

As long as humans are involved in the decision making process there will always be talking points and contraversy because it’s subject to the referee or officials interpretation of what they see. I’d go as far to say apart from simple decisions the same would go for intelligent software.

One sensor for the feet and one for the upper body then as your feet can be onside whilst your torso is offside, that is just the joke that football officialdom has become.

[kill_the_drum]

I was an advocate of VAR before it was trialed but so far it’s been a farce and seemingly only half thought through.
For me it should only be used to see if a penalty was in the box or if a goal was offside.
Using it to see if something was a foul will not be any more consistent than the current system. Even among referees, what constitutes a foul is subjective. And if you slow any coming together of players in slow motion it looks like a foul. The penalty awarded to Italy against England shows that, and the ref still got it wrong in my opinion.
What football needs to introduce to make a refs job much easier is retrospective punishment for cheating of any kind and stamping out players hounding refs after every decision.
There’s no sport in the world where the refs have to take constant abuse and deal with 22 players all willing to cheat to gain an advantage!