| VAR 20:41 - Jan 27 with 8047 views | max936 |
Yes or No?
Its a No for me, opinions? |  |
| |  |
| VAR on 22:16 - Jan 27 with 1774 views | phact0rri |
Honestly if people think that people aren't in the "killing the drama" at the board meetings with so much money riding on the entertainment of the sport you are having a laugh. That's why its taken so long to get to this point.
But I agree there needs to really up to entertainment value. I like my rugby and how they will show MOST of them on the big screen at the grounds as they go for a decision is a plus, likewise micing the conversations between the video ref and the pitch one. And I will say the audience should feel like they have a say when the referee misses something (or doesn't) it. This aspect adds to the drama, not taking it a way. And for me there are times I'm biting my nails to the quick wondering if a try is going to be awarded. And that is quite entertaining! |  |
| |
| VAR on 22:20 - Jan 27 with 1770 views | Ambergambler |
Craig Pawson made a bit of a meal of it tonight. It'll take refs time to get used to it but it has to be a good thing.
The sense of injustice when points have been lost through bad decisions (and I do believe we've had more than most) is agonising. A couple of minutes waiting time
is well worth it |  | | |
| VAR on 22:24 - Jan 27 with 1765 views | max936 |
| VAR on 21:58 - Jan 27 by TheResurrection |
I am no rugby fan, but the one thing I enjoy about it is the way they do the VAR. Proper entertainment, that. |
It takes the guess work out decisions yes, its a wait and see init lets see how it develops over time.
With Rugby it does stagnate the game there's no doubt about that, especially on some try situations where they look at countless camera angles and even then its not clear in that time 2 or 3 minutes or more have passed which results in an attacking scrum which should have been the decision in the first place 2 or 3 minutes or more earlier. Foul play is usually clearer so that's definitely good thing about it. | |
| |
| VAR on 22:28 - Jan 27 with 1758 views | max936 |
Good thread this, even if I'am wrong in my opinion.
Thanks All  | |
| |
| VAR on 22:39 - Jan 27 with 1743 views | ploppy |
Not convinced, me. On the face of it, it's a no-brainer because you're more likely to get important decisions right. I just hope it doesn't kill the joy of celebrating goals. There's nothing quite like the joy/ecstasy/relief when the ball goes in the net (the opposition's net). I defy anyone to celebrate a goal in the same way, when you've had to wait 4mins for a goal to be confirmed. Same as rugby for me - waiting for the Try/No Try isn't exciting at all. They can try and create tension by hanging it out and playing some "tension raising" sound effects over the PA but it's crap. There. I've said it. | | | |
| VAR on 23:04 - Jan 27 with 1731 views | max936 |
| VAR on 22:39 - Jan 27 by ploppy |
Not convinced, me. On the face of it, it's a no-brainer because you're more likely to get important decisions right. I just hope it doesn't kill the joy of celebrating goals. There's nothing quite like the joy/ecstasy/relief when the ball goes in the net (the opposition's net). I defy anyone to celebrate a goal in the same way, when you've had to wait 4mins for a goal to be confirmed. Same as rugby for me - waiting for the Try/No Try isn't exciting at all. They can try and create tension by hanging it out and playing some "tension raising" sound effects over the PA but it's crap. There. I've said it. |
Agreed. | |
| |
| VAR on 23:41 - Jan 27 with 1695 views | Bloodyhills |
Yes.
It's a bit clumsily done at the moment but then it's new.
I think of all the times we have be done by crap decisions and generally I'd prefer a result to be because of the football played and not skewed by wrong decisions. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| VAR on 00:01 - Jan 28 with 1685 views | ExiledJack |
No from me unless the decisions are made via swift automated process similar to the goal line technology.
Not convinced it will reduce errors as the decisions will ultimately be made by the same characters that will give Rashford a penalty when they cannot see the incident, award handballs against the wrong team, and allow players to be subbed to avoid a sending off.
Would much rather a concerted effort to improve refereeing standards. There aren't enough referees, so mistakes have no consequence to them. Higher wages and a larger selection pool would help. | | | |
| VAR on 00:22 - Jan 28 with 1670 views | max936 |
3 down arrows, life as never been so good  | |
| |
| VAR on 05:52 - Jan 28 with 1621 views | squarebear |
Whoo - you’re back level again.
Let’s for a start consider the reasons why VAR is being touted. Who stands to gain most from it?
Then replace VAR in that sentence, replace it with “Champions League” or “Premier League” or “goal line technology” and answer it again.
All these innovations are designed to help the biggest clubs make money. They are all about the bottom line.
As things stand the biggest clubs buy the best players so they usually win. And even if they don’t win they’ll usually have more possession, more attacking opportunities than a smaller opponent; spend more time in the opposition penalty area and so have more likelihood of earning a penalty / free-kick / corner.
VAR will mean the richest clubs will be awarded more decisions in their favour and so win more games. Sure, there’ll be occasions when decisions go against them, but that’s a price worth paying for the biggest clubs because overall they’ll gain.
For the money men it constitutes a step towards the removal of doubt; a means of ensuring their outlay on players is rewarded by prize money and gate receipts because their teams end up playing more games. For true football fans - people who love the game for the tension, the passion it invokes, that schadenfreude, the emotion of watching a top team being pegged back by a league two side even if there might’ve been a shirt pull in the buildup to the winning goal - VAR will have a significant negative effect as it will further assist the same cartel of clubs to win more decisions thereby continue sharing the wealth.
How can that truly be a good thing? | | | |
| VAR on 06:16 - Jan 28 with 1613 views | E20Jack |
Needs refinement.
I do think all decisions should be made by the ref and each coaching box has 2 challenges each. Get it wrong and you lose it, get it right and you keep it.
You have to clearly state what you are challenging too, so challenges arent made after every single goal in the hope of someone finding anything. It has to be a specific challenge and only that aspect of play can be looked at.
But VAR of some kind needs to stay and any fan of a smaller club not wanting it needs their heads checked. |  |
| |
| VAR on 06:19 - Jan 28 with 1613 views | E20Jack |
| VAR on 21:58 - Jan 27 by TheResurrection |
I am no rugby fan, but the one thing I enjoy about it is the way they do the VAR. Proper entertainment, that. |
Yep, I think having incidents scrutinised like this also teaches refs what goes on in these scenarios and essentially what is and isnt a foul (they dont seem to know when it is in the box), the standard of refereeing has gone up since VAR in rugby and no doubt will go the same way in football. | |
| |
| VAR on 07:18 - Jan 28 with 1600 views | jack247 |
| VAR on 06:16 - Jan 28 by E20Jack |
Needs refinement.
I do think all decisions should be made by the ref and each coaching box has 2 challenges each. Get it wrong and you lose it, get it right and you keep it.
You have to clearly state what you are challenging too, so challenges arent made after every single goal in the hope of someone finding anything. It has to be a specific challenge and only that aspect of play can be looked at.
But VAR of some kind needs to stay and any fan of a smaller club not wanting it needs their heads checked. |
So you could correctly challenge a passage of play with two infringements and not get the decision because you only challenged one of them? That works in tennis, where it’s just a cut and dried case of whether the ball was in or out.
There’s nothing wrong with the ref referring it to the VAR if he’s not sure about something, or the VAR stepping in like a modern day linesman waving his flag.
I agree with your last sentence. Basic common sense. | | | |
| VAR on 08:08 - Jan 28 with 1581 views | somersetsimon |
| VAR on 05:52 - Jan 28 by squarebear |
Whoo - you’re back level again.
Let’s for a start consider the reasons why VAR is being touted. Who stands to gain most from it?
Then replace VAR in that sentence, replace it with “Champions League” or “Premier League” or “goal line technology” and answer it again.
All these innovations are designed to help the biggest clubs make money. They are all about the bottom line.
As things stand the biggest clubs buy the best players so they usually win. And even if they don’t win they’ll usually have more possession, more attacking opportunities than a smaller opponent; spend more time in the opposition penalty area and so have more likelihood of earning a penalty / free-kick / corner.
VAR will mean the richest clubs will be awarded more decisions in their favour and so win more games. Sure, there’ll be occasions when decisions go against them, but that’s a price worth paying for the biggest clubs because overall they’ll gain.
For the money men it constitutes a step towards the removal of doubt; a means of ensuring their outlay on players is rewarded by prize money and gate receipts because their teams end up playing more games. For true football fans - people who love the game for the tension, the passion it invokes, that schadenfreude, the emotion of watching a top team being pegged back by a league two side even if there might’ve been a shirt pull in the buildup to the winning goal - VAR will have a significant negative effect as it will further assist the same cartel of clubs to win more decisions thereby continue sharing the wealth.
How can that truly be a good thing? |
Most of the wrong decisions go in favour of the big teams, so hopefully VAR will address that. |  | | |
| VAR on 08:10 - Jan 28 with 1579 views | somersetsimon |
| VAR on 22:39 - Jan 27 by ploppy |
Not convinced, me. On the face of it, it's a no-brainer because you're more likely to get important decisions right. I just hope it doesn't kill the joy of celebrating goals. There's nothing quite like the joy/ecstasy/relief when the ball goes in the net (the opposition's net). I defy anyone to celebrate a goal in the same way, when you've had to wait 4mins for a goal to be confirmed. Same as rugby for me - waiting for the Try/No Try isn't exciting at all. They can try and create tension by hanging it out and playing some "tension raising" sound effects over the PA but it's crap. There. I've said it. |
Exactly - after that Stoke game a few years back, I was relieved that the game hadn't been unduly delayed and that Charlie Adam was able to celebrate his penalty properly.
 | | | |
| VAR on 08:18 - Jan 28 with 1567 views | jack247 |
| VAR on 05:52 - Jan 28 by squarebear |
Whoo - you’re back level again.
Let’s for a start consider the reasons why VAR is being touted. Who stands to gain most from it?
Then replace VAR in that sentence, replace it with “Champions League” or “Premier League” or “goal line technology” and answer it again.
All these innovations are designed to help the biggest clubs make money. They are all about the bottom line.
As things stand the biggest clubs buy the best players so they usually win. And even if they don’t win they’ll usually have more possession, more attacking opportunities than a smaller opponent; spend more time in the opposition penalty area and so have more likelihood of earning a penalty / free-kick / corner.
VAR will mean the richest clubs will be awarded more decisions in their favour and so win more games. Sure, there’ll be occasions when decisions go against them, but that’s a price worth paying for the biggest clubs because overall they’ll gain.
For the money men it constitutes a step towards the removal of doubt; a means of ensuring their outlay on players is rewarded by prize money and gate receipts because their teams end up playing more games. For true football fans - people who love the game for the tension, the passion it invokes, that schadenfreude, the emotion of watching a top team being pegged back by a league two side even if there might’ve been a shirt pull in the buildup to the winning goal - VAR will have a significant negative effect as it will further assist the same cartel of clubs to win more decisions thereby continue sharing the wealth.
How can that truly be a good thing? |
VAR won’t mean the bigger clubs get more decisions in their favour. Yes, they will still get more penalties because they attack more. They will also have more penalties denied and more goals ruled out for the same reason.
Opposition from the cash cow bigger clubs is the reason VAR hasn’t been here for a decade or so already. | | | |
| VAR on 08:44 - Jan 28 with 1542 views | STID2017 |
100% yes.
As much as Notts County deserved a goal yesterday, replays showed the ball had gone out and yherefore should have been disallowed.
I'm not whinging about that game, but if that happened in one of our PL matches I would have been livid, especially as we are fighting forvevery point ATM |  |
| |
| VAR on 08:48 - Jan 28 with 1536 views | Loyal |
| VAR on 08:44 - Jan 28 by STID2017 |
100% yes.
As much as Notts County deserved a goal yesterday, replays showed the ball had gone out and yherefore should have been disallowed.
I'm not whinging about that game, but if that happened in one of our PL matches I would have been livid, especially as we are fighting forvevery point ATM |
It has happened in nearly every one of our last 6 games, normally against us. |  |
| Nolan sympathiser, clout expert, personal friend of Leigh Dineen, advocate and enforcer of porridge swallows.
The official inventor of the tit w@nk. | | Poll: | Who should be Swansea number 1 |
| |
| VAR on 08:49 - Jan 28 with 1535 views | E20Jack |
| VAR on 07:18 - Jan 28 by jack247 |
So you could correctly challenge a passage of play with two infringements and not get the decision because you only challenged one of them? That works in tennis, where it’s just a cut and dried case of whether the ball was in or out.
There’s nothing wrong with the ref referring it to the VAR if he’s not sure about something, or the VAR stepping in like a modern day linesman waving his flag.
I agree with your last sentence. Basic common sense. |
If there is two clear infringements then you can challenge both - the initial one, if that fails you can challenge the other as the game is already stopped. But you run the risk of losing both your challenges then in that one incident.
Otherwise you would be challenging something without actually declaring what you are challenging, essentially just asking if the ref can try and find something to rule it out. A scenario where two or more incidents are missed by the ref in one passage of play is quite niche and shouldn't be what an oberall system is based upon. [Post edited 28 Jan 2018 8:55]
| |
| |
| VAR on 08:56 - Jan 28 with 1521 views | STID2017 |
| VAR on 08:48 - Jan 28 by Loyal |
It has happened in nearly every one of our last 6 games, normally against us. |
MOTD highlights every week things that VAR would have sorted out.
To me it's a no brainer.
It'll probably come in 2019 - 20, when it's too late for us | |
| |
| VAR on 08:58 - Jan 28 with 1520 views | jack247 |
| VAR on 08:49 - Jan 28 by E20Jack |
If there is two clear infringements then you can challenge both - the initial one, if that fails you can challenge the other as the game is already stopped. But you run the risk of losing both your challenges then in that one incident.
Otherwise you would be challenging something without actually declaring what you are challenging, essentially just asking if the ref can try and find something to rule it out. A scenario where two or more incidents are missed by the ref in one passage of play is quite niche and shouldn't be what an oberall system is based upon. [Post edited 28 Jan 2018 8:55]
|
So forget the challenges and leave it to the ref and VAR. We should be roughly following the rugby blueprint, not the tennis one. | | | |
| VAR on 09:11 - Jan 28 with 1503 views | ploppy |
| VAR on 08:10 - Jan 28 by somersetsimon |
Exactly - after that Stoke game a few years back, I was relieved that the game hadn't been unduly delayed and that Charlie Adam was able to celebrate his penalty properly.
|
You can take your bullet dodging face back mate, because it wasn't quite what I said, was it. In that instance, it wasn't the goal that needed reviewing, it was the penalty award. There's always a delay after a penalty award, so a review won't "unduly delay" the game. | | | |
| VAR on 09:13 - Jan 28 with 1503 views | MrSwerve |
I guess it seems a bit more of a pain because generally football is a bit more fast and flowing than rugby. Football fans aren't used to 2 minute stoppages in play (unless there's an injury).
I think the main thing needed for it to work is respect. Respect from the players (instant yellow for pointing to the 4th official or drawing an imaginary box), respect from the fans at the stadium (showing on the big screen would help this), and respect towards the referee.
Unfortunately, I don't know if there's enough respect in football for it to work. It definitely needs to happen though, as nearly every professional sport uses technology to correct ref decisions.
On a side note I find it a bit daft that the ref draws an imaginary box AFTER he has consulted VAR and given a decision. He should do it before he looks at a screen, like in rugby. |  |
| |
| VAR on 09:59 - Jan 28 with 1468 views | welshbelly |
It's a Yes for me also. The amount to times we should have had a pen or decisions going against us could have been just what we needed in tough games. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
