The var thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
This is professional sport, its all about squeezing out those few milliliters. This isn't some kids game where you can say, ah, it was close enough to being across the line, we'll give you a goal, just to make them happy.
If you failed to stay behind the last defender, its not a goal, no matter by how little.

Imagine giving somebody a world title because they were close enough. FFS. Ruins the spirit of sport.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Saints_Alive and tomw24
tomw24 said:
Sorry, but I disagree. If it's offside, it's offside regardless of whether you're a yard off or you're an inch off. You can't go with the on field decision as assistant's are told to keep their flag down when it's tight and let the technology do the rest.
Click to expand...
I have to say I agree with you on this Tom. It’s the same argument as that used when goal line technology was brought in. Either the ball is completely over the line or it isn’t, and the same is true for offside.

I do have sympathy for the time limit argument though! If technology is the problem rather than the solution, then get better technology to make decisions quicker.
 
  • Like
Reactions: davecg69
ChilcoSaint said:
I have to say I agree with you on this Tom. It’s the same argument as that used when goal line technology was brought in. Either the ball is completely over the line or it isn’t, and the same is true for offside.

I do have sympathy for the time limit argument though! If technology is the problem rather than the solution, then get better technology to make decisions quicker.
Click to expand...

From what I have seen/read about VAR, the technology is not the issue. It is the people looking at the screens, trying to decide if one or other player (attacker or defender) is further forward/closest to/over the the imaginary line.
Similarly, fouls in the penalty area may be seen from one angle as 'contact', but from another angle as getting the ball first. As such, someone needs to make a decision, and get it right, which sometimes means that things take time.

Alternatively, the decisions could be passed to a machine, with no human intervention. This would simply result in unhappy supporters claiming that the software is rigged to favour the big teams, with no comeback from the decision makers.
 
Lemons and Oranges said:
From what I have seen/read about VAR, the technology is not the issue. It is the people looking at the screens, trying to decide if one or other player (attacker or defender) is further forward/closest to/over the the imaginary line.
Similarly, fouls in the penalty area may be seen from one angle as 'contact', but from another angle as getting the ball first. As such, someone needs to make a decision, and get it right, which sometimes means that things take time.

Alternatively, the decisions could be passed to a machine, with no human intervention. This would simply result in unhappy supporters claiming that the software is rigged to favour the big teams, with no comeback from the decision makers.
Click to expand...
Personally, I think VAR should only be used for line decisions like offside, and with super slo-mo cameras with ultra-high definition, it should be a doddle, and very quick, like GLT is.
 
st_brendy said:

Hope you don't mind, but I've moved my reply onto the VAR thread.

This is actually something we can pretty much agree on. At the end of the day, a player is either onside or offside. Even if just by one millimetre. That can't really be debated. And nor do the PL have the power to change the offside law itself (eg back to the old "clear daylight" rule).

But it still comes to the PL as to how VAR is implemented in the PL. There's no reason why they couldn't decide to only use VAR to overturn offsides when, for example, the attacker has a whole foot beyond the last defender. (That's purely an example which I haven't put much thought into - the sentiment behind it is more what I am focusing on, ie that not every single offside necessarily has to be overturned by VAR. Instead, introduce a clear and obvious aspect to offside, like you say. They don't have to use VAR to overturn all incorrect offside calls - they are deciding that they will do that.)

Now if they ever come up with the technology which can give an instant offside decision, then great. All offside decisions become correct. But at the minute, spending three minutes trying to work out if someone is one millimetre offside is really not something I can particularly support.​
Click to expand...

For me it should be clear and obvious and if the attacker gained an advantage or not. If an offside is blatantly offside then everyone can see it from the first replay, it's not like fouls where different angles can give a different perspective.

If someone's clearly offside, you can see it straight away, if it gets to the point where it's going to take over a minute and you need to draw lines on the pitch, then leave it alone and stick with the onfield decision. I can't help but think there's room for error the way it's done anyway.

I hate to repeat myself last week but it's really frustrating that it's being used so much and with so much precision for offsides but a player will seeming need to commit actual bodily harm for a penalty to be given that the ref hasn't.
 
VocalMinority said:
This is professional sport, its all about squeezing out those few milliliters. This isn't some kids game where you can say, ah, it was close enough to being across the line, we'll give you a goal, just to make them happy.
If you failed to stay behind the last defender, its not a goal, no matter by how little.

Imagine giving somebody a world title because they were close enough. FFS. Ruins the spirit of sport.
Click to expand...

If that's the case then why aren't they reviewing set pieces that lead to goals?
 
Libby said:
For me it should be clear and obvious and if the attacker gained an advantage or not. If an offside is blatantly offside then everyone can see it from the first replay, it's not like fouls where different angles can give a different perspective.

If someone's clearly offside, you can see it straight away, if it gets to the point where it's going to take over a minute and you need to draw lines on the pitch, then leave it alone and stick with the onfield decision. I can't help but think there's room for error the way it's done anyway.

I hate to repeat myself last week but it's really frustrating that it's being used so much and with so much precision for offsides but a player will seeming need to commit actual bodily harm for a penalty to be given that the ref hasn't.
Click to expand...
And let’s not forget the old “interfering with play” chestnut. The assistant can’t always see from the side who is in play and who isn’t, but VAR would take seconds to decide. If we had had VAR in February 2017 then Gabbi’s first goal would have stood.
 
Libby said:
If that's the case then why aren't they reviewing set pieces that lead to goals?
Click to expand...

You mean giving a setpiece, seeing if a goal is scored from it and then going back to review it if a goal is scored along with everything during the setpiece? or reviewing every setpiece before it is taken? Either way i think people like you would have a meltdown over that <laugh>.
 
VocalMinority said:
This is professional sport, its all about squeezing out those few milliliters. This isn't some kids game where you can say, ah, it was close enough to being across the line, we'll give you a goal, just to make them happy.
If you failed to stay behind the last defender, its not a
goal, no matter by how little.

Imagine giving somebody a world title because they were close enough. FFS. Ruins the spirit of sport.
Click to expand...

VAR,ruins the spirit of sport for me.
Who draws these seemingly arbitrary lines?unless there are dozens of cameras you can't rely on inches ffs.
Without any doubt live games are being ruined for me,friday night 20 seconds after a claim for a penalty not given we have to halt play and then wait another 30 or so while someone checks Var. Total crap for those in attendance.
However,watching games on TV completely different experience with Var, I can see why people like it and it even adds to excitement (possibly).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Libby said:
For me it should be clear and obvious and if the attacker gained an advantage or not. If an offside is blatantly offside then everyone can see it from the first replay, it's not like fouls where different angles can give a different perspective.

If someone's clearly offside, you can see it straight away, if it gets to the point where it's going to take over a minute and you need to draw lines on the pitch, then leave it alone and stick with the onfield decision. I can't help but think there's room for error the way it's done anyway.

I hate to repeat myself last week but it's really frustrating that it's being used so much and with so much precision for offsides but a player will seeming need to commit actual bodily harm for a penalty to be given that the ref hasn't.
Click to expand...

The Bmouth disallowed goal is a good example.

I don't know exactly how long it took, but sitting in the ground it didn't feel particularly long. I was fine with the length of time, whatever it was. But from the still motion shot which was put up on the big screen, it was perfectly clear that King's foot was beyond the drawn line.

It was a tight call watching it real time, and one that the linesman can easily get wrong (as indeed she did), but on replay it is clearly offside. There was no need to zoom in, or be comparing two different lines.
 
You have all argued your case so well on this thread that I'm not even sure where I stand on the VAR offside ruling. I can see it from both sides with such clarity, that I'm happy for someone else to come up with the answer.
Great debate people. Well played.
 
tomw24 said:
It's offside. No issue with that goal being ruled out at all.
Click to expand...

Take Salah against us last season. He was offside in the build up, but under VaR the goal wouldn't have been disallowed. This was very similar.

Yes he was offside, I'm not disputing that. It's how far back in time are we checking these things?
 
  • Like
Reactions: It'sOnlyAGame
Saints Fan4Life said:
Take Salah against us last season. He was offside in the build up, but under VaR the goal wouldn't have been disallowed. This was very similar.

Yes he was offside, I'm not disputing that. It's how far back in time are we checking these things?
Click to expand...
Why wouldn't VAR have disallowed that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back