Fans Against VAR - Join us

[Johnny75]

By the way, my "silly agenda" would be taking football back to the game you and almost every other user on this forum fell in love with.

My "silly agenda" means scrapping a failing technology not working.

How arrogant are you?

 

[Johnny75]

Your attempt to make me look like the idiot here is hilarious.

I understand semi-automation perfectly. You cannot automate subjective decisions like free kicks and yellow cards.

You're being petulant because I keep being proven correct about VAR, game after game.

You don't seem to understand it at all as it could be used for penalties as contact is a measurable thing and can be modelled.

All within 11 seconds.

That's the bit you don't understand.

I'll ignore your attempts at trying to change the discussion and keep taking about automation.

 

[fansagainstvar]

Still this. i'VE bEEn ProFED WrITe

I have been proven right.

I remember starting this campaign. I remember being told various things.

VAR would only be used for clear and obvious things, so what am I complaining about? Wrong
VAR will eliminate incorrect decisions, we can get back to talking about the football? Wrong
VAR works in other sports! Of course it will work in football! Wrong

I said it would kill the joy of most goals? Correct
I said they would expand the scope of VAR Correct
It will generally favour the bigger sides Debatable
It will have a major impact on the fan experience Correct

You call it arrogance and self-importance. I call it wanting to protect the game I used to absolutely love and was a major part of my upbringing and life. Without the escapism football provided me I genuinely wonder if I'd still be on this earth, as cringeworthy as it sounds I absolutely love this sport and the community spirit of it.

As for "better for sporting integrity" @delwoppio I think most of your own supporters would disagree with that let alone me. VAR makes it very possible to fix matches, I'm not saying it does do this but this technology makes it even more possible.

Now onto @Johnny75

You say you want to talk about automation. This thread is about VAR, currently in the Premier League we have no automation. I am potentially in favour of semi-automated offsides, but for me this would hinge on having an "area of doubt" where goals are given. No more little toe and armpit offside, which are not only contrary to the spirit of the game but also the spirit of the offside law.

"contact is measurable"? It's a CONTACT sport. Contact does not mean penalty. You seem to really struggle with the idea that the laws of football are subjective and have always been down to the interpretation of referees. 11 seconds is laughable. Automated penalty decisions are IMPOSSIBLE because a penalty is SUBJECTIVE.

There is this thing in society these days, where people would rather die on their hill than ever admit they might have been wrong. Many people were wrong about VAR.

I have so much respect for the people who were in favour of it but now see the cons and have moderated their opinion. Some people don't have that ability.

 

[Wolf Hunting]

I saw in an Irish paper about an hour ago, that the 'rule makers' (IPFL?? Probably wrong?) want VAR to be used for corners, free kicks and a couple of other items, The FA were likely to oppose this suggestion. So yes, it does seem that VAR is gonna be with us for the long haul, but it just needs a review on whose going to operate it. Because clearly, blindingly clearly, it's not working with referees running the fucking thing and they have to face up to that.

Interesting by the way that in his after match interview last GON referred to ".... that's 6 or 7 points that these decisions (apologised for latterly, acknowledged as being wrong) have cost us.
And I liked the bit where he referred to him running a big team here, in a big club, with hundreds of people working for it and these decisions are impacting them all. It's got to be better than this."

 

[Johnny75]

There is this thing in society these days, where people would rather die on their hill than ever admit they might have been wrong. Many people were wrong about VAR.

Indeed there are. Enjoy your grassy knoll.

 

[Langers]

I have been proven right.

<snip>

Without wanting to get into this particular debate, your arguments are not helped by goading another board member via your signature. Please can you amend it to something less provocative?

 

[fansagainstvar]

Without wanting to get into this particular debate, your arguments are not helped by goading another board member via your signature. Please can you amend it to something less provocative?

I've done it but you're welcome to ban me, I've made my point and many agree and on here seemingly disagree.

If people can't see it will never work in a way acceptable for matchgoing fans after four years of abject failure there's no helping them

I've only ever given people back the same energy I've received. I've been called arrogant and self-important despite only attaching a name to the campaign when I'm forced to. If people on your forum want to think that, fine. But they're mistaken.

I get it because I don't support Wolves but no mod has intervened when I've been unfairly insulted.

Looking forward to seeing the anti-VAR banners and cards in your stadium next week.

 

[Langers]

I've done it but you're welcome to ban me, I've made my point and many agree and on here seemingly disagree.

Why would I want to do that? There's a discussion to be had here, and all we want is for that discussion to continue in a civil manner, that's all.

 

[fansagainstvar]

Why would I want to do that? There's a discussion to be had here, and all we want is for that discussion to continue in a civil manner, that's all.

Fair enough, I just don't think there's too much I can add to the discussion at this point rather than going over old ground. If even after the Fulham game fans on here want VAR I think it's impossible I can dissuade them otherwise.

I'm abrasive, I get that, because I'm passionate. But my intentions are in the right place, nobody is sticking up for the view many matchgoing fans have. In the Premier League they view "legacy" fans like me and you as a nuisance to be silenced.

I can't understand people being passionately in favour of VAR, but I can't understand why people like death metal music or wrestling either. I guess we're all different.

 

[Kenny]

Why would I want to do that? There's a discussion to be had here, and all we want is for that discussion to continue in a civil manner, that's all.

 

[The Bear]

VAR can absolutely work, the technology is there to make the correct decisions. As proven by the fact that they constantly come out after matches and admit that certain things should have been done.

What it needs are enough people capable of doing it in real time without feeling the pressure of time or the scrutiny of all eyes on them.

The current crop of referees just aren't that, and the process and wording of VAR policy isn't helping them to make them either. It absolutely needs to be put on stadium screens and the audio played live. They shouldn't shy away from that.

Automated offsides should help with the speed of things too. But should still have a set of eyes on them because technology isn't always infallible.

 

[fansagainstvar]

VAR can absolutely work, the technology is there to make the correct decisions. As proven by the fact that they constantly come out after matches and admit that certain things should have been done.

What it needs are enough people capable of doing it in real time without feeling the pressure of time or the scrutiny of all eyes on them.

The current crop of referees just aren't that, and the process and wording of VAR policy isn't helping them to make them either. It absolutely needs to be put on stadium screens and the audio played live. They shouldn't shy away from that.

Automated offsides should help with the speed of things too. But should still have a set of eyes on them because technology isn't always infallible.

I'm aware I can come across as abrasive, I'm not looking to annoy you at all with this question, but I am genuinely interested in your answer.

If we have automated offsides, do we not need to change the law on what is offside. Because someone's little toe or shoulder being "offside" in my opinion is totally against the spirit of the law and the game.

We kept the laws of football the same, but introduced a technology which meant we could (or claim to) make decisions the human eye never could. The laws of football would need to change to adapt to the technology change (in my opinion)

 

[North Shropshire Lad]

Changing the laws [again] to accommodate VAR is how we got in such a mess in the first place. Where you draw the line on offside is irrelevant, a 1cm offside is a 1cm offside - you are just measuring from a different place.

In tennis or rugby they haven't altered their rules to bring in VAR or their DRS, they have implemented the technology once it's fit to govern within the existing framework.

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

Death Metal is fucking ace you cheeky scamp

 

[fansagainstvar]

Changing the laws [again] to accommodate VAR is how we got in such a mess in the first place. Where you draw the line on offside is irrelevant, a 1cm offside is a 1cm offside - you are just measuring from a different place.

In tennis or rugby they haven't altered their rules to bring in VAR or their DRS, they have implemented the technology once it's fit to govern within the existing framework.

Which is why the best answer is to just scrap VAR. Why does technology have to come into absolutely every aspect of life these days?

I can't agree on the 1cm thing, If there is noticeable daylight that's offside for me, if any part you can score with is onside you're level and it's brilliant attacking play. You could just use VAR as it is and only intervene if the decision is obviously wrong, but some fans will cry if a goal "technically" offside is given, which is why we might end up having to adapt the rule. Of course you are correct in that that would mean there's always a line somewhere, but couldn't the line be more in keeping with the spirit of the game?

 

[The Bear]

I'm aware I can come across as abrasive, I'm not looking to annoy you at all with this question, but I am genuinely interested in your answer.

If we have automated offsides, do we not need to change the law on what is offside. Because someone's little toe or shoulder being "offside" in my opinion is totally against the spirit of the law and the game.

We kept the laws of football the same, but introduced a technology which meant we could (or claim to) make decisions the human eye never could. The laws of football would need to change to adapt to the technology change (in my opinion)

Ever since VAR came in for offsides I've argued that there should be a margin of error on them, by way of a thicker line from the defender's body part. If the attackers line is inside or overlaps it then it's onside. Purely because of the potential distances covered by players within the frame rates available to them.

So I agree with you on that.

It would take trial and error to find the right distance/margin that everyone is comfortable with, but should be able to be simulated before it goes into practice. 10-15cm or so.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

Changing the laws [again] to accommodate VAR is how we got in such a mess in the first place. Where you draw the line on offside is irrelevant, a 1cm offside is a 1cm offside - you are just measuring from a different place.

In tennis or rugby they haven't altered their rules to bring in VAR or their DRS, they have implemented the technology once it's fit to govern within the existing framework.

If you look at cricket there was always an unwritten rule of thumb that if you got miles down the pitch then no umpire was ever going to give you out lbw. That's gone now, if Hawkeye says it's hitting the stumps then off you pop, no matter how far you've charged down.

The equivalent there of "you never used to be called offside if your shoulder alone was off". So what, you're offside, there's the evidence (as the automated systems can show in a reasonable length of time, not the wonky hand-drawn lines).

 

[fansagainstvar]

Ever since VAR came in for offsides I've argued that there should be a margin of error on them, by way of a thicker line from the defender's body part. If the attackers line is inside or overlaps it then it's onside. Purely because of the potential distances covered by players within the frame rates available to them.

So I agree with you on that.

It would take trial and error to find the right distance/margin that everyone is comfortable with, but should be able to be simulated before it goes into practice. 10-15cm or so.

If scrapping VAR wasn't on the table, this is the best compromise for me too. I agree with you!

 

[Tredman]

We either take the human out of VAR or take VAR out completely.

If we don’t have humans involved we could even, y’know, give the fans who pay to attend matches a clue what’s going on too.

 

[fansagainstvar]

If you look at cricket there was always an unwritten rule of thumb that if you got miles down the pitch then no umpire was ever going to give you out lbw. That's gone now, if Hawkeye says it's hitting the stumps then off you pop, no matter how far you've charged down.

The equivalent there of "you never used to be called offside if your shoulder alone was off". So what, you're offside, there's the evidence (as the automated systems can show in a reasonable length of time, not the wonky hand-drawn lines).

In cricket there is "umpires call", even if it's clipping the off stump, the umpires call stands if he didn't give the batsmen out.
Unless there's different rules in "the hundred" which I don't watch or the rules changed very recently. It's actually refreshing because it means the umpires respect the fact that technology isn't infallable.