Fans Against VAR - Join us

[fansagainstvar]

It's beyond blatant. If you wanted to build a case against a conspiracy it would be very difficult.

If you wanted to build a conspiracy case, it wouldn't be too difficult

I have no skin in the game as I support a Championship team.

The amount VAR works against Wolves compared to other teams is so bizarre as to make one wonder...

 

[AndyWolves]

Remember this? As DW would say, you wouldn't have that down the park

https://twitter.com/x/status/1848369532609425464

 

[Sniffer]

Headed duel?

Or it didn't count because an incorrect offside decision?

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

Why are so many of you triggered by the Andre's headed stats?

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

Remember this? As DW would say, you wouldn't have that down the park

https://twitter.com/x/status/1848369532609425464

Colin's responses to that tweet are an adventure, worth a look.

 

[Kenny]

Why are so many of you triggered by the Andre's headed stats

It's not triggered is it. Just standard Internet rules, if people think you have said something that is wrong they will find a million ways to take the piss. Your Andre comment, for whatever reason, has landed in that area.

Poor Jinky for example still gets shit for saying Neves needs to stop shooting from distance.

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

It's not triggered is it. Just standard Internet rules, if people think you have said something that is wrong they will find a million ways to take the piss. Your Andre comment, for whatever reason, has landed in that area.

Poor Jinky for example still gets shit for saying Neves needs to stop shooting from distance.

Maybe, but Andre hasn't powered in a header yet has he?

 

[fansagainstvar]

Goalkeeper gloves are anti-football. 7-man benches, too. And concussion subs? Extremely anti-football.

There’s no argument here. Sports change.

If AI takes your job and leaves you unemployed, there's no argument, jobs change.

 

[Alan]

If AI takes your job and leaves you unemployed, there's no argument, jobs change.

Yes, this analogy definitely holds up to even a half second of scrutiny.

Also, *LLM. “AI” is a marketing gimmick and in no way accurately describes what Large Language Models are capable of.

Whatever the quality of your retort, the point remains that “anti-football” is an utterly meaningless term, and you need to do better.

 

[Tredman]

Yes, this analogy definitely holds up to even a half second of scrutiny.

Also, *LLM. “AI” is a marketing gimmick and in no way accurately describes what Large Language Models are capable of.

Whatever the quality of your retort, the point remains that “anti-football” is an utterly meaningless term, and you need to do better.

Your original analogy was pretty weak too, none of the points you raised makes the match going fan a second class citizen. VAR does.

 

[Alan]

Your original analogy was pretty weak too, none of the points you raised makes the match going fan a second class citizen. VAR does.

Not by virtue of its existence, only by virtue of its shit implementation.

I’d also argue that match going fans are being treated as second class by the very clubs they support. That particular issue is much larger than VAR, in my view.

 

[Boozad]

I’d also argue that match going fans are being treated as second class by the very clubs they support. That particular issue is much larger than VAR, in my view.

Anybody buying tickets to any form of entertainment these days is being treated like a second class citizen. Nobody really gives a shit about fans any more, it’s all about the money. It’s that they really want, not you. They want as much of your money as they can get out of you.

 

[Alan]

Anybody buying tickets to any form of entertainment these days is being treated like a second class citizen. Nobody really gives a shit about fans any more, it’s all about the money. It’s that they really want, not you. They want as much of your money as they can get out of you.

Nail on head.

 

[Tredman]

Entirely true, but in what other live sporting even do you have text people watching on TV to understand what is going on? Laughable, false equivalence does not make it better.

 

[Boozad]

Entirely true, but in what other live sporting even do you have text people watching on TV to understand what is going on? Laughable, false equivalence does not make it better.

Oh I’m not disagreeing with you, I just tend to hate everything these days so it’s all fair game. Football can get fucked, I’m not spending another penny on it.

 

[Alan]

Entirely true, but in what other live sporting even do you have text people watching on TV to understand what is going on? Laughable, false equivalence does not make it better.

But that problem is not inherent to VAR is it. I find it extremely difficult to believe their reasoning for not showing the replay until after the decision. Makes no sense and does, as you say, shortchange the fans in seats.

That does not equate to “anti-football” regardless, and it’s that sort of “I don’t have an argument based on information” assertion that rankles. You can call anything “bad” until you’re out of breath, but if that’s all you’ve said at the end of it, you haven’t made a point at all.

 

[Tredman]

But that problem is not inherent to VAR is it. I find it extremely difficult to believe their reasoning for not showing the replay until after the decision. Makes no sense and does, as you say, shortchange the fans in seats.

That does not equate to “anti-football” regardless, and it’s that sort of “I don’t have an argument based on information” assertion that rankles. You can call anything “bad” until you’re out of breath, but if that’s all you’ve said at the end of it, you haven’t made a point at all.

It is inherent to VAR in this country. I’ve attended live events in other sports where this kind of nonsense does not happen.

I don’t follow your second paragraph at all but I think it’s best to agree to disagree.

 

[BillyDee]

It is inherent in video refereeing football.
In sports where it works well it used more for black and white decisions.
In football there are too many grey areas, you are just substituting one person's opinion for another.

 

[Wilf Wolf]

I still think giving teams one challenge per half would make sense, with challenge retained if upheld. On Sunday we could have challenged the foul on Guedes, assuming we hadn’t used it earlier.

 

[Boozad]

I still think giving teams one challenge per half would make sense, with challenge retained if upheld. On Sunday we could have challenged the foul on Guedes, assuming we hadn’t used it earlier.

Surely you could only challenge decisions? That was a non decision and would require stopping the game in open play. As much as I think it was a foul they’re never going to allow a manager to stop the game in open play.