Live Match Discussion 2017/18

[slink]

Honestly how could no one have known what was going on? It didn't take a genius to work out they were reviewing it. It didn't take away from the flow, the game was just as entertaining either side of any time taken for the VAR. There were stoppages for injuries too which took over a minute and they didn't change what was a very good game too.

I don't disagree that the stoppages are too long right now, when the trial is over I think this is the key thing they need to review but I don't see why those who were against it from the start are refusing to accept that it is helping decisions be more accurate. Because it quite clearly is.

Obviously they knew they were reviewing it but they have no pictures or sound of what is happening so everyone is just stood there wondering what the fuck is going on and what the VAR is actually looking at. We sort of know watching at home but even then we don't see what the VAR is doing which for me isn't right. Fans need to be kept in the game and i'd say the time delay would feel shorter if those at the game could see what was going on.

Yes the game was entertaining but like DW says it took 20 replays for the penalty to be given, now right or wrong decision it shouldn't take that long and that did kill the game for those few minutes unnecessarily. Cricket is a much slower paced game and it's annoying in that when reviews take far longer than they should because it's clear after 1 replay so when it comes to football that annoyance is multiplied. Injuries can't be helped though they are a part of the game and even then some of them take far too long to get off the pitch.

Like i've said i'm not a fan because i don't think it's been properly thought through even if some decisions are being correctly overturned and those in charge of it aren't good enough to implement it. The actual idea i am not against as more correct decisions is obviously good for the game but th

 

[YoungWolf]

I agree that they need to be communicating with those in the ground, in some form, it will definitely help but I don't think it makes it bad enough to not have the VAR going forward.

In this trial I think the key is to ensure that number of correct decisions are being increased and we both seem to agree that it is the case. Then going forward we can begin to iron out some of the issues around it. It will only improve, IMO.

 

[Alan]

I agree that they need to be communicating with those in the ground, in some form, it will definitely help but I don't think it makes it bad enough to not have the VAR going forward.

In this trial I think the key is to ensure that number of correct decisions are being increased and we both seem to agree that it is the case. Then going forward we can begin to iron out some of the issues around it. It will only improve, IMO.

Just look at football here. If something goes to review, the ref comes over the PA, says "the previous ruling is under further review", done. In soccer terms, say, "the ruling of a penalty is under further review". Or "offside". Whatever it is.

 

[YoungWolf]

Yeah I don't think it's going to be difficult to address. And maybe even at grounds with screens they can show what the officials are looking at (I think they will try to avoid this though).

 

[MARKakaJIM]

I quite like how the referral works in Rugby where the referee asks the VAR to review it and that's broadcast to the crowd so you know what he's unsure of and what's under review. They way they word the referral helps avoid ambiguity on judgement calls too I think, if their original instinct is to award a try for example they tend to ask the VAR if there is any reason not to give it, so the burden of proof shifts onto finding a clear fault. There are still times where there is no clear cut answer but that careful wording helps them frame the answer, if there is no definitive proof to go against the refs first instinct then it stands.

 

[Johnny75]

I really REALLY am not a fan of VAR at all. We managed for over a century without this. I can accept goal line tech but the rest of it is bollocks.

And football hasn't changed at all over that time period has it?

 

[Johnny75]

I quite like how the referral works in Rugby where the referee asks the VAR to review it and that's broadcast to the crowd so you know what he's unsure of and what's under review. They way they word the referral helps avoid ambiguity on judgement calls too I think, if their original instinct is to award a try for example they tend to ask the VAR if there is any reason not to give it, so the burden of proof shifts onto finding a clear fault. There are still times where there is no clear cut answer but that careful wording helps them frame the answer, if there is no definitive proof to go against the refs first instinct then it stands.

That's how I think it would work best too. It's not going to please everybody, hi Slink, but it does help get decisions correct.

 

[Alan]

I quite like how the referral works in Rugby where the referee asks the VAR to review it and that's broadcast to the crowd so you know what he's unsure of and what's under review. They way they word the referral helps avoid ambiguity on judgement calls too I think, if their original instinct is to award a try for example they tend to ask the VAR if there is any reason not to give it, so the burden of proof shifts onto finding a clear fault. There are still times where there is no clear cut answer but that careful wording helps them frame the answer, if there is no definitive proof to go against the refs first instinct then it stands.

Yep, even with decisions that aren't clear cut I can't think of a good reason not to give refs more information.

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

God I really hope Cardiff get absolutely fucking spanked today

 

[leedswolf]

I agree that they need to be communicating with those in the ground, in some form, it will definitely help but I don't think it makes it bad enough to not have the VAR going forward.

In this trial I think the key is to ensure that number of correct decisions are being increased and we both seem to agree that it is the case. Then going forward we can begin to iron out some of the issues around it. It will only improve, IMO.

I was at the Central Coast Mariners on Saturday evening. They used VAR once (to correctly call a red card). They used the big screen to inform the crowd that VAR was being utilised.

 

[leedswolf]

I quite like how the referral works in Rugby where the referee asks the VAR to review it and that's broadcast to the crowd so you know what he's unsure of and what's under review. They way they word the referral helps avoid ambiguity on judgement calls too I think, if their original instinct is to award a try for example they tend to ask the VAR if there is any reason not to give it, so the burden of proof shifts onto finding a clear fault. There are still times where there is no clear cut answer but that careful wording helps them frame the answer, if there is no definitive proof to go against the refs first instinct then it stands.

I also like how it's used in Rugby League (in the UK) where the on field referee gives his decision (eg Try or No Try) and asks for clarification on any infringement that he suspects (player offside, obstruction, grounding, etc.). It is then up to the Video Ref to find compelling evidence to overrule the original decision.

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

Excellent to see Cardiff behind early. Hopefully they get absolutely destroyed.

 

[PuntsWolf]

Gonna be a rout this. Not sure which moron told them it would be a good idea to jump the wall with the ball that close.

 

[Jack Regan]

Brilliant free-kick from de Bruyne, loved the looks on the faces of the Cardiff wall afterwards.

 

[nimrod]

don’t normally watch these cup games but have a bit of time today. Cardiff could be a few down already with better passing from City. Nearly 3 balls straight through the centre, never mind the wide play (and goal)

 

[PuntsWolf]

Danilo. Jeez how bad is he. Him and Otamendi on the left is a disaster waiting to happen.

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

That is the biggest load of bollocks decision ever.

 

[Nando]

Ooof - great hit.

 

[Tredman]

Utterly appalling refereeing.

 

[slink]

I change my mind, can we have VAR please. These refs and assistants are so bad, should be 2-0.