Newcastle (H) - 11.02.19 - Monday Night Football

[t3ch]

arguing against wanting correct calls being made is such a ridiculous argument to me I can't even begin to debate the point

 

[Tredman]

arguing against wanting correct calls being made is such a ridiculous argument to me I can't even begin to debate the point

You're probably much more used to sports matches taking longer and being slower though. Football is supposed to be fast, fluid and quick (Newcastle excepted). No normal game should ever be longer than 2 hours start to finish. That won't be the case with more and more use of VAR.

 

[BillyDee]

Where VAR works well is with sports where things are clear cut right or wrong. Tennis is the perfect example of this, the ball is either in or out, and it takes seconds for Hawkeye to clear it up. The crowd get involved with a big "oooooooohhh" and the viewing experience is not negatively affected.
Goal line technology is fantastic as it is almost instant. Offsides should be clear cut and resolved quickly, although sometimes will be complicated.
My concern is situations where things are not clean cut, where you are replacing one person's interpretation with another person's, take three minutes to do it and there is still debate. How many times have we seen post match pundits disagree on a close call they have watched many times? I don't think football is suited to this, but if it is to continue, there needs to be better communication to the fans.

 

[Deleted Cyber]

Where VAR works well is with sports where things are clear cut right or wrong. Tennis is the perfect example of this, the ball is either in or out, and it takes seconds for Hawkeye to clear it up. The crowd get involved with a big "oooooooohhh" and the viewing experience is not negatively affected.
Goal line technology is fantastic as it is almost instant. Offsides should be clear cut and resolved quickly, although sometimes will be complicated.
My concern is situations where things are not clean cut, where you are replacing one person's interpretation with another person's, take three minutes to do it and there is still debate. How many times have we seen post match pundits disagree on a close call they have watched many times? I don't think football is suited to this, but if it is to continue, there needs to be better communication to the fans.

the saving grace in cricket is umpires call but how do you get that in FOOTBALL?

 

[Tony Towner]

arguing against wanting correct calls being made is such a ridiculous argument to me I can't even begin to debate the point

Debate this then.

Wolves are 1 0 down in a PL game against Newcastle. In the 5th minute of injury time, their keeper drops the ball onto your centre halves head, who nods it in. The ref gives the goal, the crowd goals wild, then the VAR call goes up, the ref goes over to the screen, spends two minutes reviewing and rules out the goal, killing the moment for fans and still makes a debtable decision.

That's not the game I want to see, goal line technology works, I'd be happy with offside being added, issues of judgement or interpretation, no.

 

[Alan]

That would more or less be the case any time VAR rules out a goal, though. And as a fan it sucks, but no more than Monday already sucked for Newcastle supporters.

As has been pointed out, there is very little evidence that VAR would have ruled out Boly's goal given the near universal acceptance of it as not a foul from everyone not named Benitez.

Sport is competition first and competition must be built upon consistent enforcement of rules. Video review increases consistency and so any arguments against it are basically mooted, IMO.

 

[Tredman]

I'd rather sport were about enjoyment first tbh. And standing in a stadium whilst people on TV endlessly analyse slo-mo footage is not enjoyable.

 

[t3ch]

You're probably much more used to sports matches taking longer and being slower though. Football is supposed to be fast, fluid and quick (Newcastle excepted). No normal game should ever be longer than 2 hours start to finish. That won't be the case with more and more use of VAR.

Are you stereotyping my americanness, dear sir? :icon_lol:

You do see the registration date on this forum yes? I'm not advocating for 8 hour matches. I didn't just discover the sport. The lack of stoppage is one of my favorite things about it. I do not want NFL-style implementations of VAR, but then, literally no one is suggesting anything of the sort.

Debate this then.

Wolves are 1 0 down in a PL game against Newcastle. In the 5th minute of injury time, their keeper drops the ball onto your centre halves head, who nods it in. The ref gives the goal, the crowd goals wild, then the VAR call goes up, the ref goes over to the screen, spends two minutes reviewing and rules out the goal, killing the moment for fans and still makes a debtable decision.

That's not the game I want to see, goal line technology works, I'd be happy with offside being added, issues of judgement or interpretation, no.

If it's the correct call, yes. But you seem to be offering a hypothetical that, in theory, shouldn't be happening in the fist place. The choices aren't "change nothing" and "painstakingly review every movement on the pitch and ruin all excitement".

I'll leave it at that. We've debated VAR on here for years, I don't think we're gonna finally sort out any disagreements in the Newcastle matchday thread.

 

[Tredman]

Are you stereotyping my americanness, dear sir? :icon_lol:

You do see the registration date on this forum yes? I'm not advocating for 8 hour matches. I didn't just discover the sport. The lack of stoppage is one of my favorite things about it. I do not want NFL-style implementations of VAR, but then, literally no one is suggesting anything of the sort.

.

That's not what I meant at all, I just meant you probably grew up with sports which lasted a lot longer than we do, what with Americans having all that patience and all.

 

[t3ch]

I did indeed, playing them as well. But I no longer do either. :tiphat:

 

[Tony Towner]

You are missing the point though. What is the correct call? Polls seem to suggest people are 60/40 in favour of the goal standing so there's a good chance the goal would have been disallowed. VAR should be used for matters of fact not opinion.

 

[darlowolf64]

You are missing the point though. What is the correct call? Polls seem to suggest people are 60/40 in favour of the goal standing so there's a good chance the goal would have been disallowed. VAR should be used for matters of fact not opinion.

I agree with that... Was it offside? Did the ball cross the line? Did he punch the ball into the net...

 

[Parkins left foot]

The more you watch this from various angles then the less it looks like a foul - Boly just jumps & if Dubravka doesn't make a mess of clearing it then he gets nowhere near

Didn't happen that way - VAR really shouldn't change that

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

VAR is bollocks. I have never wanted it, and frankly never will. No place in football.

Goal-line tech, yes, VAR absolute no.

 

[Alan]

You are missing the point though. What is the correct call? Polls seem to suggest people are 60/40 in favour of the goal standing so there's a good chance the goal would have been disallowed. VAR should be used for matters of fact not opinion.

Then they adopt the American rule: calls are only overturned if there is clear evidence to do so. If there is any doubt at all, the call stands as it was.

 

[AndyWolves]

VAR is bollocks. I have never wanted it, and frankly never will. No place in football.

Goal-line tech, yes, VAR absolute no.

My view is that if you're saying no to VAR you can't really criticise referees if they make poor decisions

 

[Deleted Cyber]

VAR is bollocks. I have never wanted it, and frankly never will. No place in football.

Goal-line tech, yes, VAR absolute no.

Without the equivalent of umpires call I am with you. I do not want two cm offsides or goals disallowed for a technical infringement ten seconds earlier

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

Offside is offside surely? Whether it's 2cm or 20 yards.

 

[Alan]

Offside is offside surely? Whether it's 2cm or 20 yards.

Grinds my gears almost as much as pundits acting like penalty judgements should change based on the time left in the game. "It's too early to make that call" or whatever. Fuck off, if it's a foul it's a foul.

/rant

 

[Deleted Cyber]

Offside is offside surely? Whether it's 2cm or 20 yards.

Nope. Benefit of any doubt goes to the attacker. That should be the principle. A couple of fa cup var reviews were really not what the system was designed foir

Clear
Obvious

Otherwise its down to the on field ref