V.A.R. - Good for Purpose??

[Gonby's Games Gone By]

Interesting idea, Cyberman, but goals are a fairly rare commodity in football whoever you are.

 

[Deleted Cyber]

Interesting idea, Cyberman, but goals are a fairly rare commodity in football whoever you are.

I just had a look at the four shock results I could remember most in 2019 that involved the champions

Man City 0 Wolves 2- City 76% possession, 18 shots 2 on target wolves 7 shots 2 on target
Norwich 3 Man City 2- Nowich 7 shots 3 on target Man City 25 shots 8 on target
Man City 2 Crystal palace 3 Man city 19 shots 5 on taget Palce 5 shots 3 on target.

In those games VAR played no hand . However in each of those games the underdogs benefitted from City being below their best and getting the rub of the green.

That was always the way. You needed luck and a few things to stack up to take points off the big teams. We got no help from VAR on Sunday (Otherwise the Livepool goal would have been incorrectly chalked off by the ref and Netos goal would have stood ) so the game could have been 1-0 to us instead!

 

[Tony Towner]

As has been pointed out before there isn't any way you can substantiate what a score would have been without VAR.

Our goal came from us being fired up after the first VAR decision, without that we would have continued to hold formation and invite them to break us down.

If Liverpool are 1-0 down they don't attempt to manage the game in the second half in the way they did. They'd be flying at us, they may have scored, we may have hit them on the break, but the pattern of the 45 minutes would have been different

 

[Boozad]

VAR just needs to be binned off until someone competent can run it. There have been numerous goals over the years where there has been a deliberate handball or a clear offside that has been missed and these are what it is supposed to eradicate. If that was the case everybody would be behind it and supportive of it but it’s not being used that way. The technology is fine for clear and obvious mistakes, it’s nowhere near good enough to be used for something it was never intended for.

The PGMOL have a lot to answer for but they never seem to have to. It’s utterly bizarre. I’m hoping the furore over the last two sets of fixtures that came to a head with us on Sunday really sets the foundations for something to happen. We can’t carry on with a bunch of inept megalomaniacs ruining the game and our (and other teams’) results with it.

 

[Parkins left foot]

PL saying that they won't be changing the VAR rules for the rest of this season - and shouldn't, the fact that its a flawed system is irrelevant but needs to be consistent throughout this campaign to preserve the status quo however bad that is.

Gives them 6 months to discuss & revise/refine or dispense with it for next season.

 

[Kenny]

PL saying that they won't be changing the VAR rules for the rest of this season - and shouldn't, the fact that its a flawed system is irrelevant but needs to be consistent throughout this campaign to preserve the status quo however bad that is.

Gives them 6 months to discuss & revise/refine or dispense with it for next season.

They haven't got to change anything.....just stick to the rules they were given rather than make up their own shit ones

 

[sycophantia]

They haven't got to change anything.....just stick the rules they were given rather than make up their shit ones

Correct

 

[Dinowolf]

VAR is here to stay, it's cost too much to bin.

As I've said before, VAR is 'fit' for purpose, but not currently 'good' for purpose because of the interpretation being put on the Laws to make VAR fit with what the PGMOL want.

That needs to change otherwise football will suffer.

It also makes it difficult to introduce other new aspects relevant to the modern game.

 

[The Bear]

For the argument where only a players feet can be offside, that would still have problems. Like these, which are both level in any sensible fan's view, but would be offside by an even bigger margin under that new rule.

 

[darlowolf64]

But the guidelines they SHOULD be working to say that if its not obvious to the naked eye, it's onside so both the above are on

 

[Paul]

“If something is not clear on the first sight, then it’s not obvious and it shouldn’t be considered. Looking at one camera angle is one thing but looking at 15, trying to find something that was potentially not even there, this was not the idea of the VAR principle. It should be clear and obvious.”

That's from IFAB

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

Mike Riley has his fingers in his ears.

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

Mike Riley has his fingers in his ears.

Told you...

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

Instead of VAR drawing a thin offside line it should be a thick one reflecting a 20cm margin of error. If the attacking and defending body parts are both within the thick line then you go with the decision on the pitch.

That has just been posted on the BBC feed by some random watcher. Its the bloody perfect idea.

 

[PuntsWolf]

Instead of VAR drawing a thin offside line it should be a thick one reflecting a 20cm margin of error. If the attacking and defending body parts are both within the thick line then you go with the decision on the pitch.

That has just been posted on the BBC feed by some random watcher. Its the bloody perfect idea.

Bear said this tbf

 

[jlo]

Another poor decision in the Villa game today also

 

[Deleted Cyber]

Bear said this tbf

As did I .

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

It's fucking right. I don't mind who said it, I just desperately hope it could be implemented that way now.

Riley won't do it though.

 

[Deleted Cyber]

I think my point was that fans have come up with the solution independent of each other so it must be worth a go

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

Of course it must. Of course it must.

But Mike Riley and his fucking drones think they know best. Depressing.