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

[StuardoWulf]

will that be with an irate manager hanging off each ear?

 

[Aikiwolf]

Good news though, Neil Swarbrick (Head of VAR) has rated the implementation of VAR as 7/10...

 

[Tony Towner]

Good news though, Neil Swarbrick (Head of VAR) has rated the implementation of VAR as 7/10...

Says technology wouldn't have been needed if Saiss had cleared the ball off the line like he should have done

 

[Johnny75]

Good news though, Neil Swarbrick (Head of VAR) has rated the implementation of VAR as 7/10...

I've just read that. What a complete dickhead, congratulating himself and his team to getting to a place they expected to be. They seriously expected it to be this much of a fucking shambles.

Prick.

 

[Langers]

I'm assuming he's ignored the Son incident that had to be overturned, and the countless examples that shows that it all comes down to interpretation meaning inconsistencies are as common as they always were?

Other than that, yeah - let's go mad and award them 8/10. A bonus point for enthusiasm.

 

[Rui_CostCo]

The Americans have had VAR in Football for decades, across a number of iterations to the system they now have that works well. It's like Swarbrick and his minions didn't even look at what they've done.

Time is king, and both live and home audiences don't put up with delays. Initially, when calls were close they could be instantly reviewed on covered pitch side monitors, as technology improved so did the monitors, until they no longer needed them, because we now have high def tablets that can quickly be deployed on pitch to the ref. What a world we live in! All the time within a 90 second window.

We don't currently allow decisions to be challenged, but again, that's an issue they have wrestled with until their current working model some of which could be implemented swiftly and would improve matters greatly.

How we have ended up with a system that can take an age to come to a decision and still leave fans managers and players unhappy is pretty scandalous and 8/10 pats on the back are outrageous. When you should be looking for six 9's, 80% is not acceptable.

 

[Norman Deeley]

Doubt there's a fan in the country who'd give VAR more than 2/10

 

[nimrod]

Doubt there's a fan in the country who'd give VAR more than 2/10

that's about right. and I was all in favour of it. it's not the tech, it's the cretins running it and the stupid rulings. the twats congratulating themselves for identifying a toe or armpit was offside just sums them up #bunchoffuckingsoullessweirdos

 

[Rui_CostCo]

put a 90 second limit on the call. That still feels like an interminable delay, but it's half of what we re getting now. Hilariously today I read there's now some debate as to whether the armpit was played onside by the defenders knee. Someone has called VAR the nitpickers charter, which is what most peoples gripes seem to be around. The nitpicking of millimeter fine decisions. Small changes to the offside rule would help to end that kind of nonsense and a majority of the issues

 

[Kenny]

Nothing wil be sorted until those in charge have a clue what they are doing. Over the weekend you had a Sheff Utd goal ruled out after nearly 4 mins of checks and you still really couldn't tell if it was offside or not then they had 1 look at the Salah goal (that on the first replay shown looked off) and went, yep thats on. No detailed look or anything. The whole process is all over the place

 

[Dinowolf]

Mike Riley has admitted that VAR got 4 incidents wrong that it ruled on the weekend before the international break.

Brighton v Everton - penalty shouldn't have been awarded to Brighton to make 2-2
Norwich v Man U - James penalty shouldn't have been given, saved anyway
Arsenal v Palace - Sokratis goal should have stood
Watford v Chelsea - Delafeau? penalty should not have been awarded.

These are decisions that are affecting the results of games and consequently will affect the league positions of some clubs.

VAR is currently not good for purpose as it is not helping referees to reach the right decisions.
How can other sports like Cricket and esp. Rugby get it so right and football with all their finances etc., get it so wrong.

 

[Tony Towner]

How can other sports like Cricket and esp. Rugby get it so right and football with all their finances etc., get it so wrong.

Because as long as you believe in the accuracy of the technology cricket decisions are factual, football on fouls is opinion.

 

[Dinowolf]

...and Rugby?

 

[Kenny]

...and Rugby?

They still get things wrong on opinion based decisions in Rugby BUT the huge difference is you know how/why they have reached their decision because everything can be heard by the crowd and viewers

 

[Tony Towner]

...and Rugby?

Dunno, I don't really watch it. I do watch the NFL and there are controversial reviews every week which are opinion based

 

[MARKakaJIM]

The phrase 'good for purpose' really grates.

 

[The Bear]

So it should do. There's no such phrase.

Fit for purpose.

 

[Tony Towner]

Gary Lineker:
Took a while, but VAR rules out a Palace goal against Liverpool. If you look for long enough the anti-goal merchants will find something. [emoji849]

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

It's shite. We lose a perfectly valid goal and they don't even look at it. Fuck the fucking fuck off out of the game VAR.

 

[MARKakaJIM]

It's shite. We lose a perfectly valid goal and they don't even look at it. Fuck the fucking fuck off out of the game VAR.

Nothing VAR can do on that one, linesman flagged and play was stopped.

That's just standard old school shit officiating.