• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

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

Just seen Southampton's equaliser. Rank incompetence

Thing is, almost all of the mistakes are not related to the technology but the appalling knowledge and conduct of those who operate it. The problem isn't the VAR in abstract, but its operator. At least that can be fixed, get better qualified people or teach those who operate it.
 
Thing is, almost all of the mistakes are not related to the technology but the appalling knowledge and conduct of those who operate it. The problem isn't the VAR in abstract, but its operator. At least that can be fixed, get better qualified people or teach those who operate it.

Exactly
 
Do you not think they've been trained? They are trying to speed up decisions so more pressure on operators than before......

It will continue its downward trajectory.
 
Do you not think they've been trained? They are trying to speed up decisions so more pressure on operators than before......

It will continue its downward trajectory.

Clearly nowhere near enough.
 
Sky Sports pundit Graeme Souness has called for the offside rule to be changed in the wake of more VAR controversy overshadowing Liverpool's clash with Wolves on Super Sunday.

"I just don't get it," said Souness in the Sky Sports studio.
"We're in the entertainment business. What we're doing is denying the people the enjoyment of goals. What we should do is say that if any part of an attacker is in an onside position they can't be given offside.

"We cannot go on like this. There's too much frustration going on."

Fellow pundit Jamie Carragher argued: "VAR is costing football goals."

It's calculated that 22 goals in the Premier League have already been ruled out for marginal offside rulings this season.

Sky Sports' Tony Cottee: "They should hang their heads in shame at Stockley Park. They are ruining the game! They should be giving the advantage to the forward, they are not doing it.
"Their aim is to have less goals, not more goals! Just what the fans want! It's ridiculous, a joke."

Crystal Palace boss Roy Hodgson: "We're being told by people in football, the media, and presumably fans who are affected by these things that this is going to make football better. I went along with that because it would have been wrong to make a strong stand against the way the tide was turning in favour of technology. The big problem with technology is that it's like speed cameras.

"When they say you've done 32 or 33 and not 30, can you be 100 per cent certain you have done 32 and not 29? That's where we are with VAR, and as a result, we get the situation where people are becoming a bit disillusioned because they're seeing good goals chalked off by very small margins."

Sky Sports' Jamie Redknapp: "We have to trust the calibration but we're talking centimetres. I think they have to change the rule in the summer - it's not something the fans appreciate.

"I think maybe next year, we need to look to a situation where you can only be offside with your feet, because when people are running, you're naturally going to be leaning, it might be your head or shoulder. It just feels unfair, and it's not 100 per cent accurate either."

Something has definitely got to change.
 
Yes we appear to have been shafted by VAR this season, but my greatest concern is that there's going to a game (say a relegation 4 pointer) where a VAR decision or non decision is going to be a catalyst from some serious crowd trouble.
 
Yes we appear to have been shafted by VAR this season, but my greatest concern is that there's going to a game (say a relegation 4 pointer) where a VAR decision or non decision is going to be a catalyst from some serious crowd trouble.

No, they'll throw their hands in the air and say no, their actions are insulated from that response.

It will however cost somebody their job, some players may face uncertainty after a relegation so I'd love to know the LMA/PFA stance given they purportedly serve manager/player interests.
 
21 goals have been chalked off this season thanks to var and the vast majority have been slide rule decisions. The game is about scoring goals. Rule changes in recent years have all been to improve the scorers chances. Back pass, 3 points for a win. Now this technology is being implemented with no error margin so change the offside rule from next season or change it now half way through is fair enough
 
Bin it. Completely ruined that game and nearly the one against City. Felt absolutely floored after the high of the goal and then that dreaded VAR. I switched off after that ...

I remember Lampard having his goal disallowed against Germany in the SA WC so let's be honest there was always a clamour for technology to improve the game. For years games have been scrutinised by the pundits and mistakes highlighted. Now, we get VAR and it's scrutinished to the n'th degree and apparently by the letter of the law of the game our goal was offside which is ridiculous, completely fucking ridiculous given the minute margins BUT if they are going to do that they have to be 100% consistent and they couldn't allow it. As goes Lallana's goal how far back do they take it? VvD handballed it and put the ball through therefore it was totally relevent to that passage of play. Inconclusive my arse they just don't want to open up another can of worms.

Fuck off VAR - give us our game back warts and all ...
 
I have no issue with the principle of using VAR. the issue is more of interpretation of rules and particularly for offside. We’ve had the same debate on here as to what constitutes offside. For example, I wrote previously that for a through ball where a forward is essentially level with a defender I think it wrong to give offside just because body shape is different. We’re now seeing even worse examples of this in the EPL due to the incompetence of the refereeing institutions taking the most extreme view of what constitutes offside, which imo is fundamentally incorrect. They do the same thing with penalty incidents in taking the view that any ‘contact’ can justify a penalty award regardless of whether it would hardly be sufficient to harm a blade of grass, never mind knocking over a grown man. It is the officiators’ lack of common sense and non appreciation of the game itself that is being highlighted. For me, VAR proved Jonny is on, Pukki was on for Norwich and usually when some diver dives at the slightest touch that they are trying to con their way to a pen. If a dickhead ref sees it differently, it’s down to their officiating not really VAR. I would agree that VAR gives them more opportunity to demonstrate how shit they really are.
 
I also agree with Souness in that if any part of the body is level with the defender it's not offside. If in doubt go with the attacking side.

This shouldn't be hard. It isn't Fuck VAR, it should be Fuck the PGMOL they are appalling.
 
I also agree with Souness in that if any part of the body is level with the defender it's not offside. If in doubt go with the attacking side.

This shouldn't be hard. It isn't Fuck VAR, it should be Fuck the PGMOL they are appalling.

You'd end up with some nonsense of forwards running through and trying to leave an arm trailing behind so there was some overlap with the defender, then defenders would end up taking some odd body positions trying to prevent any trailing body part being able to be taken advantage of by a forward. It'd be like the farce that existed for a while with attackers kicking the ball at people's arms from point blank range and defenders standing with their arms behind their backs in response.

It's irrelevant what body parts you decide to be the crucial ones, as long as they're trying to measure it to such a degree of accuracy the current problems will continue whether they're comparing arms, feet, or whatever other body part. The whole thing needs a rethink as to how they're going to integrate it, same as with the Mahrez penalty the other day, the replay clearly shows there is contact between the two players so it makes it more difficult to ignore compared to a one of real time view from the referee where he could just claim he didn't notice. You're always likely to spot more infringements with countless slow motion replays but at the same time you lose the context and so whilst it exposes a lot of new incidents that are in need of a decision, a lot of the time it doesn't actually assist in reaching a convincing conclusion.
 
I don't understand why we haven't implemented VAR to support the on field decisions. I.e. Johnny's offside yesterday, you can't see in real time if he was off therefore the on field decision should have been upheld.
 
I don't understand why we haven't implemented VAR to support the on field decisions. I.e. Johnny's offside yesterday, you can't see in real time if he was off therefore the on field decision should have been upheld.

I agree with that. The implementation stinks.
 
You'd end up with some nonsense of forwards running through and trying to leave an arm trailing behind so there was some overlap with the defender, then defenders would end up taking some odd body positions trying to prevent any trailing body part being able to be taken advantage of by a forward. It'd be like the farce that existed for a while with attackers kicking the ball at people's arms from point blank range and defenders standing with their arms behind their backs in response.

It's irrelevant what body parts you decide to be the crucial ones, as long as they're trying to measure it to such a degree of accuracy the current problems will continue whether they're comparing arms, feet, or whatever other body part. The whole thing needs a rethink as to how they're going to integrate it, same as with the Mahrez penalty the other day, the replay clearly shows there is contact between the two players so it makes it more difficult to ignore compared to a one of real time view from the referee where he could just claim he didn't notice. You're always likely to spot more infringements with countless slow motion replays but at the same time you lose the context and so whilst it exposes a lot of new incidents that are in need of a decision, a lot of the time it doesn't actually assist in reaching a convincing conclusion.

You clearly didn't read my post properly. The advantage is with the attacker if it's inconclusive and you would be offside if only your arm is level as you can't score with your arm.

It really isn't hard.
 
There is no way the camera or frame rates used are accurate enough for yesterday’s decision. Until the technology catches up we should bin it off.
 
You clearly didn't read my post properly. The advantage is with the attacker if it's inconclusive and you would be offside if only your arm is level as you can't score with your arm.

It really isn't hard.

I must have misread where you said 'any body part', my mistake of course.
 
What Johnny says - this subtle change gives the advantage to the attacking side which is as it should be. It is why I also disagree with the handball rule when it comes to a goal, the absence of any consideration of intent is a problem because the same rule doesn't apply elsewhere on the field of play. If the attacking.player deliberately handles the ball then it is a foul, if there is no intent and no way they could avoid the ball then it isnt afoul anywhere else on the pitch so shouldn't be if there is a goal and there should also be some.consideration aboutnwheyher it had any impact on the play.
 
What Johnny says - this subtle change gives the advantage to the attacking side which is as it should be. It is why I also disagree with the handball rule when it comes to a goal, the absence of any consideration of intent is a problem because the same rule doesn't apply elsewhere on the field of play. If the attacking.player deliberately handles the ball then it is a foul, if there is no intent and no way they could avoid the ball then it isnt afoul anywhere else on the pitch so shouldn't be if there is a goal and there should also be some.consideration aboutnwheyher it had any impact on the play.

The handball rule is daft I'd agree and that is tricky to evaluate, I think it has to come to the hand changing the balls direction of travel in favour of attack/ defender. Again not hard to judge and if it's inconclusive then play the ref's decision on the pitch.
 
Back
Top