The VAR / Refereeing Thread | Page 2 | Vital Football

The VAR / Refereeing Thread

Greavswasthegreatest said:
Well that is better than what we have currently which in 'unreasonable doubt' and what we see now is 'scapegoatism' ....make a boobooo get the sack or moved on!... so with regards to Liverpud disallowed goal.....it should have been given, Romero's hand ball penalty should not have been given ...as respectively, I doubt he was offside and I doubt romero deliberately tried to block the shot! and the Liverpud first Red was iffy cos the guy went for the ball and the ball helped move his foot higher and onto Biss so it was not as deliberate act and should have been a yellow....in my reasonable doubt!
Click to expand...
Intentional or not it was still serious foul play.
 
Whingin! Bindippers, yeah it has to be them! bad losing tosspots.

How many times have we lost points, the list is long, even a cup because of VAR when we have played them? not forgetting other sides the same.

Check out how many points we have lost, even last season cos of poor VAR decisions.

Did we threaten to sue? not on your nelly, just got on wiv it like every other bloody side has to, ok had a whinge n whine that's the norm lol!

Bindippers! Bad losers simple as that, I am crying bucket loads NOT!

Poor decisions, yes shall we talk about similar hand balls, Us v Arsewipes or Notts Forest v The Bees yesterday, one a pen the other not, why?

Our list of whines n whinging regards VAR is long, but hey!

Whether VAR is right or wrong, it is here to stay, plenty of whining to come along the way, lol! and yes improvements are urgently needed, but for now lets just get on wiv it! like it or not.
 
muttley said:
Not for me. "Reasonable doubt" is as open to corruption as "clear and obvious".

We just need refs and video refs actually learning and using the laws of the game. They think it is OK not to. They just make it up.
Click to expand...

As we have seen in recent times, even "clear and obvious" has been open to interpretation/corruption.

The problems will always been human error - be it at the rule making stage or the actual officiating stage. Every year we have new rules that cause new drama. Every year the quality of refereeing is exposed.

We will never be able to make officiating games at this level perfect. Not even close. What it needs to be is as consistent and drama-free as humanly possible.
 
Matic said:
As we have seen in recent times, even "clear and obvious" has been open to interpretation/corruption.

The problems will always been human error - be it at the rule making stage or the actual officiating stage. Every year we have new rules that cause new drama. Every year the quality of refereeing is exposed.

We will never be able to make officiating games at this level perfect. Not even close. What it needs to be is as consistent and drama-free as humanly possible.
Click to expand...
One journalist made an interesting observation. He said that we (the football world) wanted VAR to correct errors of fact (e.g incorrect offside decisions). We don't want to it to interfere in subjective decisions which it increasingly finding a role for.

'The problem with VAR is it has confused opinion with fact. It rules on matters of opinion, so is as inconsistent as what went before, but then it does not get matters of fact right, which jeopardises its very existence.'
 
Gary Onedaysoon said:
One journalist made an interesting observation. He said that we (the football world) wanted VAR to correct errors of fact (e.g incorrect offside decisions). We don't want to it to interfere in subjective decisions which it increasingly finding a role for.

'The problem with VAR is it has confused opinion with fact. It rules on matters of opinion, so is as inconsistent as what went before, but then it does not get matters of fact right, which jeopardises its very existence.'
Click to expand...

For me, the problem is that the football authorities designed VAR processes around 80-90% of decisions being subjective with the "did the ref make a clear and obvious error" nonsense. The reality is that about 10% of decisions (if that) are subjective if you apply the laws of the game correctly.

As an example, VAR should only looking at whether it is a penalty or not based on the laws of the game. It should irrelevant to them what decision the on-pitch referee made. If he got it wrong, then just inform him to reverse it. Him running off the pitch and looking at a screen so that he can make the final decision is just a circus. PGMOL spend more time determining whether the error was "clear and obvious" than they do whether it was the right decision. I'm certain other countries just compare the incident to the laws of the game.

On top of that there is the obsession with keeping 22 players on the pitch, which means the refs blatantly ignore the laws in that area. There would be so many more yellows and reds if the laws were adhered to. However, you'd see player behaviour change very quickly and then they would calm down again. It's a pain barrier I'd like the game to go through so it starts becoming more entertaining again. Let's eradicate the dark arts.
 
muttley said:
For me, the problem is that the football authorities designed VAR processes around 80-90% of decisions being subjective with the "did the ref make a clear and obvious error" nonsense. The reality is that about 10% of decisions (if that) are subjective if you apply the laws of the game correctly.

As an example, VAR should only looking at whether it is a penalty or not based on the laws of the game. It should irrelevant to them what decision the on-pitch referee made. If he got it wrong, then just inform him to reverse it. Him running off the pitch and looking at a screen so that he can make the final decision is just a circus. PGMOL spend more time determining whether the error was "clear and obvious" than they do whether it was the right decision. I'm certain other countries just compare the incident to the laws of the game.

On top of that there is the obsession with keeping 22 players on the pitch, which means the refs blatantly ignore the laws in that area. There would be so many more yellows and reds if the laws were adhered to. However, you'd see player behaviour change very quickly and then they would calm down again. It's a pain barrier I'd like the game to go through so it starts becoming more entertaining again. Let's eradicate the dark arts.
Click to expand...
100% with you there muttley esp you last para!

More cards, yellow n red, we would see players attitudes/behaviour change, thus the Laws being adhered to.
But the trouble wiv more cards means Refs having to grow bolloxs, and show I am in charge.
 
A nose hair or elbow or nipple between offside or not is not a clear obvious and valid measure FFS its the legs and feet that need to determine the outcome for an offside and as for hand ball if it is clear and obvious they put their hand in the way of a ball deliberately to avert a goal then that is a penalty........
 
Last edited:
We could have done with VAR and proper refs at the Women's game yesterday - we should have had 2 penalties and the Ref and linesperson was scared to call them.

There 2nd goal was over the line but it went in a min later anyhow
 
sldspurs said:
We could have done with VAR and proper refs at the Women's game yesterday - we should have had 2 penalties and the Ref and linesperson was scared to call them.

There 2nd goal was over the line but it went in a min later anyhow
Click to expand...
If VAR had been in use Lauren James wouldn't have been on the pitch to score the second goal, it would have shown her deliberately kick out into the face of the Spurs player after falling on her in a tackle. It was only one and a half minutes into the game and a similar reaction to the one that saw her sent off in the world cup.
 
Last edited:
TQ2Spurs said:
If VAR had been in use Lauren James wouldn't have been on the pitch to score the second goal, it would have shown her deliberately kick out into the face of the Spurs player after falling on her in a tackle. It was only one and a half minutes into the game and a similar reaction to the one that saw her sent off in the world cup.
Click to expand...
Yes u r right TQ ... the result would have been sooo different - nasty player but then so are quite a few on them in blue.... they must be trained in the boxing ring.
 
sldspurs said:
Yes u r right TQ ... the result would have been sooo different - nasty player but then so are quite a few on them in blue.... they must be trained in the boxing ring.
Click to expand...
You are right sld, James is rightly applauded for her skillset but (just like her brother) has temperament issues.
 
muttley said:
For me, the problem is that the football authorities designed VAR processes around 80-90% of decisions being subjective with the "did the ref make a clear and obvious error" nonsense. The reality is that about 10% of decisions (if that) are subjective if you apply the laws of the game correctly.

As an example, VAR should only looking at whether it is a penalty or not based on the laws of the game. It should irrelevant to them what decision the on-pitch referee made. If he got it wrong, then just inform him to reverse it. Him running off the pitch and looking at a screen so that he can make the final decision is just a circus. PGMOL spend more time determining whether the error was "clear and obvious" than they do whether it was the right decision. I'm certain other countries just compare the incident to the laws of the game.

On top of that there is the obsession with keeping 22 players on the pitch, which means the refs blatantly ignore the laws in that area. There would be so many more yellows and reds if the laws were adhered to. However, you'd see player behaviour change very quickly and then they would calm down again. It's a pain barrier I'd like the game to go through so it starts becoming more entertaining again. Let's eradicate the dark arts.
Click to expand...
I get the ambition Mutts but I disagree with the solution .Too many great games of football have been ruined by the sending off of players. We spectators don't pay to watch uneven contests. The players should face severe punishments meted out after post match review if deserved but I am in favour of allowing substitutes to replace them on the day after a 10 minute hiatus akin to a sinbin.
 
Love totty said:
For me it is simple. You risk injuring a player if you lunge towards the ball with your studs, over the ball or not. That is not the bit you kick with and should not be what you tackle with.
Click to expand...

Don't care what he was trying to do or intended to do, when you roll your foot or place it over the ball to try and drag it away, you risk hurting the opposite player, it doesn't matter what he intended, his studs were up, he was stretching and so not in control - it was the correct decision for a straight red.
 
Love totty said:
I get the ambition Mutts but I disagree with the solution .Too many great games of football have been ruined by the sending off of players. We spectators don't pay to watch uneven contests. The players should face severe punishments meted out after post match review if deserved but I am in favour of allowing substitutes to replace them on the day after a 10 minute hiatus akin to a sinbin.
Click to expand...

99% of the time, a team finishing with 10 men or less is down to the players, not the officials. The current ignoring of the laws by the refs is just encouraging more and more dark arts. That is killing a lot of the skill in the game.

I can imagine Gazza hating this current system if he played today. The opposition would just stifle him with professional fouls and the officials would just let it happen with no cards. We would never get to see that wow factor he gave us Spurs fans.

I do like the sin bin idea though. I've actually seen it used at Step 5 level when players abuse the refs. They get 10 mins off the pitch. That could be utilised for more things in my opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.