Halsey (again)

[alphabet_king]

As you've all said the issue is the rule and not VAR.

Having said that I think the rule comes from having VAR. For VAR to be consistent it needs to have non-ambiguous rules. As soon as you put everything in slow mo it takes all decision making very clinical so the rules need to match or you get issues

It does make me smile that all the managers and pundits are reaping what they sowed but can't handle it. Gimme the non-VAR lower leagues any day.

The rule was clear. it was changed. Not because of VAR, but because...well no one's sure really. But it really is nothing to do with VAR.

VAR has plenty to answer for, lets not lump this in with the VAR bucket also. Even this thread is talking about VAR now, and not the ridiculous hand ball rule in the first place.

To respond to your point though....it appears fans wont even accept even black or white rules either. Offside - for example. When pulled back because it's proven on VAR unequivocally as offside (sometimes by a gnats hair - but offside none the less), fans still moan.

 

[GillsBluenose]

Having said that I think the rule comes from having VAR. For VAR to be consistent it needs to have non-ambiguous rules. As soon as you put everything in slow mo it takes all decision making very clinical so the rules need to match or you get issues

It does make me smile that all the managers and pundits are reaping what they sowed but can't handle it. Gimme the non-VAR lower leagues any day.

Agreed. I think the point you make about slowmo was also very relevant in the days when accidental handball was not deemed to be a foul.

To my eyes, watching at full speed nearly always made it clear when handball was unintentional but, even then, it could look far more deliberate in slow motion and particularly when running the film forwards and backwards.

 

[mick745]

I said at the time teams should be careful what they wish for.

They wanted VAR so they can lie in the bed of their own making as far as i am concerned.

But the problem is this. Football for 100 years was a very simple game. The same rules applied throughout whether top professional leagues or park football.

Now there is two tiers, one for matches played at VAR-enabled grounds and one set of rules for the rest.

If the lino cannot see offside at Priestfield with the naked eye it is not offside but if the same match is at Anfield then it is offside.

If a gills player handles the ball by having it headed onto his arm with his back to the ball it is not a penalty. At Stamford Bridge it is.

Law 12 deals with fouls and misconduct. The important part of the first part of the wording is forgotten

"If in the referee's opinion..."

That discretion which brought a human level of common sense to decision making has been removed in these instances.

 

[alphabet_king]

I said at the time teams should be careful what they wish for.

They wanted VAR so they can lie in the bed of their own making as far as i am concerned.

But the problem is this. Football for 100 years was a very simple game. The same rules applied throughout whether top professional leagues or park football.

Now there is two tiers, one for matches played at VAR-enabled grounds and one set of rules for the rest.

If the lino cannot see offside at Priestfield with the naked eye it is not offside but if the same match is at Anfield then it is offside.

If a gills player handles the ball by having it headed onto his arm with his back to the ball it is not a penalty. At Stamford Bridge it is.

Law 12 deals with fouls and misconduct. The important part of the first part of the wording is forgotten

"If in the referee's opinion..."

That discretion which brought a human level of common sense to decision making has been removed in these instances.

That discretion which brought a human level of common sense to decision making has been removed in these instances.

You do realise VAR decisions are made by humans?

But you're still missing the point. This is not about VAR. It's about the shit hand ball rule - VAR in this case is irrelevant.

If a gills player handles the ball by having it headed onto his arm with his back to the ball it is not a penalty. At Stamford Bridge it is.

Absolute bollocks IMO mate. The ref gives that at GFC also.

Do we think it might be possible for people stop using the shit rules to validate their hatred of VAR? It's irrelevant.

The hand ball rule has been changed. It is crap and doesn't work. It needs to be changed back ASAP.

 

[Baghdad_Rob]

You do realise VAR decisions are made by humans?

But you're still missing the point. This is not about VAR. It's about the shit hand ball rule - VAR in this case is irrelevant.

The argument is whether or not the rule was changed to suit VAR.

When it comes down to something like goal line technology, it is a question of if the ball is over the line or not. It either is or isn't. There can not be any other state. There is no gray area.

As per the offside rule with the stupid moving of lines, the question is one of "is part of the strikers body one pixel closer to the goal than the defenders?". Again, this is a simple yes or no answer (or theoretically should be). If the striker is one pixel closer to the goal then offside otherwise onside. There is no grey area of whether or not a player's nose, finger or backside is interfering with play.

VAR is supposed to be 100% accurate and can only be accurate if it is measuring a "yes or no" scenario. By removing the concept of intent and making the rule effectively one of "did it touch the arm?" then it is removing the grey area since the answer to "did it touch the arm?" is either a yes or no. There is no grey area concerning if the touch caused any sort of significant deflection that benefitted one side or the other.

Whenever VAR is used and a decision is judged to be wrong by the fans, the mistake is either one of two things:

a) VAR is correct as per the rules. It is the fault of the way the rules are written
b) The VAR referee has judged intent wrongly and therefore has made a mistake using VAR.

Depends on how cynical you are in thinking that now VAR has been introduced with a lot of time, money and commitment invested, the football authorities can't afford to admit defeat in its introduction.

Ultimately whether or not the rules were changed to make it easier for VAR to be seen to be right or not is irrelevant. What is relevant is that VAR and the rules it is being used against is arguably broken.

 

[OneSirKeefy]

You do realise VAR decisions are made by humans?

But you're still missing the point. This is not about VAR. It's about the shit hand ball rule - VAR in this case is irrelevant.



Absolute bollocks IMO mate. The ref gives that at GFC also.

Do we think it might be possible for people stop using the shit rules to validate their hatred of VAR? It's irrelevant.

The hand ball rule has been changed. It is crap and doesn't work. It needs to be changed back ASAP.

“The ref gives that at GFC”?

Well, he didn’t on Saturday. There was a similar incident where a Blackpool player hit the ball, it looked like it struck our player, a meter away, on the arm, and the ref looked and waved play on. Just like “the olden days” where you thought, yep, the defender had no chance there, unintentional, no pen.

Overall tho, fully agree the rule is crap now, and that VAR had nothing to do with this particular incident. It does however really, really piss me off on 99% of other occasions

By that I mean that we bother using it, not VAR on its own per se.

 

[alphabet_king]

“The ref gives that at GFC”?

Well, he didn’t on Saturday. There was a similar incident where a Blackpool player hit the ball, it looked like it struck our player, a meter away, on the arm, and the ref looked and waved play on. Just like “the olden days” where you thought, yep, the defender had no chance there, unintentional, no pen.

So the ref has missed it then. Its always been the case that the best refs are in the top divisions. We get the slightly shitter ones, who miss a lot more. Thats never been an issue, yet people are now moaming about exactly that with VAR. Apparently now thats an argument against var.

Strange that this thread should have been about the shit hand ball rule, yet people with an axe to grind with var have made it about that instead. Its literally nothing to do with var yet var is now being discussed on this thread.

 

[alphabet_king]

Funnily enough, i just saw an article in the mirror that quotes a tweet from gary linekar 5 years ago that is calling for the hand ball rule to be changed, to what its recently been changed to. Which they then reminded everyone about him now moaning about the silly rule on MOTD. Id imagine theres a number of sikilar examples if people bothered to check.

It turns out football fans and commentators will just never be happy either way.

 

[GillsBluenose]

Funnily enough, i just saw an article in the mirror that quotes a tweet from gary linekar 5 years ago that is calling for the hand ball rule to be changed, to what its recently been changed to.

Is it a coincidence that Lineker took penalties so he knows he would have scored a lot more goals?

As it is, they can not change rules mid season so the new rule will come under the microscope even more as the Premier League season unfolds. By the end, I expect the attackers to be whacking and heading the ball at defenders as much as possible, with the hope that it at least clips their fingers.

 

[Colburn]

VAR has to be brought into this as the ref didn't give either of those ridiculous pens until he looked at the monitor so no VAR no pen. As Roy Hodgson said they were then looking for a reason to give it

 

[Vambogills]

We have goal line technology that has failed. We have VAR that has sucked all the joy out of a fast flowing game. We now have rule changes, thought up by people who clearly don't understand the game unless it is in super slow motion. Anyone who regularly watches football can spot the glaringly obvious problems the latest version of the handball rule will cause. So can referees but, of course, they are now merely there to apply the new rules and not sensibly make a professional assesment.
I can't abide watching the Premiership for the reasons above. Our league without the finance for this technology to be rolled out has dodged a bullet. L1 and 2 remain more authentic to the spirit of the game most would like to watch. None of my Prem supporting chums are happy.

 

[LancsGordoRoad]

I don`t watch a lot of Premiership football so am unfamiliar with the extent to which VAR is utilised. But reading some of the comments above, I wonder whether the Premiership has done much in the way of studying how certain other sports make use of similar technology.

In the NHL, (North American ice hockey) for example, video is extensively employed at a kind of "League central operations room" that review all "goals" to ensure that, in respect of a goal scored, that the puck had actually crossed the goal-line. They do it live -time and will call the play back if video shows that, for example, on-ice officials mistakenly ruled out a goal. They`ll only call the play back (ie stop the game ) if an error was made, so the flow of the game is mostly uninterrupted.

However, there are occasions, such as an alleged off-side play directly preceding a goal or a foul on the goalkeeper directly preceding the puck going into the goal, when the prerogative for instigating video review, to challenge an awarded "goal" , is solely at the discretion of the (scored-on) team`s head coach. If the coach gets the call wrong , ie his challenge is over-ruled following examination of the video, (ie adjudged as not off-side, adjudged no goalie interference, so a "good goal") the challenging coach`s team is penalised by having one of their players removed from the ice on a time penalty. This ensures that coaches are very careful about making a challenge - a second challenge, if over-ruled results in a double-penalty.

I don`t know, whether in the Premiership, managers are allowed to make a "challenge" directly after a "goal" against them is awarded ? Or, whether any and all VAR is purely a matter for officials unconnected with either club. If it`s the latter then perhaps there is more time taken on VAR review than there needs to be if certain situations, like alleged offside prior to a goal, were at the sole discretion of the managers, on the understanding that if their "challenge" was over-ruled the challenging manager`s team would be penalised - maybe by reducing his number of players on the field to ten for fifteen minutes.

I`m not suggesting that VAR should only be instigated by managers, but perhaps if there were certain situations (as above) where they could, it would help diminish the time wasted by having everything reviewed all the time ?

 

[alphabet_king]

I don`t watch a lot of Premiership football so am unfamiliar with the extent to which VAR is utilised. But reading some of the comments above, I wonder whether the Premiership has done much in the way of studying how certain other sports make use of similar technology.

In the NHL, (North American ice hockey) for example, video is extensively employed at a kind of "League central operations room" that review all "goals" to ensure that, in respect of a goal scored, that the puck had actually crossed the goal-line. They do it live -time and will call the play back if video shows that, for example, on-ice officials mistakenly ruled out a goal. They`ll only call the play back (ie stop the game ) if an error was made, so the flow of the game is mostly uninterrupted.

However, there are occasions, such as an alleged off-side play directly preceding a goal or a foul on the goalkeeper directly preceding the puck going into the goal, when the prerogative for instigating video review, to challenge an awarded "goal" , is solely at the discretion of the (scored-on) team`s head coach. If the coach gets the call wrong , ie his challenge is over-ruled following examination of the video, (ie adjudged as not off-side, adjudged no goalie interference, so a "good goal") the challenging coach`s team is penalised by having one of their players removed from the ice on a time penalty. This ensures that coaches are very careful about making a challenge - a second challenge, if over-ruled results in a double-penalty.

I don`t know, whether in the Premiership, managers are allowed to make a "challenge" directly after a "goal" against them is awarded ? Or, whether any and all VAR is purely a matter for officials unconnected with either club. If it`s the latter then perhaps there is more time taken on VAR review than there needs to be if certain situations, like alleged offside prior to a goal, were at the sole discretion of the managers, on the understanding that if their "challenge" was over-ruled the challenging manager`s team would be penalised - maybe by reducing his number of players on the field to ten for fifteen minutes.

I`m not suggesting that VAR should only be instigated by managers, but perhaps if there were certain situations (as above) where they could, it would help diminish the time wasted by having everything reviewed all the time ?

No idea what this has to do with the OP.

The hand ball in question was not an issue with VAR. It was an issue with the rules being shit in the first place, which give ludicrous outcomes as we saw at the weekend in the prem. The law is the same with or without VAR (although admittedly VAR refs more regularly manage to spot infringements that the on pitch ref misses easily in real time). The issue is not the use of VAR, it's the law itself which people have an issue with. The ref's decision, and the use of VAR was correct in this instance. Unfortunately it just applied it in the wrong way.

 

[OneSirKeefy]

No idea what this has to do with the OP.

The hand ball in question was not an issue with VAR. It was an issue with the rules being shit in the first place, which give ludicrous outcomes as we saw at the weekend in the prem. The law is the same with or without VAR (although admittedly VAR refs more regularly manage to spot infringements that the on pitch ref misses easily in real time). The issue is not the use of VAR, it's the law itself which people have an issue with. The ref's decision, and the use of VAR was correct in this instance. Unfortunately it just applied it in the wrong way.

None of it is to do with the op, as you keep reminding us. The thread has simply evolved into talking about VAR.

But imho none of these things are issues if we just do away with VAR and everything that it brings.

Was football that f*cked for the past 50 years (refereeing wise) that we have to completely redefine the way it’s played, the laws, the interpretations, the endless stoppages, and finally the fact we can overturn a result after the final whistle has blown and allow some more play?

Can I ask that the 86 game between England and Argentina be reviewed please? Maybe we’ll find something that affected that result. Who knows?

That game has gone down in history for the “non decision”. Football history is possibly the better for it.

I will admit I hate the whole VAR concept with a passion. It has not helped in any way to get “fairer” results. It has just created a whole heap more controversy, angst, fan discontent and removed the spontaneity of football. And there seem to be as many shit decisions as there ever was.

It is not a scientific game. It’s not chess. It is played by people with frailties and faults who make mistakes. It can be referreed similarly. It’s all part of the “game”.

Otherwise just play FIFA 21 or watch other people doing that online.

 

[LancsGordoRoad]

None of it is to do with the op, as you keep reminding us. The thread has simply evolved into talking about VAR.

But imho none of these things are issues if we just do away with VAR and everything that it brings.

Was football that f*cked for the past 50 years (refereeing wise) that we have to completely redefine the way it’s played, the laws, the interpretations, the endless stoppages, and finally the fact we can overturn a result after the final whistle has blown and allow some more play?

Can I ask that the 86 game between England and Argentina be reviewed please? Maybe we’ll find something that affected that result. Who knows?

That game has gone down in history for the “non decision”. Football history is possibly the better for it.

I will admit I hate the whole VAR concept with a passion. It has not helped in any way to get “fairer” results. It has just created a whole heap more controversy, angst, fan discontent and removed the spontaneity of football. And there seem to be as many shit decisions as there ever was.

It is not a scientific game. It’s not chess. It is played by people with frailties and faults who make mistakes. It can be referreed similarly. It’s all part of the “game”.

Otherwise just play FIFA 21 or watch other people doing that online.

I`m not really that familiar with the VAR usage in the Premier League but can understand why some are uneasy about it. I mentioned above the issue of whether or not Prem managers had opportunities to instigate Reviews, i`ve since been looking at reports and it appears that they don`t. My point was that VAR can work in sport, it does so very effectively in the NHL, and fans and media appear to support it. But a difference is that there are opportunities to reduce game interference time by having some calls purely at the discretion of managers (head coaches) who know that it will cost their team if they employ it too often, takes away the temptation to guess !

I don`t see anything wrong with employing technology, especially goal-line technology, as we`ve all been to games where a lino has guessed whether a ball has crossed the line - sometimes to our relief and sometimes to our annoyance. The VAR does work well in those instances. Not convinced about handball and offside yet though - maybe some of the wider aspects have been rushed in a little too quickly.