VAR

[springerbfc]

true - she shouldn't even be refereeing in Sunday league let alone the Women's World Cup if she's scared to enforce the laws of the game.
And it also proves Phil Neville was correct in his post match comments.

How many years did Man Utd go without conceding a penalty at OT during the 90's? Or a sending off? This is no different.

 

[iron4ever]

If VAR in the Premier League can stop all the shirt pulling etc in the penalty area when a corner or free kick is being taken then l am all for it. Hand out a few penalties and it would surely make the offenders think twice (assuming they have a brain) before trying it again.

 

[Super_horns]

They tried that a few years back but only seemed to run for about 2 months then forgotten about .

 

[Steve_Wafc]

They tried that a few years back but only seemed to run for about 2 months then forgotten about .

It’s like that retrospective panel that was put together to combat diving. It was strong to start with and being enforced, but now you don’t even hear about it and there was plenty of diving again last season.

If they continued the shirt pulling punishment, then Chris Smalling would’ve given away a penalty every game.

 

[B2TF]

VAR checks should be made immediately rather than flagged later.

NO. No. No! How long would this take? The pure joy of football, for a fan is in the instant the ball hits the net and the referee turns and points to the centre circle. Any delay in that process kills the moment and sucks all the excitement out of it. There is NO NEED AT ALL for this shit, there never was and there never will be, we just need grown ups to behave like grown ups. The ref gets it wrong? Big deal, did anybody die? And don't come back to me about how much money is at stake, I don't give a fuck about the money, if money is the only excuse you can come up with, you have no excuse for it, at all.

I never in a million years thought I'd ever say this, but here goes.... I agree 100% with BFT2!*

*Make the most of it though, fella. It'll only happen once in my lifetime!

If you set aside your prejudices, you will see that I am usually right on most things.

- reduce match length to 70 minutes in order to mitigate for increased playing time as a result of above new rule.

Are you fucking kidding me? You're fucking kidding me aren't you!

VAR would have stopped that cheating tw@t Maradona in his tracks - he would have been red carded for the "hands of god goal" and the cheats career ruined. I'm all for it - if it can be done correctly and within 30 seconds.

What the fuck are you talking about? You want to wait up to 30 seconds for permission to go crazy and celebrate? You want to ruin football for everyone and forever, because Maradonna once cheated against us? Nobody goves a fuck about that goal anymore, we moved on, you know why- because we're adults, we're grown ups, it's what we do. Christ! Have a word with yourself lad, give your head a wobble!

 

[#Beebot]

Are you fucking kidding me? You're fucking kidding me aren't you!

On average the ball is in play for well under 60 minutes. VAR will reduce this even further. Added time is therefore completely arbitrary - any figure added on by the ref that is less than 25 is absolute bollocks, it's just guessing. 70 minute matches with a stop clock actually increase the amount of football being played. A reduction in playing time to 60 minutes was actually discussed recently.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2017/jun/17/football-rule-makers-reducing-games-60-minutes

 

[B2TF]

On average the ball is in play for well under 60 minutes. VAR will reduce this even further. Added time is therefore completely arbitrary - any figure added on by the ref that is less than 25 is absolute bollocks, it's just guessing. 70 minute matches with a stop clock actually increase the amount of football being played. A reduction in playing time to 60 minutes was actually discussed recently.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2017/jun/17/football-rule-makers-reducing-games-60-minutes

It's also been proposed to break the game up into 4 quarters, because, y'know, the game is so intense now the players need more breaks. And oh yeah, we can slip more advertising into the broadcasts. The game doesn't need your fixes thanks, it's the people around it who are broken!

 

[#Beebot]

It's also been proposed to break the game up into 4 quarters, because, y'know, the game is so intense now the players need more breaks. And oh yeah, we can slip more advertising into the broadcasts. The game doesn't need your fixes thanks, it's the people around it who are broken!

This has nothing to do with making the game more American, it's about ending time wasting and arbitrary added time. This would resolve situations like the Scotland v Argentina game in the WWC where the ball wasn't in play for more than a few seconds after the 86th minute.

 

[Vanni]

I was unsure on VAR but have now made up my mind after watching the Chile v Colombia match the other night. Two Chile goals were chalked off after at least two mins of goal celebrations from the Chilean players and fans. Actually, the ref and his assistants took about four mins to decide on the second Chilean 'goal', and that can only mean that those in charge couldn't agree on the decision.

OK then, the first goal might have been marginally offside, but the second one was very open to interpretation - did the Chilean player control the ball with his hand or was it accidental? I thought it was clearly the latter.

But what really irkes me is that assistant refs are under orders to give the benefit of the doubt to the attacking side when there's a suspicion of offside and then look at the VAR footage if (and only if) a goal is scored. And by suspicion of offside I'm not only referring to marginal offsides but also to instances where the players were clearly in an offside position, some as much as 3/4 yards

Goal line technology is welcome because there's only one way it can be interpreted but this whole VAR thing is nonsense.

 

[Steve_Wafc]

The problem is people are still looking for a perfect flawless game. This isn’t the point of VAR, it’s not there to make every decision correct, it’s there to try and eradicate the majority of obvious errors made by the referee.
I have no idea how VAR is being operated right now, but for me it should be an even number of people looking at the same picture (separate screens), they get 20 seconds to view the incident from various angles and then they push a button for ‘Yes’ or ‘No’, say for if it’s a penalty or not. If 2 say Yes and 2 say No, then it can’t be given because it’s not unanimous. This also needs to be displayed on screen, like they do for penalty shoot-outs, green lights and red lights or ticks and crosses etc. At least that adds a touch of inclusion and clarity to the viewer/crowd. I think if a debatable penalty isn’t given, but you see the reason for that is because of a stalemate between the VAR officials, I think that would be accepted by the majority because the viewers see and agree themselves that it’s not a black and white incident and it’s impossible to be sure either way, rather than just the ‘it’s given/it’s not given’ they’re providing now, with no clarity provided whatsoever.

 

[B2TF]

This has nothing to do with making the game more American, it's about ending time wasting and arbitrary added time. This would resolve situations like the Scotland v Argentina game in the WWC where the ball wasn't in play for more than a few seconds after the 86th minute.

I see, so you'd fix time wasting by giving them less time to waste. Brilliant. As I've already said, the game isn't broken, it's the people you need to fix!

 

[B2TF]

the viewers see and agree themselves that it’s not a black and white incident and it’s impossible to be sure either way, rather than just the ‘it’s given/it’s not given’ they’re providing now, with no clarity provided whatsoever.

That's the problem, right there- what have "the viewers" got to do with this? Why aren't you talking about "the supporters" i.e. the people who've got their arses off the couch and paid kings ransom for a seat? The people who are actually part of the spectacle, and are the ONLY people you should be thinking about. The people who are having their match experience ruined by this shit?

 

[Steve_Wafc]

That's the problem, right there- what have "the viewers" got to do with this? Why aren't you talking about "the supporters" i.e. the people who've got their arses off the couch and paid kings ransom for a seat? The people who are actually part of the spectacle, and are the ONLY people you should be thinking about. The people who are having their match experience ruined by this shit?

I mean, I don’t think 20 seconds here and there would ruin their match experience, but each to their own..
Believe it or not, but there’s such situations where people can’t get a ticket because of high demand, so this has nothing to do with laziness or apathy. You do support Halifax though, so I understand your confusion
At the end of the day, everyone is watching the same game, whether it’s at the stadium or not and everyone wants a game that has a certain level of clarity.

 

[Super_horns]

You will get debate and complaints about the amount of injury time at the end of a half...

Some team is 1-0 up at Old Trafford - you can see there being 10 minutes of injury time due to VAR usage!

 

[Steve_Wafc]

You will get debate and complaints about the amount of injury time at the end of a half...

Some team is 1-0 up at Old Trafford - you can see there being 10 minutes of injury time due to VAR usage!

None, surely? You stop the clock. Adding time on becomes an advantage for one team and a disadvantage for the other, which is counter productive.

 

[#Beebot]

I see, so you'd fix time wasting by giving them less time to waste. Brilliant. As I've already said, the game isn't broken, it's the people you need to fix!

I don't think there's a recorded instance in football history of a ref adding time on at the end of the game that equates to the amount of time the ball was not in play. If we keep matches at 90 minutes and accurately add on another half hour that "fixes" the problem, but it also fundamentally changes the fitness levels we expect from footballers and the length of time fans stay at games - fans staying at the ground well past 5pm every Saturday etc. It's unfeasible and there's also no other sport that operates like this. Have rugby and all American sports got it wrong or are we the crazy ones?

 

[Super_horns]

None, surely? You stop the clock. Adding time on becomes an advantage for one team and a disadvantage for the other, which is counter productive.

I tend to agree but does that happen now?

Doesn't seem so..

 

[Steve_Wafc]

I tend to agree but does that happen now?

Doesn't seem so..

You mean the stopping of the clock? Not as often as it should. I think it should happen with genuine injuries or anything that’s not time wasting. Like a team player breaks his leg, is down for 10 minutes and needs oxygen. His team are 1-0 up, they’re not going to want 10 extra minutes to deal with because of an unfortunate situation. Added time only really works when the opposition is blatantly delaying a throw in or goal kick etc, because that acts as punishment for the negative acts.

 

[Blue Lion]

I don't think there's a recorded instance in football history of a ref adding time on at the end of the game that equates to the amount of time the ball was not in play. If we keep matches at 90 minutes and accurately add on another half hour that "fixes" the problem, but it also fundamentally changes the fitness levels we expect from footballers and the length of time fans stay at games - fans staying at the ground well past 5pm every Saturday etc. It's unfeasible and there's also no other sport that operates like this. Have rugby and all American sports got it wrong or are we the crazy ones?

Added time isn't supposed to perfectly match the amount of time that the balls not in play. It's basically just for substitutions, treating injuries, time wasting, disciplinary stuff and goal celebrations (and now VAR too). I doubt anyone expects to see the ball in play for 90 minutes per game. Personally I don't think there's a problem with goal kicks and stuff being part of each 45 minutes because it keeps the game flowing quickly, but that's just my opinion of course.

With regards to stopping the clock, it would definitely help to more accurately make up for lost time during games rather than the token three or four minutes that we usually get. But it wouldn't shorten the matchday experience at all - if anything, it may well encourage loads more drinks breaks and team talks than we currently have because there wouldn't be the urgency to not waste time any more (if that makes sense). NFL games literally take hours because of the amount of time between plays - and they overrun far more than football matches. In my opinion football is already one of the fastest paced sports out there. The only time I really notice games going slowly is for time wasting, which happens American football and rugby as well.

Good debate this btw

 

[springerbfc]

I really don't want to see a central clock brought in which is stopped every single time the ball is not "in play". That might work for the NBA, NFL etc. but is not necessary in football in my view and would risk slowing down the game.

Time wasting is already catered for in the rules and referees have discretion to add time on for major breaks etc. It is otherwise up to each team to get on with things as quickly as they want.

My preference would be for referees to stamp down hard on time wasting and for the half time break to be reduced to a minimum of 10 minutes so that the second half can, by and large, start on time.

Part of the wonder of attending a live game used to be racing back to the car after the final whistle to catch Sports Report on 5Live.

 

[Jerry]

My preference would be for referees to stamp down hard on time wasting and for the half time break to be reduced to a minimum of 10 minutes so that the second half can, by and large, start on time.

Always used to be 10 minutes when I started going to games, not sure when or why it was changed but I suspect it was so that TV could get an extra ad break in during the half time.

Isn't it still 10 minutes in Scotland which is why their full times come through before the English ones?

 

[springerbfc]

Always used to be 10 minutes when I started going to games, not sure when or why it was changed but I suspect it was so that TV could get an extra ad break in during the half time.

I understand it was because of TV coverage but cannot find anything substantial to validate.

If we have to have time for commercial breaks etc. then it's 15 minutes half time for all televised games, 15 minutes half time but reduced in line with time added on to the first half (minimum 10 minutes) for all other games.

 

[Vanni]

It is simply not true that it is '20 seconds here and there'.

Here's a YT video of the whole Chile-Colombia match. Watch the first 'goal' (16m20s) and then watch the second 'goal' (1h18m20s) and then tell me if it's 20 secs here and there before play resumes. FWIW, only 4 mins were added on at the end of the 90 mins.

 

[springerbfc]

Wow, that's insane! Over 3 minutes it took for them to disallow the goal.

It probably won't make any difference but could situations like this start to put people off going to PL games?

I cannot imagine how it must feel to be sitting in a stadium waiting 3 minutes for the most marginal of decisions to be called to reverse whatever has just happened on the pitch.

 

[Steve_Wafc]

It is simply not true that it is '20 seconds here and there'.

Here's a YT video of the whole Chile-Colombia match. Watch the first 'goal' (16m20s) and then watch the second 'goal' (1h18m20s) and then tell me if it's 20 secs here and there before play resumes. FWIW, only 4 mins were added on at the end of the 90 mins.

I’m assuming this is aimed at me, but not 100%. Anyway, the “20 seconds here and there” comment was connected to my own personal restructuring of VAR. I know it’s not 20 seconds now, it’s being applied poorly, that’s why I came up with the hypothetical plans. 20 seconds for 4 officials to make an individual yes or no decision and then tally up the votes to see which one is the preferred option and if it’s a stalemate, then it can’t be given. That would be my plan.

 

[Fyldefan]

I dont see why they need to let the ref have the final say on these things. He then has to jog over to the screen and seemingly take an age reviewing the footage. As somebody above has said, why not just let those watching the screen decide. Cuts the time right down

 

[Fyldefan]

NO. No. No! How long would this take? The pure joy of football, for a fan is in the instant the ball hits the net and the referee turns and points to the centre circle. Any delay in that process kills the moment and sucks all the excitement out of it. There is NO NEED AT ALL for this shit, there never was and there never will be, we just need grown ups to behave like grown ups. The ref gets it wrong? Big deal, did anybody die? And don't come back to me about how much money is at stake, I don't give a fuck about the money, if money is the only excuse you can come up with, you have no excuse for it, at all.



If you set aside your prejudices, you will see that I am usually right on most things.



Are you fucking kidding me? You're fucking kidding me aren't you!




What the fuck are you talking about? You want to wait up to 30 seconds for permission to go crazy and celebrate? You want to ruin football for everyone and forever, because Maradonna once cheated against us? Nobody goves a fuck about that goal anymore, we moved on, you know why- because we're adults, we're grown ups, it's what we do. Christ! Have a word with yourself lad, give your head a wobble!

All that and not one single emoji. B2TF you're slacking

 

[Kim Jong Un]

Just to add a little comment to this thread.

I despise VAR and what it represents with every bone in my body.

 

[springerbfc]

I completely agree. However, I think it's here to stay for top flight games.

 

[Shotsfan1993]

VAR would have stopped that cheating tw@t Maradona in his tracks - he would have been red carded for the "hands of god goal" and the cheats career ruined. I'm all for it - if it can be done correctly and within 30 seconds.

That sort of incident is what VAR is for - clear, obvious errors by the referee. Instead, they are using it for very subjective decisions where the initial decision was better than the VAR decision