VAR

It has its good and bad points. It does eventually get the correct decision but that delay and uncertainty really kills the whole celebration of the “ Goal “. it’s never going to completely stop mistakes from happening when it comes to penalties given for handball etc because it’s still only the refs opinion.
 
Where you stand on it essentially tells us what you think football is for: storytelling, narrative and the moment; or a rigorous competition where the rules must always be upheld and adhered to.

I also think most people's gripes are with its implication, not with its actual use.
 
Graemeh89 said:
It has its good and bad points. It does eventually get the correct decision but that delay and uncertainty really kills the whole celebration of the “ Goal “. it’s never going to completely stop mistakes from happening when it comes to penalties given for handball etc because it’s still only the refs opinion.
Click to expand...
This is why I don’t really like it but it does get the correct decisions I suppose.
 
ClockworkOrange said:
Where you stand on it essentially tells us what you think football is for: storytelling, narrative and the moment; or a rigorous competition where the rules must always be upheld and adhered to.
Click to expand...

Nah don’t agree. I can see both sides , I don’t particularly like it , but I can see the benefit of having it when you see spurs going through tonight. If rangers had that goal disallowed people would be on here screaming that refs are corrupt because it was offside but given
( which it would have been if not for var )

With VAR , the correct decision was made.
 
dt17 said:
Only if your arm is in an unnatural position otherwise how is that fair? If your arm is tucked into your body and the ball happens to hit it the player shouldn't be penalised.
Click to expand...
In that instance I agree, your hand hasn't stopped the ball going in...Because had it not hit your hand it's hitting your body?
Going back to the previous analogy, if you kick it over the bar it's a corner, not an OG.
To me it's quite logical and already the rules of the game in so many other examples.
 
Why did they need to check Llorente's goal for so long to see if it brushed his arm on the way past. Even if it did it can hardly be seen as handball as arm wasn't in a unnatural position was against his body.

Clear and obvious error's by the referee is when it was meant to be used but it looks like it's brought in for nearly everything.
 
JW1988 said:
Genuinely think that’s the most batshit crazy thing I’ve seen in football.
Imagine being a city fan, imagine being sterling denied a hat trick.
Imagine being a spurs fan.

Nuts
Click to expand...

It was crazy, I am with cabin crew from New Zealand and they are spurs daft! Mental mental game
 
It's crazy to me the argument against VAR seems to be its spoiling the enjoyment and euphoria for fans and players when a goal or decision gets RIGHTLY overruled. I just want to see the correct decision getting made more times than not. VAR 100 % yes for me.
 
Aye can you imagine the uproar on here if we got knocked out of the quarter finals of a European competition due to an offside goal.
 
I’ve noticed they take an age to make a decision then barely add on any additional injury time to compensate.
 
It won’t work up here by the way, far too corrupt. The Spurs ‘handball’ goal was the correct decision but could you imagine a Scottish ref having the balls to give that for us? They’d be analyzing at every opportunity, looking for an excuse.
 
I disagree. The ref should still make the final call. All VAr does is tell him he might have missed something and to "advise him" to take a second look. As for players surrounding him, I agree with you there, but its the same when they surround officials for a penalty call or start waving invisible cards to get opponents booked. Maybe we should have a rule where any player getting within 5 yrds of an official when he's consulting the linesman or talking with VAR should be an automatic yellow card, just like taking your shirt off when you score
 
Fife flyer said:
Tonight proves that it causes as many problems as it solves
Click to expand...
I think it worked well tonight. Harsh on City but the offside call was correct and the Lorente goal was indecisive. VAR is only supposed overturn the original decision if its a clear and obvious error, Lorente's goal was a tough call but ultimately It wasn't clear it hit his arm. I saw two angles and both looked clearly different. On one I would swear it hit his arm, in the other, I was convinced it came off the City player's hand. Ultimately it will get more calls right than wrong imho, and be good for the game.
 
trevor_steven said:
I just think its going to take a bit of getting used to.

If it wasn't for VAR Manchester City would wrongly be in the draw for the Champions League Semi Final. It's incidents like tonight that have made me come round to the idea of it.
Click to expand...
I don’t believe that. I think if there was no var, the linesman wouldnhave has the balls to call it correctly. He just sat back and let tech take over.
 
dt17 said:
...and that tonight is why we have VAR.
Click to expand...

That should read why we shouldn’t.
The Spurs goal was a good goal in my opinion but VARMARSE as I know call it should have meant it didn’t count as it hit his hand first. Clearly the ref then made a judgement call which he’s not supposed to do with this goofy assed system. It’s not ready for prime time and should be punted.
 
Eckhailitchenko said:
VAR is pish and instant replay in the NFL is a joke. Just slows the game down and makes officials lazy. Everyone is still arguing about VAR decisions and Barca were denied a stone wall penalty by it tonight. The players make mistakes and so do refs and linesmen and that's fine as human error is a part of the game that contributes to it being so great.
Down with VAR !
Click to expand...

I disagree. We would benefit greatly from VAR in this country. We'd be around 15 points better off for a start.
 
tottie beck said:
I think it worked well tonight. Harsh on City but the offside call was correct and the Lorente goal was indecisive. VAR is only supposed overturn the original decision if its a clear and obvious error, Lorente's goal was a tough call but ultimately It wasn't clear it hit his arm. I saw two angles and both looked clearly different. On one I would swear it hit his arm, in the other, I was convinced it came off the City player's hand. Ultimately it will get more calls right than wrong imho, and be good for the game.
Click to expand...

The twat on BT sports said about 5 times that the ball hits his knee then after the game calls it right and says it hits his hips.

The offside call was correct however are we going to analyse every f'n goal?

VAR meant for obvious mistakes not marginal ones and the advantage should be given to the attackers!
 
I don’t like VAR as its now becoming more important than the game itself, its taking over and I say this as someone who embraces change
 
Eckhailitchenko said:
That should read why we shouldn’t.
The Spurs goal was a good goal in my opinion but VARMARSE as I know call it should have meant it didn’t count as it hit his hand first. Clearly the ref then made a judgement call which he’s not supposed to do with this goofy assed system. It’s not ready for prime time and should be punted.
Click to expand...

Just because the ball hits your hand doesn't mean it's a hand ball / foul though. His arm was tucked into his body, the ball came at him from about a yard away therefore he didn't have time to react and in order for him to move his arm out the way he'd need to chop it off.

Surely it has to be a deliberate hand ball or making your body bigger, ie. your arm is in an unnatural position?
 
For those who think it will benefit us do you think that the mentally challengeds goal in the first game would have been chopped off because of the foul on Tav? Don't be ridiculous!
 
Gotta disagree with the OP - the ref should be the only one calling the tunes via VAR. If it is a decision slightly open to interpretation then it should be the ref's interpretation of the rule and not some faceless gimp sitting in a darkened room. This is the only way we will get some sort of consistency.

The only decision solely made by VAR is the offside rule - but that should be an open and shut case.
 
Rt. Hon. Bearman said:
If it wasn’t for VAR Spurs would now be out of the CL due to an incorrect decision being made.

We can talk about the ‘flow’ of a game but surely correct decisions matter more than anything else?

Would you be content for Rangers to be unjustly knocked out of a cup or losing the title due to the absence of VAR?

No one likes getting beat but when VAR shows you have been beaten fairly then it lessens the pain somewhat.

There’s nothing worse in professional sport than cheating and injustice.
Click to expand...

And a video ref from the sfa will put an end to all the cheating we have seen this season, right ?
 
Jist of it is. No one was even thinking VAR when Sterling scored. It totally killed the game and spectacle. I reckon most folk were thing just %^*& off with this.
Spurs have been incredibly lucky since even the early group games.
Pity there was no VAR in 67 mind. And the idea that we might benefit from VAR is the very reason it won't be brought in.
 
biggee said:
Jist of it is. No one was even thinking VAR when Sterling scored. It totally killed the game and spectacle. I reckon most folk were thing just %^*& off with this.
Spurs have been incredibly lucky since even the early group games.
Pity there was no VAR in 67 mind. And the idea that we might benefit from VAR is the very reason it won't be brought in.
Click to expand...

How did it kill the game? It made the correct decision meaning the right team went through...if anything it added more drama.
 
VAR is 100% a good thing. One change I would make is that I'd have it shown on screens in grounds where available. Watching last night, I think it makes the spectator see the decision the ref has to make, it makes us feel a part of the game almost. It was definitely exciting last night, and the delays weren't nearly as bad as we saw last year in the English league cup.
 
dt17 said:
Aye can you imagine the uproar on here if we got knocked out of the quarter finals of a European competition due to an offside goal.
Click to expand...

Exactly what I was thinking.

If that had been Rangers trying to get through to a CL semi-final and an offside goal denied us, you can guarantee the uproar, outrage and demands for VAR to be used.

VAR gets a crucial game and competition-defining absolutely correct twice and folk are complaining about it.

No solution will ever truly make everyone happy.
 
Eckhailitchenko said:
That should read why we shouldn’t.
The Spurs goal was a good goal in my opinion but VARMARSE as I know call it should have meant it didn’t count as it hit his hand first. Clearly the ref then made a judgement call which he’s not supposed to do with this goofy assed system. It’s not ready for prime time and should be punted.
Click to expand...

VAR can simply highlight to a referee something he may have missed in the build-up, which allows him to review and make a call on. That's what happened. They gave him the opportunity to review the potential handball so he could decide whether to rule the goal out - he decided not to, which was the correct decision.

VAR is not there to over-rule or dictate to the ref - that's why it's Video ASSISTANT Referee.
 
I get VAR "ruined" a potentially epic end to that match with a City winner but all the correct calls were made thankfully and the includes all the 2nd legs of the Quarter Finals.
 
Ted Rangers said:
VAR is 100% a good thing. One change I would make is that I'd have it shown on screens in grounds where available. Watching last night, I think it makes the spectator see the decision the ref has to make, it makes us feel a part of the game almost. It was definitely exciting last night, and the delays weren't nearly as bad as we saw last year in the English league cup.
Click to expand...

I think the reason they probably don't is in case the crowd can influence the decision?
 
so cal bear said:
Needs to go, the end to that game was batshit crazy. Fine as a neutral watchijg on tv, but %^*& being a fan at that game.
Click to expand...

This to me is the big problem. Possibly makes sense on TV with commentary and endless replays but it was clear as they panned round the stadium that the fans were confused about what was going on.

Soon we'll have players scoring but not celebrating right away but instead waiting until the goal is confirmed.
 
dt17 said:
I think the reason they probably don't is in case the crowd can influence the decision?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I don't think they're allowed to. Probably same reason they don't show replays of general incidents on the big screens at Ibrox during matches. Think you only see replays of the goals.
 
dt17 said:
I think the reason they probably don't is in case the crowd can influence the decision?
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think that is the reason. It happens in other sports though, rugby being the most obvious comparison...although the referee's in that sport are generally much stronger than football's.
 
My argument against VAR is not about the correct decisions but the fact that it could become detrimental to the atmosphere and supporters in the stadium. A few more calls like the end of the man city, spurs game ( albeit the correct decision) could result in supporters and players not celebrating goals in fear of them being dissallowed.
 
slacker said:
This to me is the big problem. Possibly makes sense on TV with commentary and endless replays but it was clear as they panned round the stadium that the fans were confused about what was going on.
Click to expand...

Doubt they were confused, just bricking it with tension. The screens display the decision once made (and presumably the reason for the review while it's happening).
 
dt17 said:
Aye can you imagine the uproar on here if we got knocked out of the quarter finals of a European competition due to an offside goal.
Click to expand...

We'd all be saying the ref was good, he let the game flow without worrying about stupid niggly things like offsides.. .
 
Flying Fullback said:
Two correct decisions and no mistakes proves it causes problems :confused:
Click to expand...

I really don't get the headlines this morning about VAR "controversy". If it got the decisions wrong, then it would be controversial. Last night it just did exactly what it was implemented for. It got two critical decisions absolutely correct and avoided an unjust result via a goal that would have otherwise been incorrectly allowed and put Spurs out of the tournament.
 
For those conspiracy theorists, I'd say VAR gives biased refs less place to hide as they can't claim they didn't see something after watching it being replayed a 100 times.
 
Bluenose1979 said:
Doubt they were confused, just bricking it with tension. The screens display the decision once made (and presumably the reason for the review while it's happening).
Click to expand...

They showed the screens on TV I think. Just said VAR review.

Was it the Man Utd vs PSG game where they spent five minutes trying to work out whether the ball went out for a throw at the other end of the pitch at the start of a long passage of play which led to the goal. Not a hope in hell that the fans there knew what was being reviewed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top