| On VAR 09:01 - May 16 with 1307 views | hype313 |
Wouldn't it be better if teams had two challenges per game akin to Tennis and Cricket? That way if anyone feels really hard done by they can review it? Keep Goal line technology obviously, but rather than having multiple reviews, you limit it? |  |
| |  |
| On VAR on 09:11 - May 16 with 1001 views | Guthrum |
That would be best. With (as in Cricket, Rugby and American Football) clear evidence required to overrule the on-field decision.
The other thing I might add in is if the ref fails to spot a physical infraction (e.g. an off-the-ball shove/trip/punch), then the VAR can draw it to his attention at the next break in play and, if necessary, the pitch official can show a card. |  |
| |
| On VAR on 09:14 - May 16 with 987 views | homer_123 |
| On VAR on 09:11 - May 16 by Guthrum |
That would be best. With (as in Cricket, Rugby and American Football) clear evidence required to overrule the on-field decision.
The other thing I might add in is if the ref fails to spot a physical infraction (e.g. an off-the-ball shove/trip/punch), then the VAR can draw it to his attention at the next break in play and, if necessary, the pitch official can show a card. |
I think this is actually even worse.
It will slow the game down even more. You can see teams using theirs strategically to break up play, slow it down etc.
VAR simply isn't needed.
Part and parcel of what makes football what it is - is 'decisions' - it's the human element that we all love and hate in equal measure.
VAR was brought in to deal with issues around obvious errors - it actually has made things worse on that front. As well as actually not being needed as generally ref and lino's got over 90% of calls right. |  |
| |
| On VAR on 09:17 - May 16 with 969 views | rickw |
| On VAR on 09:14 - May 16 by homer_123 |
I think this is actually even worse.
It will slow the game down even more. You can see teams using theirs strategically to break up play, slow it down etc.
VAR simply isn't needed.
Part and parcel of what makes football what it is - is 'decisions' - it's the human element that we all love and hate in equal measure.
VAR was brought in to deal with issues around obvious errors - it actually has made things worse on that front. As well as actually not being needed as generally ref and lino's got over 90% of calls right. |
Most of the time it isn't, but in a years time if someone punches in a winner to relegate us we'll all be calling for it.
I think FIFA just need to allow different federations to try different ways of using it, one league could try the 2 appeals method, maybe another could have replays on a big screen and the whole stadium hear the conversation between the officials each time the game is stopped similar to Rugby. I'm sure other countries/leagues would try different things as well, eventually all leagues will change to whatever method seems to work best |  |
| |
| On VAR on 09:24 - May 16 with 931 views | pointofblue |
| On VAR on 09:14 - May 16 by homer_123 |
I think this is actually even worse.
It will slow the game down even more. You can see teams using theirs strategically to break up play, slow it down etc.
VAR simply isn't needed.
Part and parcel of what makes football what it is - is 'decisions' - it's the human element that we all love and hate in equal measure.
VAR was brought in to deal with issues around obvious errors - it actually has made things worse on that front. As well as actually not being needed as generally ref and lino's got over 90% of calls right. |
Though I'd argue that that is due to the incompetence of officials in this country rather than VAR itself. It seems to work better abroad and in international.competitions. |  |
| |
| On VAR on 09:25 - May 16 with 919 views | tractorboy1978 |
| On VAR on 09:17 - May 16 by rickw |
Most of the time it isn't, but in a years time if someone punches in a winner to relegate us we'll all be calling for it.
I think FIFA just need to allow different federations to try different ways of using it, one league could try the 2 appeals method, maybe another could have replays on a big screen and the whole stadium hear the conversation between the officials each time the game is stopped similar to Rugby. I'm sure other countries/leagues would try different things as well, eventually all leagues will change to whatever method seems to work best |
I wouldn't. I've coped perfectly fine in the last 27 years I've been watching us play without it. We've had bad decisions go for us and against us. Can cope with an honest human error in real time, but I cannot cope with officials still making poor decisions with access to multiple replays from multiple angles. And none of it is worth the detriment it has been to the experience of watching football in a stadium and never feeling like you can properly celebrate a goal. I think some will only appreciate this next year when they feel it and see it with their own eyes. | | | |
| On VAR on 09:26 - May 16 with 912 views | Guthrum |
| On VAR on 09:14 - May 16 by homer_123 |
I think this is actually even worse.
It will slow the game down even more. You can see teams using theirs strategically to break up play, slow it down etc.
VAR simply isn't needed.
Part and parcel of what makes football what it is - is 'decisions' - it's the human element that we all love and hate in equal measure.
VAR was brought in to deal with issues around obvious errors - it actually has made things worse on that front. As well as actually not being needed as generally ref and lino's got over 90% of calls right. |
You can't slow the game down that much with only a couple of appeals. Trying to pull a fast one will be shown up to everybody*. Plus if you waste them on that, they aren't available when actually needed (e.g. a penalty given, or not, wrongly).
* All video reviews should be shown on the big screens, to keep the crowd engaged. | |
| |
| On VAR on 09:27 - May 16 with 906 views | Basuco |
The big question for me is, why does English VAR take an absolutely ages when other Countries take a few seconds? And the Premier League referees still manage to get so many decisions wrong after watching multiple slow motion replays? Mistakes always seem to benefit the big clubs as well. Or is this just me that thinks that? |  | | |
| On VAR on 09:28 - May 16 with 900 views | JammyDodgerrr |
Thing is with the review system compared to other sports, is football is quite a low-scoring games. Even with just two reviews - they are always going to be used on goals and it won't really change anything. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| On VAR on 09:30 - May 16 with 883 views | TRUE_BLUE123 |
Not sure that would work.
Just get rid I say. |  |
| |
| On VAR on 10:01 - May 16 with 828 views | homer_123 |
| On VAR on 09:26 - May 16 by Guthrum |
You can't slow the game down that much with only a couple of appeals. Trying to pull a fast one will be shown up to everybody*. Plus if you waste them on that, they aren't available when actually needed (e.g. a penalty given, or not, wrongly).
* All video reviews should be shown on the big screens, to keep the crowd engaged. |
Sometimes, you have to accept that something isn't working or fit for purpose.
This is one of them. No matter how you tweak it, VAR isn't fit for purpose.
Two things, it really wasn't needed in the first instance. Officials were getting over 90% of decisions right anyway. The money invested in VAR would have been better spent upping the level of officiating.
Secondly, it's introduction has taken something from the game, certainly from a fans perspective. An unintended consequence maybe but still, these 'injustices' are part and parcel of the game - each club has their own (we certainly have) and it's part of footballs DNA.
For me, it needs to be removed. | |
| |
| On VAR on 10:05 - May 16 with 810 views | baxterbasics |
My suggestion:
VAR only gets consulted at the request of either a captain or a manager.
There is no limit to the number of requests, but if it is deemed a frivolous challenge the requestor can be yellow carded. This way they will only request if they are really certain a decision went against them unfairly. |  |
| |
| On VAR on 10:07 - May 16 with 802 views | Swansea_Blue |
I don't like the sound of that. What happens if there's a clear error missed on the field once the appeals have been used up? VAR would then be impotent. You'd have all the tech and be paying people to sit there, but not able to used them when most needed. |  |
| |
| On VAR on 10:10 - May 16 with 797 views | vilanovablue |
The issue with VAR here seems to be the people in charge of implementing it, not sure how we fix that particular issue. |  | | |
| On VAR on 11:02 - May 16 with 746 views | Bellevue_Blue |
| On VAR on 10:07 - May 16 by Swansea_Blue |
I don't like the sound of that. What happens if there's a clear error missed on the field once the appeals have been used up? VAR would then be impotent. You'd have all the tech and be paying people to sit there, but not able to used them when most needed. |
With any challenge system like suggested, you would keep the challenge if the on field decision was deemed to be incorrect.
So you would only not have a challenge if you had previously wasted them attempting to change 'correct' decisions and as such the blame then falls on that captain/ manager for wasting them.
It's a win win because it speeds up the game, means that we don't hyper analyse every goal/ incident and you get that spontaneous aspect because teams will waste challenges. [Post edited 16 May 11:10]
| | | |
| On VAR on 13:04 - May 16 with 664 views | eireblue |
I read another very intelligent poster suggest this on another thread. I think you are onto something.
It may have an interesting effect on the interactions between players and refs.
Rather than the players earnestly trying to explain to the ref why and how the decision just made was wrong, ref can say, captain, want to review, no..so let’s get on with it then. |  | | |
| On VAR on 13:15 - May 16 with 638 views | Blue_badge |
Some good ideas expressed in this thread on making VAR more effective. I'm generally in support of getting rid of it totally and relying on the element of chance that human led decisions involve - but then I think back to that Alan Hudson "goal" against us in 1970... |  | | |
| On VAR on 13:35 - May 16 with 618 views | DarkBrandon |
No. How many goals do you see without someone having their hands in the air appealing for something? An offside. A foul. You’d end up with at least 75% of goals reviewed for something or another. Why not? What would you be saving your review for if not goals.
And even if a goal wasn’t reviewed, nobody could celebrate until the opposing captain had spoken to the senior players, the manager and the ref and agreed it wasn’t worth using up a review.
You could perhaps limit this a bit if you had to ask for something in particular to be reviewed. A ball out of play. A foul. But then you’d end up with VAR stopping the game, able to rule on the specifics of the challenge, but not able to review on anything else. Which would be farcical.
I’m much less concerned about increasing the percentage of decisions that are correct, than I am in maintaining the sense of elation when a goal goes in. Lose that and football is gone. |  | | |
| On VAR on 13:35 - May 16 with 616 views | DarkBrandon |
| On VAR on 09:28 - May 16 by JammyDodgerrr |
Thing is with the review system compared to other sports, is football is quite a low-scoring games. Even with just two reviews - they are always going to be used on goals and it won't really change anything. |
Yup | | | |
| On VAR on 13:38 - May 16 with 602 views | lazyblue |
No | | | |
| On VAR on 13:48 - May 16 with 577 views | Bellevue_Blue |
| On VAR on 13:35 - May 16 by DarkBrandon |
No. How many goals do you see without someone having their hands in the air appealing for something? An offside. A foul. You’d end up with at least 75% of goals reviewed for something or another. Why not? What would you be saving your review for if not goals.
And even if a goal wasn’t reviewed, nobody could celebrate until the opposing captain had spoken to the senior players, the manager and the ref and agreed it wasn’t worth using up a review.
You could perhaps limit this a bit if you had to ask for something in particular to be reviewed. A ball out of play. A foul. But then you’d end up with VAR stopping the game, able to rule on the specifics of the challenge, but not able to review on anything else. Which would be farcical.
I’m much less concerned about increasing the percentage of decisions that are correct, than I am in maintaining the sense of elation when a goal goes in. Lose that and football is gone. |
Is the elation of a goal actually going to be impacted that much, you just celebrate and then hope/ assume the goal stands. The elation is only really impacted when the goal is not given and you don't celebrate and then it gets changed to a goal.
This idea that people are just sitting on their hands until the goal is officially given is complete nonsense IMO. It's no different to a goal being scored and the ref consulting the linesman before disallowing it.
I understand the point that Football is unique but ask a fan of Rugby, Tennis, American Football if they lose the elation of celebrating a scoring a point/ try/ touchdown etc in that moment and I'm not sure many would say it drastically impacts that initial moment of 'elation' that fans harp on about with VAR. | | | |
| On VAR on 13:51 - May 16 with 570 views | eireblue |
| On VAR on 09:28 - May 16 by JammyDodgerrr |
Thing is with the review system compared to other sports, is football is quite a low-scoring games. Even with just two reviews - they are always going to be used on goals and it won't really change anything. |
If someone was rolling around as though they had been head butted by Thor, it would be quite amusing to see how long that sort of thing continued, if the opposition captain knew that was a fake, and could get a player yellow/red carded for simulation. | | | |
| On VAR on 13:52 - May 16 with 566 views | _clive_baker_ |
Then it just becomes a challenge every time a goal is conceded surely? And pouring over the footage trying to find a reason to rule it out. |  | | |
| On VAR on 13:57 - May 16 with 551 views | Mookamoo |
| On VAR on 09:14 - May 16 by homer_123 |
I think this is actually even worse.
It will slow the game down even more. You can see teams using theirs strategically to break up play, slow it down etc.
VAR simply isn't needed.
Part and parcel of what makes football what it is - is 'decisions' - it's the human element that we all love and hate in equal measure.
VAR was brought in to deal with issues around obvious errors - it actually has made things worse on that front. As well as actually not being needed as generally ref and lino's got over 90% of calls right. |
Not if you add a sanction should the team fail to get the decision overturned.
In American Football, they lose a timeout. Teams here could lose a substitution. |  | | |
| On VAR on 13:58 - May 16 with 544 views | rickw |
| On VAR on 13:52 - May 16 by _clive_baker_ |
Then it just becomes a challenge every time a goal is conceded surely? And pouring over the footage trying to find a reason to rule it out. |
I think the review idea would be limited to 1 per half, then you get it back if correct.
You could always book the captain for timewasting if the review request is found to be completely warrantless. | |
| |
| On VAR on 14:19 - May 16 with 516 views | ipswichtillidie |
Spoke about his with friends years ago. Makes total sense. 1 challenge each half perhaps per captain to rule out howlers. Adds to the drama and responsibility of the captain or Manager to review a decision. Also leaves the officials to officiate and puts some responsibility back on the teams. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
