VAR

[RicoS321]

Into its second season and VAR still an absolute abomination. Last night was a disgrace, with all goals ruined by shitey checks (of nothing). Miovski's especially, even the player looked like he'd stopped caring when the decision was finally made.

However, maybe it's time to separate the handball rule from the VAR issues. We know that the rule was changed explicitly for VAR's implementation, so it's still to blame. The rule itself is a disgrace though, and we can use McKenzie's apparent handball last night as evidence (among many others). That pathetic decision is the equivalent of having a player dive to win a penalty against you. McKenzie has no idea that Rubezic is missing his header and no chance to get his arm out the way (he wasn't even looking at the ball). Upon hitting (glancing) his arm, there is zero advantage to him, and zero disadvantage to the opponent. There are numerous examples where this is the case, and now anytime the ball is in the box, dickheads are screaming "handball", hoping to win this shite lottery. Instead of taking in a rule that prevents cheating, this rule endorses it. By cheating, I mean unsporting behaviour. It's just a shite way to win or draw any game. It's knowing you've won by diving or getting a goal when you're ten yards offside (no longer a thing).

What strikes me as strange is that nobody is talking about it. Everyone talks about it in the past tense "well you just can't have your hand out in the modern game". As if we, the people who watch, play, pundit the sport are completely incapable of influencing those that make the rules. They should be raging about it and asking for a return to the previous rule. This one has very obviously failed, by introducing an unsporting result to the game. The previous rule, where the referee decided on intention, was significantly better and less prone to unsporting decision. Just take it back. It's bizarre that the supposed experts in our game aren't kicking up a real fuss about this. It's anti-sport bollocks. It'd be interesting to see what VAR would be like if it wasn't tainted by the shite handball rule change that accompanied it (still shite on last night's viewing!).

[OrlandoDon]

I’ll give my two cents. Has var made the game better, no. We’re seeing penalties/goals given that wouldn’t be given, and aren’t even claimed for at times. Even the slightest of offside by a pube is now offside. I’d rather we just stuck with refs and training them to improve. Every game someone looks to var for assistance, that’s not always for the good of the game. I don’t think var has worked.

[Jute]

Agree with Rico and Orlando on this. I honestly don’t think VAR has done anything to improve the game especially for those attending matches. Handball rule is an abomination that could only have only been invented by someone who has never played the game. 

[RicoS321]

Just watched the highlights from yesterday. A lot of stoppages there. Overall, the game didn't benefit from VAR. The linesman flagged for their disallowed first, correctly, so VAR adds nothing. The linesman - I think - doesn't flag for their second offside goal which VAR disallowed, but given that it was about a minute between that and the ball going in, I don't think the game benefits from VAR intervening - we should have just defended better. Neither pen was worth the hassle, neither being deliberate. Arguably, Gogic's was "worse" in that his forearm was further from his body, but it's being used as momentum for the block and his hand isn't raised way in the air. The on-field decisions to play on would have been fine a few years ago, and would still be to this day for me. Finally, the double touch decision perfectly highlights why VAR doesn't work. You'd need a lot of physics and maths to get a definitive answer on whether the ball touches his standing foot. In my opinion, there is not a single replay or still that can definitively show the ball hitting the standing foot (I haven't seen all shots). It appears that the spin of the ball is the defining factor for some. I can see the justification for that, but the question is: is it possible for that spin to have been generated by the player? Given that he slips and contacts the ball in a strange way, I think it probably is possible to catch the ball with a rising foot and generate a weird top-spin. The bottom line is that it's impossible for VAR to intervene there, despite the suggestion on Sportsound and Sportscene that it should have. I think the guys in the VAR room probably made the right call in saying that there was no clear and obvious error, or simply that they had nae fuckin idea. I think VAR is generally fairly speculative the majority of the time too. I think that yesterday's game is very eloquent proof of its shiteness, and that is that it hasn't improved the game.

Incidentally, we'll now get 20 seconds of a two minute's highlight package showing a referee waiting for a VAR call, as if it's some sort of exciting spectacle that has greatly enhanced the viewing experience.

[tom_widdows]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68116985

[RicoS321]

17 minutes ago, tom_widdows said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68116985

Jesus fucking Christ. That's all we need. Another game of fucking football. It is the logical conclusion of a sport trying to get every single decision "correct". Right lads, try it again from the top, nobody goes home until we get this right.

[OrlandoDon]

16 minutes ago, RicoS321 said:

Jesus fucking Christ. That's all we need. Another game of fucking football. It is the logical conclusion of a sport trying to get every single decision "correct". Right lads, try it again from the top, nobody goes home until we get this right.

I just read this. Another reason to scrap var, we never get things 100% right, why make it harder.

[Jute]

I am getting to the stage where I do not want to attend games with VAR. It is killing the game. 

[OrlandoDon]

So how much does var cost clubs and the governing body? Radical thinking but what if we put that money into referee development and training instead? Are we able to cancel bar much like we added it during a season? 

var has created a different sport, this week alone without var we’d lose to st Johnstone and arguably we beat hearts today. The hearts fan noise on every play in our box immediately after var rules our goal out was obvious, trying to get var to play for them. Players hounding refs on calls to get var involved, that didn’t happen as much or in certain situations before var.  

the game delays don’t make the game better. Good goals are ruled out, and var creates goals that never should happen. Didn’t see the penalty today but sounds harsh on devlin, var has created var goals that don’t occur without var. it’s not good for the sport.

poor calls were made by human error, in hindsight I can accept that I suppose. Var is are creating goals and changing games, and after every goal scored and conceded we stare at the ref and wonder/hope will var change things. It’s not good for the game.

[RicoS321]

9 hours ago, OrlandoDon said:

So how much does var cost clubs and the governing body? Radical thinking but what if we put that money into referee development and training instead? Are we able to cancel bar much like we added it during a season? 

var has created a different sport, this week alone without var we’d lose to st Johnstone and arguably we beat hearts today. The hearts fan noise on every play in our box immediately after var rules our goal out was obvious, trying to get var to play for them. Players hounding refs on calls to get var involved, that didn’t happen as much or in certain situations before var.  

the game delays don’t make the game better. Good goals are ruled out, and var creates goals that never should happen. Didn’t see the penalty today but sounds harsh on devlin, var has created var goals that don’t occur without var. it’s not good for the sport.

poor calls were made by human error, in hindsight I can accept that I suppose. Var is are creating goals and changing games, and after every goal scored and conceded we stare at the ref and wonder/hope will var change things. It’s not good for the game.

VAR goals that don't occur without VAR. That's a good way of putting it. Exactly correct. It'd be interesting to go back through VAR awards and classify then as VAR goals ("of VAR" or not "of VAR") and otherwise. Similarly with decisions against. 

The game was fine before it. What was needed was a complete change of attitude towards referees from the bottom up. I attended an under 15s game the other week and the ref was getting abuse from players, coaches and supporters. As always though, we don't deal with the underlying problem, we use "technology" to deal with the symptoms and then call it progress, accusing anyone who calls it out as anti progress, or a luddite. Then cajoling them by warnings of being "left behind" and other such bollocks which fail to examine which race we're being left behind in (a race off a cliff into a giant pile of elephant shite in this case). In this regard, football is just a mirror to the rest of our world, we must obey the overlord of progress (towards what, is never defined) and technology (and science).

Watching the game yesterday showed how bad things have got and that they will only get worse. It's not just the VAR, it's the entire attention grabbing model that's pursued, so that you can't just enjoy the game. The English game is far worse of course, when everything is just 100mph, with uber-athletes. There wasn't an instant yesterday, watching it, when you were allowed to pause for thought. Every throw-in flashes towards the manager, a player's face, a replay, with no time to digest what you're seeing. They might as well have had strobe lighting, it's so full on. Designed to grab your attention and keep you locked in. No time to see what's happening, the essence entirely stripped out for television - it's no wonder that VAR made sense to those who are television people. It's become a spectacle. The controversy bigger than the game itself. I'd like to at least make it to thirty years of season tickets in a row before I give up though.

Edited January 28 by RicoS321

[wee toon red]

https://www.afc.co.uk/2024/04/10/club-statement-video-assistant-referees/
 

If what the club are saying here is true - that the tech failed but the VAR got involved to overturn an on-field decision using guesswork - then the system and its implementation in Scotland at least is done. There can’t be any coming back from that.

Edited April 10 by wee toon red

[OrlandoDon]

What a bizarre statement. The system failed so they guessed whether the goal should stand and even overturned the on field decision without clear evidence. didnt even tell the ref to take a look.

VAR is broken and needs canned. Awful for our game. And what if we get relegated by a point when that should now clearly have been 3??

[wee toon red]

When you didn't have enough competent refs to run the games up here pre-VAR then it stands to reason that needing more of them to use this system just results in more incompetent people being involved. A joke.

Surely the only appropriate way this should’ve been handled was “sorry ref, the system is down so go with your on-field call”? That fact that it wasn’t just beggars belief.

Edited April 10 by wee toon red

[RicoS321]

Fucking hell that's bad. I have to say, I'm normally fairly critical of our club when it comes to statements, but this one was exactly right. No partisan pish, just sticking to the facts. It has to get canned, hopefully this is the start of the process.

[OrlandoDon]

37 minutes ago, wee toon red said:

When you didn't have enough competent refs to run the games up here pre-VAR then it stands to reason that needing more of them to use this system just results in more incompetent people being involved. A joke.

Surely the only appropriate way this should’ve been handled was “sorry ref, the system is down so go with your on-field call”? That fact that it wasn’t just beggars belief.

Second paragraph says it all. That’s the most basic common sense to me….!?!? You only change a call where it’s a clear and obvious error and that wasn’t the case and couldn’t be verified.

[RicoS321]

1 minute ago, OrlandoDon said:

Second paragraph says it all. That’s the most basic common sense to me….!?!? You only change a call where it’s a clear and obvious error and that wasn’t the case and couldn’t be verified.

It is to us, but as soon as you give these interfering cunts the power to rule, they can't stop themselves. The level of arrogance that it takes to believe that you can better make a decision from a wonky camera angle, than a linesman looking straight across the pitch (it was a freekick too, so the linesman was in the exact position required). Not just arrogance, but it shows that they don't have even a basic understanding of how the system works to overcome 2D parallax, which is the whole fucking purpose of the Hawkeye system. I'd be fucking furious if I was the linesman having his work ruined by those incompetent fuckers. 

Just as important is that they lied to the BBC at the weekend too. The BBC must surely release the details of who they spoke to at the SFA and properly out them on this. There should be resignations. 

[OrlandoDon]

Another game, a semi final, where we’re left scratching our heads with VAR. I guess we’d be scratching our heads with referee calls but I just don’t see how VAR has made the game better. Certainly hasn’t added clarity. It definitely doesn’t add enjoyment, and it’s been a year where VAR seems to have impacts games and results. 
what were the real time referee calls for both incidents today? Didn’t see the scales one, certainly though with the hoilett one a penalty had been awarded??

[RicoS321]

8 hours ago, OrlandoDon said:

Another game, a semi final, where we’re left scratching our heads with VAR. I guess we’d be scratching our heads with referee calls but I just don’t see how VAR has made the game better. Certainly hasn’t added clarity. It definitely doesn’t add enjoyment, and it’s been a year where VAR seems to have impacts games and results. 
what were the real time referee calls for both incidents today? Didn’t see the scales one, certainly though with the hoilett one a penalty had been awarded??

Both calls were as they were if VAR hadn't been there. The Hoilett one saw Robertson blow for a freekick near the spot, making it look like he had given a penalty. He allowed play to continue (in a first for me) to see if we'd score, which caused all the confusion. That is VAR protocol and wouldn't exist without it.

[OrlandoDon]

2 hours ago, RicoS321 said:

Both calls were as they were if VAR hadn't been there. The Hoilett one saw Robertson blow for a freekick near the spot, making it look like he had given a penalty. He allowed play to continue (in a first for me) to see if we'd score, which caused all the confusion. That is VAR protocol and wouldn't exist without it.

The allowing play to continue does not add to the game either, just leads to confusion. Besides blowing late for a free kick because we didn’t gain an advantage/keep possession, how does allowing play to continue help our game??

[RicoS321]

2 hours ago, OrlandoDon said:

The allowing play to continue does not add to the game either, just leads to confusion. Besides blowing late for a free kick because we didn’t gain an advantage/keep possession, how does allowing play to continue help our game??

The idea is that you allow the attacking team to finish their move in case the original call is incorrect. It makes sense (sort of) for offside, as that is an exact yes/no call. It makes zero sense in a subjective call for a foul. You're basically then VARing for a subjective foul and then any other subsequent subjective events afterwards. If the referee sees a foul, then he should always blow for it. I've not seen an incident like ours before, and I'm not sure if the ref's approach was correct.

The reason that you should just blow for a freekick, is otherwise there are two potential ways that exactly the same incident can be refereed. The referee could have let the incident play out and called the penalty (it was a penalty, apparently, that wasn't in question), thus VAR is making the decision on whether there was a foul in the build up. The referee's approach meant he was going to VAR saying: I have given a foul, is that a clear and obvious error. I have no doubt that in this instance, the two approaches would have garnered different results. Quite simply, if the referee thinks something is a freekick, then he gives a freekick. If he isn't sure, then it isn't a freekick. VAR offers nothing with his approach, and all he has done is sought to sway VAR's more accurate decision. Remember, in the case of offside being allowed to continue, the decision made by the onfield linesman has (and can have) no bearing on VARs decision, which is the important distinction. The linesman only actually raises his flag if a goal is scored in order to signal to the crowd, and also to make his decision in case of an issue with the technology. 

I'm glad you took this into the VAR thread, as I don't think the decision necessarily had an impact on the match, and it's not a case of partisan sore loserness, it's just a comment on the technology itself and how it was used.

 

[OrlandoDon]

I think VAR and refereeing in general is now totally out of control. It used to be the case that in good games you didn’t see the ref, or weren’t at least that aware of his presence, and we’d always say we didn’t want the referee to have a heavy influence in the game. VAR ultimately has completely reversed this where every week VAR/the on field ref play a significant part in the outcome. I think that’s what’s so frustrating to fans is that every game has a long stop where VAR/the ref influences a game. How often do we have games now where VAR and the ref don’t influence a game?

I’m speculating but I say a lot, how often is post match pub chat now about VAR and calls versus quality play and players? It dominates the game which cannot be good.

there has to be a sensible step back from the powers that be. Reflect and evaluate priorities. Football is a product for fans and I dont know how many fans say VAR has positively impacted their enjoyment of the game. Many/any?? The beautiful game was not about refs and calls, but it’s now a significant and determining factor.

 

28 minutes ago, RicoS321 said:

The idea is that you allow the attacking team to finish their move in case the original call is incorrect. It makes sense (sort of) for offside, as that is an exact yes/no call. It makes zero sense in a subjective call for a foul. You're basically then VARing for a subjective foul and then any other subsequent subjective events afterwards. If the referee sees a foul, then he should always blow for it. I've not seen an incident like ours before, and I'm not sure if the ref's approach was correct.

The reason that you should just blow for a freekick, is otherwise there are two potential ways that exactly the same incident can be refereed. The referee could have let the incident play out and called the penalty (it was a penalty, apparently, that wasn't in question), thus VAR is making the decision on whether there was a foul in the build up. The referee's approach meant he was going to VAR saying: I have given a foul, is that a clear and obvious error. I have no doubt that in this instance, the two approaches would have garnered different results. Quite simply, if the referee thinks something is a freekick, then he gives a freekick. If he isn't sure, then it isn't a freekick. VAR offers nothing with his approach, and all he has done is sought to sway VAR's more accurate decision. Remember, in the case of offside being allowed to continue, the decision made by the onfield linesman has (and can have) no bearing on VARs decision, which is the important distinction. The linesman only actually raises his flag if a goal is scored in order to signal to the crowd, and also to make his decision in case of an issue with the technology. 

I'm glad you took this into the VAR thread, as I don't think the decision necessarily had an impact on the match, and it's not a case of partisan sore loserness, it's just a comment on the technology itself and how it was used.

 

 

[tom_widdows]

Sickner for Coventry today too

Ex Ref Bobby Madden was on Off the Ball yesterday and said the 'we need it in the SPL so Scottish refs can officiate champions league/ euros etc' claim is bullshit.
He also said he would take VAR back to what it was meant to find such as Henry's handball vs Ireland, Lampard's goal vs Germany.

Paraphrasing:
'If there is any element of doubt leave it to the referee'
VAR for Offside and major errors (Henry handball etc) only'

Just thinking of great moments in past games ive watched that VAR could/ would have ruined.

Aguero vs QPR
Solksjaer vs Bayern Munich
Stan Collymore last minute winner vs Keegan's Newcastle
Mackie vs the Tic in the 2008 quarter final replay
Chris Clark vs Hibs opening day of the season 2002/03
Andy Dow vs SEVCO in the League cup quarter final

and so on

 

[OrlandoDon]

The one I don’t like, much like yesterday, is the foul in the build up. Either call it in the moment or don’t. Call the foul before the goal or play on and allow the goal. Case and point the miovski goal (against Celtic I think, maybe hearts??) where there was the accidental contact with miovski and defender and play continues and he scores. Call it there and then or let the play go. Undermining a ref and picking up on things he missed isn’t the ideal way to work with refs. Let the games flow in the moment.
VAR also takes everything so literal that it manufactures fouls rather than letting the game flow in a natural manner. A number of penalties this year where I just don’t think are really fouls.

Major change needed for the good of the game.

[RicoS321]

8 hours ago, OrlandoDon said:

The one I don’t like, much like yesterday, is the foul in the build up. Either call it in the moment or don’t. Call the foul before the goal or play on and allow the goal. Case and point the miovski goal (against Celtic I think, maybe hearts??) where there was the accidental contact with miovski and defender and play continues and he scores. Call it there and then or let the play go. Undermining a ref and picking up on things he missed isn’t the ideal way to work with refs. Let the games flow in the moment.
VAR also takes everything so literal that it manufactures fouls rather than letting the game flow in a natural manner. A number of penalties this year where I just don’t think are really fouls.

Major change needed for the good of the game.

The foul in the build up never gets called though, the Miovski one you mention was a VAR call after the event that the ref missed. There is no option for VAR to stop play that quickly. The ref on Saturday seems to be an outlier, in that he saw a foul and didn't blow. That only occurs for offside normally.

Agree about the manufacturing of fouls. The Scales one on Saturday would have been such a case if it had been given. A total unintentional handball at point blank range, which everyone can see in real time that the player knows little about. Slow it down and repeat it enough, with the instruction to find a foul in this incident, and you can quickly remove all context and give a penalty. That type of thing wouldn't have even made the highlights a few years ago, and nor would Miovski have been claiming for it. Now, even the most anti-VAR of us are discussing these types of incident in a different way "we've seen them given" etc. We've been drawn into the VAR way of discussing the game.

10 hours ago, tom_widdows said:

Ex Ref Bobby Madden was on Off the Ball yesterday and said the 'we need it in the SPL so Scottish refs can officiate champions league/ euros etc' claim is bullshit.
He also said he would take VAR back to what it was meant to find such as Henry's handball vs Ireland, Lampard's goal vs Germany.

Paraphrasing:
'If there is any element of doubt leave it to the referee'
VAR for Offside and major errors (Henry handball etc) only'

Just thinking of great moments in past games ive watched that VAR could/ would have ruined

First, let's be clear, Bobby Madden is a dick. Secondly, he's talking absolute shite. We've had these discussions from way before VAR's introduction, it was obvious to anyone that it is impossible to limit VAR to those incidents that are "clear and obvious", because there is no possible definition of what that means. Why is anyone even suggesting that after seeing the thing in action? Is he fucking deluded? How, exactly, do you define the Henry incident (the lampard one is easily covered by goalline technology)? Where is the defining marker that makes Henry's incident a "big error", and one that isn't? What happens when the Tims get an error defined as big enough to intervene, and the Huns don't? The answer is that they slowly move back towards where we are now, as was predicted by me and everyone else that discussed VAR before it poisoned our game (in any country). There is no such thing as a clear and obvious error, it has no definition, so Madden can fuck off. Why on earth does he want the game ruining, time wasting, offside shite still to exist too? Is a guy 6mm offside a clear and obvious error that has gained the attacker an unsporting advantage? 20mm? A yard? Are there really that many offside decisions so egregious, where a player has gained a huge advantage, that the technology is worth it? Of course not, because Madden's world doesn't exist. If it did exist, then it'd only intervene in about four occasions per season and would be as worthless as goalline technology.

[tom_widdows]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c4n1ndlknk1o

If they chuck it how long would it take doncaster and co to follow suit?