VAR

[From Despair To Where?]

Was against VAR before tonight but open to improvements in the system. But after tonight, I'm shocked anyone can defend it. So many errors in that 3rd goal, Scotland's sub problem, the retake of the penalty was ludicrous and the referee failing to add any injury time when it nearly took 10 minutes. VAR is the collapse of an already rapidly declining game IMO unless they fix it very quickly

The VAR decision was technically correct, the problem in this instance is FIFA making a tweak to the rules in a way that appears designed to justify the use of VAR. The other bullshit last night is firmly down to the officials.

The other issue for me is that, if you look at the France game the other night, VAR gets used to judge that the keeper is 5cm off their line but isn't used to judge that 3 French players were encroaching when the penalty was taken.

[6ft Kerplunk]

Keepers have been getting away with moving forward off the line for years especially in penalty shootouts. I'm all for them getting pulled up for it. Had thought the rule change that only one foot has to be on the line/behind the line was pretty fair. I should probably read up on it again but doesn't encroachment only come into it if the penalty is missed and comes back into play?

[sheshnu]

If a penalty is missed (saved or whatever) then play restarts with a goal kick these days, so there's no point in encroaching.

Actually that may only start next season, I haven't been watching any of the holiday football.

[Silver Fox]

Fvcking VAR is going to ruin football, absolute nonsense, I'm so glad we're still in the championship next year and won't have to put up with it

[Winston Biscuit]

Fvcking VAR is going to ruin football, absolute nonsense, I'm so glad we're still in the championship next year and won't have to put up with it

fingers crossed League 1 won't have it the season after next as well!

[paultheroyal]

Fvcking VAR is going to ruin football, absolute nonsense, I'm so glad we're still in the championship next year and won't have to put up with it

Totally agree and been saying it for years. Took over seven minutes to sort all that out - and Ref played 4 of which the time wasn't stopped for any shenanighans in that 4.

Under VAR - it will now be possible to save a penalty. Just put it low left or low right and the keeper is not stopping that. The days of the chip penalty will be at an end.

[Winston Biscuit]

VAR is bent as f*ck

[6ft Kerplunk]

Under VAR - it will now be possible to save a penalty. Just put it low left or low right and the keeper is not stopping that. The days of the chip penalty will be at an end.

No keeper is going to stop a perfectly taken penalty. The rule hasn't been changed that much, they couldn't move forward before they just used to be able to get away with it 99% of the time. They can still move left or right get the not perfect ones. Keeper's will still gamble and dive early so the chipped ones will still go in.

[From Despair To Where?]

I still think that there should be an element of "ref's call" with VAR. If you can't make a clear cut decision after a minute of watching slow motion replays from multiple angles then go with the on field decision.

[Royal Rother]

I still think that there should be an element of "ref's call" with VAR. If you can't make a clear cut decision after a minute of watching slow motion replays from multiple angles then go with the on field decision.

Just been announced that the PL will NOT be using VAR on keepers at penalties next season. TFFT.

[Sanguine]

I still think that there should be an element of "ref's call" with VAR. If you can't make a clear cut decision after a minute of watching slow motion replays from multiple angles then go with the on field decision.

Illustrates where VAR is going wrong - things should only be referred to the referee if VAR thinks that a clear and obvious error has occurred. By definition those should be the quickest to resolve, and where the referee reviews the replay and is unsure, his original decision should stand.

[genome]

I just find it funny that VAR is meant to eliminate controversial decisions and endless debate over referee calls and instead it has just replaced it with some different and even more controversial decisions and even more debate.

I called it ages ago. Football has too many grey areas for this system to work as it should.

[Hendo]

I just find it funny that VAR is meant to eliminate controversial decisions and endless debate over referee calls and instead it has just replaced it with some different and even more controversial decisions and even more debate.

I called it ages ago. Football has too many grey areas for this system to work as it should.

Agreed, GDS works and it should work for offsides but for anything else it is wrong to use it.

It isn't like cricket or tennis where there are no real grey areas.

[Sanguine]

It is just being used wrong - and as a result cannot culturally 'bed-in'. As I said before, if used correctly, VAR can't be 'wrong'.

- It should only be used to correct clear and obvious errors.
- Those such errors should be defined by clear protocols.
- Only where those protocols are satisfied should the VAR officials alert the referee.
- VAR officials should make a recommendation based on the footage reviewed.
- Referee makes the final decision within a defined amount of time (if he can't, then there is no clear and obvious error).

At it stands, things are going wrong at almost every stage of the current process, which doesn't seem to be as defined as the above.

Follow the above and there isn't room for error. Yes, football is still a subjective game for the most part, but at worst, if you adhere to that strict process, you get an enhanced subjective decision (i.e. based on review of replays from multiple angles).

I think the key bit missing, and that helps VAR keep falling over, is that I don't think under the current system, VAR officials make any recommendation to the referee. TMO in rugby does, or at least it is a clear two way discussion - the sending off of Sonny Bill Williams against the Lions a great example - it was a subjective decision reached by the two officials (did Williams dangerously lead with the shoulder into the attacker's head?) but the outcome was understood and reach on a clear and logical decision path.

Simply saying to the referee 'ummm, think you might want to look at this' isn't the same thing.

[6ft Kerplunk]

I just find it funny that VAR is meant to eliminate controversial decisions and endless debate over referee calls and instead it has just replaced it with some different and even more controversial decisions and even more debate.

I called it ages ago. Football has too many grey areas for this system to work as it should.

Agreed, GDS works and it should work for offsides but for anything else it is wrong to use it.

It isn't like cricket or tennis where there are no real grey areas.

No real difference between a player being a cm or two offside and a keeper being a cm or two off their line when a penalty is taken. If anything the penalty one is the easier to make a decision on as its based on the goalkeepers feet and a fixed line.
Agree with everything else that's being said that if VAR is used it should only be for clear and obvious errors, should be time limited and match time reset to the time of the event that's been sent for review.

[Sanguine]

Probably coming across as a rugby-phile here that I'm not - but the stopped game clock is another feature of the game that I like. The referee pausing the clock for injury stoppages, substitutions and VAR would take a lot of the uncertainty and subjectivity out of additional time.

[Hoop Blah]

I just find it funny that VAR is meant to eliminate controversial decisions and endless debate over referee calls and instead it has just replaced it with some different and even more controversial decisions and even more debate.

I called it ages ago. Football has too many grey areas for this system to work as it should.

Agreed, GDS works and it should work for offsides but for anything else it is wrong to use it.

It isn't like cricket or tennis where there are no real grey areas.

It can't work for offsides because offside is a subjective decision, it isn't factual as in ball in and out of play.

[BR0B0T]

I still think that there should be an element of "ref's call" with VAR. If you can't make a clear cut decision after a minute of watching slow motion replays from multiple angles then go with the on field decision.

if VAR thinks that a clear and obvious error has occurred. .

lols...even on here we argue about fcuking everything

[BR0B0T]

I just find it funny that VAR is meant to eliminate controversial decisions and endless debate over referee calls and instead it has just replaced it with some different and even more controversial decisions and even more debate.

I called it ages ago. Football has too many grey areas for this system to work as it should.

Agreed, GDS works and it should work for offsides but for anything else it is wrong to use it.

It isn't like cricket or tennis where there are no real grey areas.

It can't work for offsides because offside is a subjective decision

it mostly isn't though...

apart from phase of play which mostly isn't

[Zip]

Nothing wrong with being a rugby phile. I’m one and the video ref works perfectly well in that sport. If anything needs to go to VAR then the ref just needs to stop his watch. As has been said I don’t know why refs can’t stop their watch as soon as a goal is scored, or if a player is injured or if a substitution is made. It works in rugby. It can work in football.

The authorities need to get their act together with VAR. It should be a step in the right direction if used properly.