Agree with Danny Baker but fucking hell he loves moaning about VAR doesn’t he
Good point Danny Baker
Ultimately if VAR means more correct decisions are made than incorrect ones, I simply can’t see any argument that would ever convince me it’s a bad idea. As the technology becomes more sophisticated / quick, it will become a part of the sport.
I would have loved VAR against United when we lost our unbeaten run. They would have got multiple red cards (Ferdinand sent off early for bringing down Ljungberg + van Nistelrooy stamping on Cole) and crucially, no penalty for that Rooney dive.
Remember the Scholes tackle on Reyes in the FA Cup semis in 2004? That was a definitely sending off.
It would certainly mean that Mike Dean would come unstuck when he is the ref in our games
The problem they had last night though was that even after VAR took 3 minutes to come to a decision, a lot of people were still unsure if it was the correct decision. Needs ironing out big time, especially the idea that it should only be used to correct “clear and obvious” errors.
I get that the technology is far from perfect. At the beginning, it’s going to be messy.
What they need is to establish clear guidelines on when it should be used, and the ways in which for example an offside decision will be determined e.g. looking at a specific camera angle depending on the location of the offside, and establishing that if any part of the head or leg is beyond the line then it is offside. At the moment, I think people aren’t even sure about what part of the body can be offside hence the confusion. Or that if there are two angles and one looks on and the other looks off, to give the benefit of the doubt to the attacker etc.
Once there is an established system / guidance on how the decisions ought to be made, then a lot of the inconcistency / not knowing wtf is going on will also be fixed.
Can’t they use bird’s eye view for offside? It’d be a lot easier. Harry kanes last week and derby’s yday.
Freeze at the point the ball leaves the player making the pass’ foot. Go bird’s eye view. See if there is a goalscoring part of the body offside. If it is, offside. If not, onside.
The major problem we have is if the team judged offside decides to appeal. “Playing to the whistle” becomes difficult. What if the opposition team give up? (“Ah he’s offside anyway. Let him have a shot. I’m not saving it”) appeal comes back successful. Goal
Its a television gimmick. Getting the right decision is secondary to the television adding drama. It also means that television becomes more important to the game.
We can all list things that have gone against our team, but we all know we have got away with things as well.
VAR will be chaotic on offside imo. How long would that goal Liverpool had Disallowed at the Emirates been debated this season. Till we have a more clear ruling on offside that needs avoiding at all costs.
In all fairness on decisions we may have gotten with this system in place in the past, we probably dont get away with Sanchez goal against Chelsea at wembley.
I agree that there needs to be clearer guidance on how / when it will be used, and the factors that determine the decision.
Basically, where I see this going (certainly for the top leagues with all the £billions floating around), is that the cameras will become far more advanced and be able to do some crazy 3D mapping and determine based on that whether somebody is offside or not. It’s not outside the realms of possibility that linesman will be rendered obsolete in 20 years time. Provided the technology develops, I envisage a scenario whereby the referee gets an almost instant buzzer notification when a player is offside and he calls it straight away. Of course we are nowhere near that yet, but I can’t find fault in trying to use technology to come to the correct decision. That is the bottom line and although the issue gets obfuscated by inconsistency and delays right now, it is a step in the right direction.
For me, it’s not a question of the technology itself but the clarity in the rules of applying its use.
And for the record, I’ve never subscribed to the “decisions even themselves out over the course of the season”. That’s a nonsense in my book (not saying you do agree with that statement but it’s the oft repeated line by detractors of VAR). A decision going your way is based on a variety of factors and there is no correlation whatso-fucking-ever between getting a penalty decision go your way in September, and then not getting a nailed-on penalty months later in February. A referee’s decision will be influenced by the parameters of the game in question (e.g. who is at home, big club v little club, referee’s general control of the game to that point, the crowd etc.). You could get 10 decisions go your way in a season, or 10 go against you. VAR eradicates that by trying to get the major decisions correct. So be it that we don’t get the Sanchez goal against Chelsea. In the end, winning a game of football should be determined by the players on the pitch, not pisspoor, weak refereeing. VAR will hopefully improve to the extent where it achieves this.
Ref should no longer end a move if the play is close to the goal.
Don’t use VAR if offside is happening like 50-60 yards away.
So we shouldn’t improve on current faulty methods because it would lead to annoying debates?
You can avoid debates
I don’t care how long it takes as long as its the correct decision. Danny Murphy was doing my nut in last night.
If you can’t decide an offside in 30 seconds then it’s not offside.
Can’t blame technology for incompetent decision making.
Instant replay in any sport sucks.
The starting point should be about what decisions get referred. That’s completely arbitrary right now.
Edit: I see you said basically this in a subsequent post.
How about when we get the wrong decision. Imo that happened on tthe French penalty in the world cup final.
Even in sports that have instant replay teams constantly get screwed by technicalities, bet you the refs woulda found out how to screw us out of our 50th.
Here’s a perfect example. Rams pulled a fake fg, look at the replay it’s clear that the ball made it to the line or passed the first down. The refs called it short, but because there wasn’t clear evidence it wasn’t a first down. That basically cost us home field advantage in the upcoming championship game, it’s a huge call that was wrong.
Replay only makes the rules more convoluted, waters down the sport, and wastes time, the officials will find a way to fuck it up regardless.
Wimbledon 2-0 up against West Ham
Wimbledon 3 West Ham 0