New thought on VAR

[Spitfire]

I'm generally dubious of the principle of "the theory is correct, it's just human failings that prevent it working". It just reminds me of impossible dietary and exercise regimes that promise you'll live forever, then blame you for not being able to live on 2 glasses of water and a 50 mile run every day! The easier something is to do, the more likely it will get done properly. VAR is an awkward fit for football.

Every aspect of the system is operated by humans, so it has to be workable by humans. VAR has been introduced largely because "it works in other sports". Which I think means cricket and rugby. Cricket is totally inappropriate comparison with football. And Rugby is also more stop-start...and I don't follow rugby, but I know people who do and they complain about the VAR in it anyway.

It needs to start with understanding the nature of football. And I don't think that has been done. It's just been copied from other sports. Football has always been intended to be a fast moving, free flowing game. The whole point that differentiates it , is that it isn't a minute of hanging around, followed by a few seconds of action (eg american football/cricket) and without that, where does VAR fit in?

In practice we've seen that there are very few incorrect decisions actually rectified by VAR. All this fuss is for nothing. Get rid of it and work on getting better quality referees. It would be a better solution to have 4 assistant refs, one in each quarter of the line.

Bang on.

 

[jrpb-3]

I'm in favour of what VAR is supposed to deliver

The system is it stands and the poor way it's implemented, and the fact it seems to be getting worse over time not better (they've now even managed to screw up the one bit of VAR that did work well, offside)
As it is at present it seems a lot of the time it is no better than not having the system, and sometimes worse.

I think there are 2 big issues for me that if done differently might improve things.

One already mentioned is the "clear and obvious error nonsense" meaning whichever way a ref goes on an decision if it's a close one VAR isn't going to change it either way which is ridiculous.

The other and partly related to that is that communication between the ref and VAR seems to be VAR telling the ref they are looking at something then telling the ref what their decision is or for the ref to go and take a look. For a lot of decisions how do they know what the ref thinks he has seen unless they ask him, how can they judge if a ref has made a mistake if they don't know the details.

There needs to be more 2 way communication between the ref and VAR ref can tell VAR what he has seen and why he has given a decision, VAR then decide if that matches up with the footage, if the ref is clearly wrong they can tell him, if there is a discrepancy/possible difference then just get the ref to take a look on the screen. VAR don't have to overrule, just let the ref take another look and the ref makes the decision

 

[Hoganstolemywife]

OMFG

Why do they intervene with that decision but neither of the ones yesterday.

No ****ing consistency

 

[Longford Wolf]

Not much different to the pull on Sasa.

 

[S G Wolves]

Anyone got a replay of the Sasa pull non pen?

 

[NottsWolves]

OMFG

Why do they intervene with that decision but neither of the ones yesterday.

No ****ing consistency

They make it up as they go along.

Didn’t intervene yesterday as not clear and obvious- was that one a clear and obvious mistake from the ref? Utter *******s.

 

[Contrarian]

Perhaps "clear and obvious" needs to replaced with "game changing" or equivalent. So if a ref makes an error that is "game changing" , then VAR intervenes.

Which would include direct free kicks within shooting range, penalties, red cards as well as handballs in the penalty area and every goal scored, of course.

After 4 or whatever years of this, it seems the "clear and obvious" has always been problem #1 with the system. If a player violently attacks another one behind the referees back, does VAR not intervene, because the ref wasn't looking in that direction so hasn't made a "clear and obvious" error? Strangely enough, I think that could be the case with current interpretation. The VAR team have 2 problems to deal with, both canb be subjective: 1) was there a foul? 2)did the ref make a clear error by missing it? That second one is easy to eliminate and I'd like to see how it works in practice when criticality of the incident is the key, not "clear and obvious errors".

 

[Contrarian]

They make it up as they go along.

Didn’t intervene yesterday as not clear and obvious- was that one a clear and obvious mistake from the ref? Utter *******s.

There's no logic to it. Are they trying to remove errors from the decision making or not? If they are, then refs should be allowed to check even things like corners, if they are not sure if the ball really did come off a defender. If we're stuck with it, then go the whole hog. Prevent things like that Chelsea free kick scored against us a few years ago, where the player dived.

If VAR is not intended to change every mistake that changes the course of the game, then what is it intended to do? All that's left is "change selected mistakes". And that is exactly where we are now and where all the controversy is. Correct all significant errors with VAR. Or get rid of it and go back to how it was. Don't have this "pick and choose when to get involved depending on whether the ref is having a difficult time of it".

 

[rubyloo]

I was so apoplectic with rage at that ‘penalty’ that I made a fool of myself in a Spanish bar yesterday. Can someone remind me what problem this was the solution to? It’s destroyed the game, I don’t want to hear apologists coming up with complex solutions to ‘make it work’ just get ****ing rid.

 

[Pagey]

If there was no VAR we would still be in the same position as we are now.
Without VAR
Still no penalty for us at Old Trafford
Still a penalty against us at Luton
Still a penalty against us last at Molineux
The on field referee gave all those decisions

Fair enough, then your saying VAR has had no effect on us this season, so **** it off, it's not fit for purpose!

 

[Werewolf of Wombourne]

The VAR panel should be made up of the best former referees they can find who have no relationship with the current crop so don’t worry about embarrassing their mates

 

[Pagey]

The VAR panel should be made up of the best former referees they can find who have no relationship with the current crop so don’t worry about embarrassing their mates

I'd argue the panel should be run totally independent to the refs, by a seperate entity.

 

[Monketron]

The biggest issue with VAR is the 'clear and obvious' doctrine they've adopted. What counts as 'clear and obvious' is going to be different for every official for every event. Brings far too much randomness to decisions which are already subjective enough.

 

[Scallywolf]

I just want to know if there is any football fan, player, manager or pundit who is in favour of VAR. Seriously is there anyone out there who thinks it actually helps the game if football? If there is put your names on a postage stamp addressed to FA headquarters.

Referees must love it as VAR makes decisions for them and ex referees must love it even more as they are earning good money under false pretences!

It is the worst of its kind to ever be introduced into the great game. Six minute delay yesterday in Bournemouth v Burnley game for an offside decision. Six bloody minutes, getting lines drawn in the wrong place. The players had enough time to take a toilet break and have a cuppa tea{

VAR is the worst piece of technology used in any sport Imo.

 

[WeAreTheWolvesII]

I just want to know if there is any football fan, player, manager or pundit who is in favour of VAR. Seriously is there anyone out there who thinks it actually helps the game if football? If there is put your names on a postage stamp addressed to FA headquarters.

Referees must love it as VAR makes decisions for them and ex referees must love it even more as they are earning good money under false pretences!

It is the worst of its kind to ever be introduced into the great game. Six minute delay yesterday in Bournemouth v Burnley game for an offside decision. Six bloody minutes, getting lines drawn in the wrong place. The players had enough time to take a toilet break and have a cuppa tea{

VAR is the worst piece of technology used in any sport Imo.

I'm a fan, although clearly in the minority.

I hate the way we've been cheated in the past, and I imagine the worst case scenario, such as we reached an FA Cup final or a play-off final and lost to a wrong decision that could easily have been overturned.

People think it's bad now, and it is, but you watch Premier League Years or clips of older games, and, for example, some of the decisions that United used to get were hilariously bad in time.

There's too much noise around VAR.

It's literally giving officials a replay to make a more informed decision. That's it. If it's not working, you need to question the people involved.

The problem here is officials. Yet, if VAR wasn't here, it's the same officials.

As has been discussed on here, with no VAR, we are still getting done with awful decisions.

Would it make you feel any better if we had no VAR and Newcastle still got that penalty? Or Luton? I wouldn't care one bit. The outcome is still the same.

It may be hard to believe, but if you take away VAR, more decisions would be wrong.

The Bournemouth one you reference is an interesting one. Firstly, it's incompetence from a person to draw a line in the wrong place, that goes back to the first bit of the officials not being good enough.

But, thankfully that's rare. Yet the Bournemouth fans were still singing it's embarrassing. This is a goal that has huge implications in the relegation battle. I would wager that 100% of Bournemouth fans at the game would rather the right decision was reached as opposed to drawing 2-2 but not having to wait. Offside is offside, it's factual, and this correct decision has played a key role in a huge relegation fixture.

So, the officials must do better, it's that simple. But, they're incompetent with replays, so it would be worse without them, and there's too much at stake in football to not have it, in my opinion.

Another main criticism is taking the emotion out of the game, and I do get that to a degree.

However, my experience anyway, this is vastly overhyped. Look at the video of Hwang's goal, it certainly didn't look like many fans in the South Bank were withdrawn with their celebration!

Yet many claim every goal is ruined.

I personally think you always get a feel of whether a goal could be disallowed. Of course, there are examples, two against Leicester spring to mind, where it shocks you, but these are rare.

 

[Howler]

Anyone got a replay of the Sasa pull non pen?

Not to post, but the defender had both arms completely around the midriff of Sasa. The colour commentator then proceeded to explain why it was fine which got a smirk from me, it was far more of a pen than the Newcastle one awarded earlier. For me I would have not awarded either but that's because I despise soft pens, unfortunately we have offcialdom that will award a **** weak penalty one minute and not up the other end a minute later. The "inconsistencies" are far too convenient.

 

[Bill S Preston Esq.]

Howard Webb needs to resign.

Yep, he's overseeing the same calamitous implementation of VAR he was bought in to irradiate.

He like his predecessor is not fit for purpose.

 

[Bill S Preston Esq.]

The VAR panel should be made up of the best former referees they can find who have no relationship with the current crop so don’t worry about embarrassing their mates

The problem here is very few referees since the PL era began have been any good.

The few who were are picking up pensions on mobility scooters or dead.

 

[old wittonian]

I'm a fan, although clearly in the minority.

I hate the way we've been cheated in the past, and I imagine the worst case scenario, such as we reached an FA Cup final or a play-off final and lost to a wrong decision that could easily have been overturned.

People think it's bad now, and it is, but you watch Premier League Years or clips of older games, and, for example, some of the decisions that United used to get were hilariously bad in time.

There's too much noise around VAR.

It's literally giving officials a replay to make a more informed decision. That's it. If it's not working, you need to question the people involved.

The problem here is officials. Yet, if VAR wasn't here, it's the same officials.

As has been discussed on here, with no VAR, we are still getting done with awful decisions.

Would it make you feel any better if we had no VAR and Newcastle still got that penalty? Or Luton? I wouldn't care one bit. The outcome is still the same.

It may be hard to believe, but if you take away VAR, more decisions would be wrong.

The Bournemouth one you reference is an interesting one. Firstly, it's incompetence from a person to draw a line in the wrong place, that goes back to the first bit of the officials not being good enough.

But, thankfully that's rare. Yet the Bournemouth fans were still singing it's embarrassing. This is a goal that has huge implications in the relegation battle. I would wager that 100% of Bournemouth fans at the game would rather the right decision was reached as opposed to drawing 2-2 but not having to wait. Offside is offside, it's factual, and this correct decision has played a key role in a huge relegation fixture.

So, the officials must do better, it's that simple. But, they're incompetent with replays, so it would be worse without them, and there's too much at stake in football to not have it, in my opinion.

Another main criticism is taking the emotion out of the game, and I do get that to a degree.

However, my experience anyway, this is vastly overhyped. Look at the video of Hwang's goal, it certainly didn't look like many fans in the South Bank were withdrawn with their celebration!

Yet many claim every goal is ruined.

I personally think you always get a feel of whether a goal could be disallowed. Of course, there are examples, two against Leicester spring to mind, where it shocks you, but these are rare.

The sanctions for their incompetence, which could cost a club £ millions, are farcial. A week off, absolutely ridiculous. In any other job they'd be sacked.

 

[SA Wolf]

The sanctions for their incompetence, which could cost a club £ millions, are farcial. A week off, absolutely ridiculous. In any other job they'd be sacked.

Unfortunately if the refs and VAR officials were sacked for incompetence, we'd have under-5 refs in the Prem next weekend. Their incompetence is staggering and if it wasn't so serious, it would be laughable.

 

[TheConcourse]

I'm generally dubious of the principle of "the theory is correct, it's just human failings that prevent it working". It just reminds me of impossible dietary and exercise regimes that promise you'll live forever, then blame you for not being able to live on 2 glasses of water and a 50 mile run every day! The easier something is to do, the more likely it will get done properly. VAR is an awkward fit for football.

Every aspect of the system is operated by humans, so it has to be workable by humans. VAR has been introduced largely because "it works in other sports". Which I think means cricket and rugby. Cricket is totally inappropriate comparison with football. And Rugby is also more stop-start...and I don't follow rugby, but I know people who do and they complain about the VAR in it anyway.

It needs to start with understanding the nature of football. And I don't think that has been done. It's just been copied from other sports. Football has always been intended to be a fast moving, free flowing game. The whole point that differentiates it , is that it isn't a minute of hanging around, followed by a few seconds of action (eg american football/cricket) and without that, where does VAR fit in?

In practice we've seen that there are very few incorrect decisions actually rectified by VAR. All this fuss is for nothing. Get rid of it and work on getting better quality referees. It would be a better solution to have 4 assistant refs, one in each quarter of the line.

All of this.

 

[fleck1]

I feel they need to scrap the clear and obvious part of var stepping in, an error is an error no matter how small and var is here to make the correct decision. Who draws the line and decides what's clear and obvious. You could see why the ref gave the penalty at the weekend, he gets one look in real time but the var has to say you may need to take a look at that. Surely a penalty that isn't a penalty is a clear and obvious error

 

[Flump]

A week off, absolutely ridiculous. In any other job they'd be sacked.

If you sacked a ref every time they made a big mistake, there'd be no refs in a months' time!

I know everyone likes to think it's easy, but it's clearly not.

 

[Chriswwfc]

Are they going to issue an apology?

 

[Flump]

Isn't it just that they've now moved to not intervening unless it's absolutely clear cut?

They did this because people complained about 60/40 decisions being overturned after 5 minutes of course.

But then it just creates a new problem of where do you draw the new line between "clear and obvious" and "fairly clear and fairly obvious".

3 options for me, all of which would be better than the current one

• scrap VAR completely
• VAR gets 1 review, if that's enough to overturn it, then they can, if not, onfield sticks
• More of a discussion - I think sometimes (like this game) the ref is basically unsure and guessing, so it's daft to then give additional weight to their decision, so they should be able to refer the decision, rather than call it and have it confirmed/overturned. In this case if the ref had asked VAR to look, they might well have said "there was a tiny bit of contact, but initiated by the forwards and very marginal, so no pen".

 

[Jefe]

I was so apoplectic with rage at that ‘penalty’ that I made a fool of myself in a Spanish bar yesterday. Can someone remind me what problem this was the solution to? It’s destroyed the game, I don’t want to hear apologists coming up with complex solutions to ‘make it work’ just get ****ing rid.

Problem is without VAR, the fool Taylor still would've shafted us with his on-field decision and we would have no recourse. Similarly, because of the "clear and obvious error" standard, we are screwed because the guideline essentially tells the VAR ref not to overturn subjective calls. The middle ground is to abolish the "clear and obvious error" standard, so the VAR ref can flatly say that it is not enough for a penalty from his position: that Schar went down too easily, Hwang tried to pull out etc. I thought this was the point, to give the eyes in the sky an advantage the on-field referee doesn't have in real time, to ultimately make the best decision.

 

[Gedwolf]

Are they going to issue an apology?

Does it honestly matter if they do?

 

[Chriswwfc]

Does it honestly matter if they do?

I get your point, it won’t achieve anything for us.

But it ****s me off when they won’t acknowledge the mistake and I have **** fans smiling at me telling me it was the correct decision.

Also, if they can’t admit fault and sweep
It under the rug, there is absolutely no hope that the system improves.

 

[Frank Lincoln]

Isn't it just that they've now moved to not intervening unless it's absolutely clear cut?

They did this because people complained about 60/40 decisions being overturned after 5 minutes of course.

But then it just creates a new problem of where do you draw the new line between "clear and obvious" and "fairly clear and fairly obvious".

3 options for me, all of which would be better than the current one

• scrap VAR completely
• VAR gets 1 review, if that's enough to overturn it, then they can, if not, onfield sticks
• More of a discussion - I think sometimes (like this game) the ref is basically unsure and guessing, so it's daft to then give additional weight to their decision, so they should be able to refer the decision, rather than call it and have it confirmed/overturned. In this case if the ref had asked VAR to look, they might well have said "there was a tiny bit of contact, but initiated by the forwards and very marginal, so no pen".

The first option is the one I would go for. Scrap VAR, it just isn’t fit for purpose. They have had long enough to sort it out now. Five and a half minutes it took to make a decision at Bournemouth on Saturday. That was ridiculous. The incompetent fools are still drawing lines in the wrong places. It just beggars belief.

 

[Jay Jay de Wolf]

As I put on other VAR thread.. plus why don't mods merge this 2 similar threads?

SSN " Ref Watch " Wolves v Newcastle... Sue Smith Steven Warnock and Dermot Gallagher all say NO PENALTY!!

VAR should have advised ref to go to screen for a clear and obvious error!!

 

[Jonzy54]

Just watching Ref Watch and they all said the Hwang tackle wasn’t a penalty,they didn’t show the Sasa one
What winds me up is that this season and last we have had a few where we have appealed for decisions but after very few seconds it comes back ‘ Check over’ which infers Stockley Park probably only looked once yet how many times do they forensically look at decisions involving the so called big teams so they can find an angle to go in their favour ?

 

[Black Country Wanderer]

Without VAR it would still have been a penalty
Ive no problem with that,refs are human with a split second to decide,we went 150 years accepting those decisions right or wrong
The problem i do have is when you have technology available to correct the errors its not used to do so on many occasions
Clear and obvious is like saying the ref is always right unless hes blind
Way too much subjectivity and spending 5 minutes to say well the decision is incorrect but we cant overturn it as we cant prove the ref wrong is crazy
Just a simple "go look at the monitor" is all thats required, if he thinks its still a pen then we have to accept that
The monitor should then give real time images and slow motion from angles which VAR see as problematic
Not just one angle or a still image which can look worse than it is
VAR can be good ,should be good,and would be good if the idiots controlling it, and the laws around it ,were implemented correctly

 

[Golden Oldie]

I wouldn't put to many new thoughts into VAR, because those who partake in the exercise that regularly stains and puts a stench into our game, cannot deal with the present level of thoughts on it, never mind some new ones.

 

[lobodelsur]

In fact, for all that VAR was brought in to ensure more correct decisions all it has realistically done is highlight the total lack of consistency of PL referees decision-making. In the good old pre-VAR days we'd all have gone home on Saturday thinking philosophically, 'Oh well, another day a different ref...' Instead of which we are furiously hammering away at our keyboards.
It doesn't do what it was supposed to do and it highlights and emphasises the flaws that we had learned to live with (an occasional poor ref). Get rid of it.

 

[old wittonian]

If you sacked a ref every time they made a big mistake, there'd be no refs in a months' time!

I know everyone likes to think it's easy, but it's clearly not.

But the threat of the sack, or making an example of one or two, might make the more competent.
To encourage the others as they say.

 

[Flump]

But the threat of the sack, or making an example of one or two, might make the more competent.
To encourage the others as they say.

Only if you assume it's a lack of motivation to get decisions right, rather than refs trying to judge fast moving incidents against constantly updated guidelines that most people don't understand.

The fact that VAR took 5 minutes over the pen to me shows he wanted to get it right, and was struggling to decide whether it was "clear and obvious" which should be overturned or a "fairly clear and fairly obvious" mistake which shouldn't be.

 

[wayne-the-wanderer]

I don't blame Taylor, i thought it was a penalty initially, i bet he has watched it back and thought WTF, why didn't they tell me to go have a look.
If there is any doubt about anything the ref should go to the monitor to make the final decision

 

[JadeWolf]

I don't blame Taylor, i thought it was a penalty initially, i bet he has watched it back and thought WTF, why didn't they tell me to go have a look.
If there is any doubt about anything the ref should go to the monitor to make the final decision

It’s absolutely bonkers that the referee can’t request to see the screen himself. The one Saturday is the perfect chance for a referee to say “I think this is what happened but I’m not sure, let me watch it back”.

 

[Chuck Murray]

It is alarming how little the pitchside monitors get used in Wolves games. Then again, was it the Leeds game last season where the match official actually went to the monitor, which we all thought was a good sign at the time, and just confirmed his own idiotic call? This might have been the one where Adama's shirt was tugged to get him off the ball, leading to a Leeds insurance goal late in the contest IIRC.

You would think the monitors are there for a reason, and not just as a decorative sideline feature.

 

[SA Wolf]

It is alarming how little the pitchside monitors get used in Wolves games. Then again, was it the Leeds game last season where the match official actually went to the monitor, which we all thought was a good sign at the time, and just confirmed his own idiotic call? This might have been the one where Adama's shirt was tugged to get him off the ball, leading to a Leeds insurance goal late in the contest IIRC.

You would think the monitors are there for a reason, and not just as a decorative sideline feature.

Good point and yes, it was the Adama pull back.