Liverpool FC Forum

Yeah, I guess a machine can only be as good as the man that operates it. It's not VAR that's the problem, it's the people that use it.

Disagree that it's better in other leagues though. It may be the worst in the Prem but bad decisions are made in the rest as well. It was the same when we didn't have VAR so might as well just remove it and accept that refs just suck at their jobs, both with and without technology on their disposal.

f*ck VAR, !

It's ripping the soul out of the game.

Who are these faceless c*nt's making the the VAR decisions ?

Think I read that one of them was a fella who has never refereed a premiership game !

Goal disallowed because a players armpit was offside  !   

Loved it more when we could just applaud or boo the referee !

In the olden days a major part of the discussion in the pub after the game was about the referee/linesmans decision. Whether they had a decent performance or were incompetent, blind, biased or just plain sh'it.
VAR has taken that away by proving what most of us thought all along: they are just plain sh'it, but they have been getting away with it for decades. VAR has exposed their faults from every angle and at every speed possible in FHD due to the technology of today. The biggest problem it has brought, especially in the english game is the time the bellends take to come to the wrong decision. It has changed the live football experience and not for the better.
Unless and until fans, managers and clubs get together to demand that VAR be used for what it was supposed to do, then this whole embarrassing, pathetic, shameful and deplorable shambles will continue.

I’ve refereed youth games and you cannot possibly see everything that goes on, sometimes I have asked the player whether he touched it last and was more than happy to change my call as almost always the players know. It should be about the truth and not ego and I think that’s is what VAR needs to get right, the acceptance that the ref made a mistake and its ok and that if you use VAR then correct the decision is so important. For the refs to close ranks and protect their own when a mistake is made and back up the mistake with some ridiculous justification will doom VAR. It can be used to improve the game but it seems in England at least the refs seem determined to show VAR as useless because what has gone on so far this season has been laughable.

Atkinson should not be refereeing as he is clearly biased or an idiot.

Problem is VAR seems to be making all the decisions these days and has become VR instead of VAR

kazza » Tue Nov 05, 2019 5:41 am wrote:I’ve refereed youth games and you cannot possibly see everything that goes on, sometimes I have asked the player whether he touched it last and was more than happy to change my call as almost always the players know. It should be about the truth and not ego and I think that’s is what VAR needs to get right, the acceptance that the ref made a mistake and its ok and that if you use VAR then correct the decision is so important. For the refs to close ranks and protect their own when a mistake is made and back up the mistake with some ridiculous justification will doom VAR. It can be used to improve the game but it seems in England at least the refs seem determined to show VAR as useless because what has gone on so far this season has been laughable.

Atkinson should not be refereeing as he is clearly biased or an idiot.

This is it basically. The refs in the UK need to put their ego to one side and put football first.

Gents, the FA have created a monster that's killing the game.

VAR was created to stop situations like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5QlBHF6ib8

Instead the FA have created a situation where a group of men decide to the absurdity of the last millimetre whether a goal stands. Every weekend, it seems every match now, there are decisions where the VAR team are deciding the final outcome of games based outside of normal play accuracy. Refs have lost control and passion is being corrupted. Next we'll have adverts run during VAR breaks.

I accepted Wolves equaliser last night, a good goal from a team putting us under pressure. The LFC players accepted the goal - no one complained then BOOM! the goals disallowed and we win the game.  I'm not surprised Wolves are upset... we're talking unseen millimetres once again that neither the ref, players nor fans can see and it's spoiling the games.

The refs have lost control of the games and the VAR instruction is now 'both sides put the ball in the back of the net as many times as you can and we'll decide the final score'.

Watch that video Iinked again - that's what we wanted yet it's morphed into an anal question of the last millimetre when there is no evidence of when the players boot actually made contact with the through pass on an offside anyway. Farce!

Reg » Mon Dec 30, 2019 3:01 am wrote:Gents, the FA have created a monster that's killing the game.

VAR was created to stop situations like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5QlBHF6ib8

Instead the FA have created a situation where a group of men decide to the absurdity of the last millimetre whether a goal stands. Every weekend, it seems every match now, there are decisions where the VAR team are deciding the final outcome of games based outside of normal play accuracy. Refs have lost control and passion is being corrupted. Next we'll have adverts run during VAR breaks.

I accepted Wolves equaliser last night, a good goal from a team putting us under pressure. The LFC players accepted the goal - no one complained then BOOM! the goals disallowed and we win the game.  I'm not surprised Wolves are upset... we're talking unseen millimetres once again that neither the ref, players nor fans can see and it's spoiling the games.

The refs have lost control of the games and the VAR instruction is now 'both sides put the ball in the back of the net as many times as you can and we'll decide the final score'.

Watch that video Iinked again - that's what we wanted yet it's morphed into an anal question of the last millimetre when there is no evidence of when the players boot actually made contact with the through pass on an offside anyway. Farce!

What would you like to do Reg?

Re define parameters. It works in other sports so why not football. Take away the committee decision, make it a single man working together with the ref on the spot. Desensitise what is rapidly becoming an escalating situation.

https://www.skysports.com/football/news ... ule-change

Reg I was at the game and virtually in line with the player that was later found to be offside. Absolutely nobody in the crowd screamed offside and there a knowledgeable bunch where I was sitting and our seats are very close to the pitch. It made up for the Firmino armpit decision earlier in the season. Personally I haven’t got a problem with it providing there is total consistency. In the past before VAR there have been numerous incorrect linesman decisions that have affected the outcome of the game. The game is so fast that mistakes are inevitable and at least VAR will ensure that incorrect decisions don’t erroneously affect the score line.

What you say is very sensible Dev but when they show on tv that's it's down to an armpit or a slither of a boot then without knowing how accurate the angle, passer's kick pressure on the ball etc.. it becomes too black and white. VAR wasn't devised to measure millimetres but to clarify more obvious faults. In the case of millimetres the FA should rule that either the attacker or thedefender has the benefit of the doubt. The introduction of VAR may necessitate new laws.

From today's Telegraph:

Solving the Premier League's VAR mess: Our reporters' proposals on how to end technology debate

30 DECEMBER 2019 • 12:06PM

After VAR disallowed five goals for marginal offside decisions in the Premier League this weekend, our correspondents put forward their proposals to end the debate over when the technology should intervene.

Jason Burt
The advantage needs to be switched back to the attacker for offside. The problem is not VAR but the offside rule. One solution would be to say if any whole part of the player’s body is onside, even a trailing foot, then he should he deemed onside. Not the other way around. But it would have to be the whole of his foot, for example, not just his heel.

James Ducker
There’s a simple solution - abandon the ‘offside is offside’ rule and instead apply the offside rule only when there is a “clear and obvious” error by the match officials. If there is a cigarette paper between players then rule in favour of the attacking player. That would mean disallowed goals such as Lys Mousset’s for Sheffield United against Manchester City and Pedro Neto’s for Wolves against Liverpool on Sunday would have stood. It would empower the referee and also result in the Video Assistant Referee making far quicker calls, rather than us all suffering these interminable delays. One of the joys of football is it is so fast paced - anything that makes it feel like the equivalent of using a protractor to work out a difficult sum in a maths exam can’t be right. 

Chris Bascombe
Football should take the lead from cricket when it comes to the use of video technology, especially with the closest calls.

The first decision of the on-field umpire still counts with LBW appeals that clip the stumps, or contentious catches which may or may not have bounced into the hand. The same logic should apply to football’s offside rule.

There is no chance those watching on TV can be 100 percent sure when the replay shows such a miniscule difference between offside or onside. Do they really know when the ball connected with the boot of the attacker making the forward pass? That millisecond makes all the difference.

A margin of error as in cricket - call it the ‘linesman’s call’ - would remove the controversy with these tight judgements. It would ensure only the most ‘clear and obvious’ offsides see a goal disallowed. VAR should be finding a valid reason to change the on-field decision, not asserting so much control. If the official on the day sees it as offside in the moment and gives it - no matter how tight - the decision would also stand if within the 'linesman's call' margin of error and be accepted.

Cricket has been enriched by the technology. It has become part of the entertainment in a test match. It may never be that way in football, but it would at least ensure fewer decisions are overturned.

Matt Law
I would like to see each club have two challenges per match in which they can use VAR. Managers would be responsible for telling the fourth official that he wanted an incident, which could be a goal for either side, penalty for either side or a red card, checked by VAR. Once he has used those three challenges, then VAR could not be used to check any more incidents for that club. This would help share the responsibility between the managers, referees and VAR, and may help to ease some of the controversy.

Jeremy Wilson
Football needs to involve all stakeholders, including fans, in an honest conversation about whether it still wants offsides re-refereed in the knowledge that a perfect solution does not exist. Either there will be injustices if we go back to where we were, or there will be marginal goals not given after the euphoria of all the celebrations if we stay where we are. The biggest problem is not facing up to which of the above it wants least. If VAR is still accepted for offside calls, it would make sense to reconsider the law and ideas like using the hip or even daylight to decide. It feels, at present, too weighted in favour of the defender but this debate will ultimately go nowhere until there is an acceptance of the realities of either choice.

Rob Bagchi
I have never felt VAR was necessary and even if it were, Mike Riley would not be my choice for the ideal candidate to run it. If we are to persist with it, it has to return to first principles of “clear and obvious error” with offside decisions, giving the benefit of any doubt to the attacking side. If the original call cannot be faulted after two replays then stay with the onfield decision. To make it simpler, the players’ feet should be the determining factor – they’re not runners breasting a tape – and however much the rest of his or her body is offside should be seen as a natural, blameless advantage.

According to Robbie Savage CLEAR AND OBVIOUS is not an issue with regards to offside decisions. Every goal is checked by VAR to ensure that offside isn’t an issue. Allowing common sense to prevail by giving the attacking player the benefit of the doubt would simply add to the problem IMHO. If you say that providing the attacking player is no more than 50mm offside then the goal stands. Imagine the opposing players and the problems that would create.

I am actually more concerned about the quality of refereeing in certain instances. Anthony Taylor immediately blew his whistle claiming that Lallana had handled the ball. Given the referees position on the pitch it was an extremely poor decision and all I can say is thank goodness for VAR. The more worrying aspect of the referees ineptitude meant that if the ball hadn’t crossed the line at the time he blew his whistle then the goal would have been disallowed which would’ve been nothing short of a disgrace. The same referee was also responsible for this debacle as highlighted in the Mail: VAR overturns Anthony Taylor’s bizarre decision to award Tottenham a free-kick when Paulo Gazzaniga wiped out Chelsea’s Marcos Alonso in tackle Gary Neville called ‘an assault’ before Willian scores from the penalty spot in heated London derby !! That wasn’t just poor refereeing it was an act of downright stupidity. Fans often complain that the game is either corrupt or bent. Is it any wonder with refereeing of this standard  !!! 

The use of challenges like in tennis or having any part of the body onside are both stupid suggestions. I never understood the use of challenges, the law of the game should be applied at all times. Having limited amount of times when you're allowed to see if a decision was right or not is just stupid to me.

The second one if applied will change nothing. What's the difference between looking at millimetres whether someone's toe is onside or offside? We'll still have the same problem.

The only solution is, striker gets the benefit. If it's not "clear and obvious" then it shoudldn't be given.

Unfortunately, offsides aren't the only problem of VAR, and so far it's been ruining the game more than helping it. Fixing the offside problem as soon as possible however, will be the correct first step forward.

I think it needs to be binned, the game is in danger of becoming sterilised. It's already practically a non contact sport and now they want to take the spontaneity out of the game as well, years ago if a goal was scored you glanced over at the linesman and if his flag was down you partied like it was 1999, these days you have to wait 3 minutes before you can properly celebrate.
Poor refereeing decisions have been part and parcel of the game since the year dot, in fact its poor refereeing decisions and hard luck stories that make up 90% of footy folklore, fathers don't tell their sons about the time a linesman made a great call back in 1956, no they tell them about the time they were just about to win the cup but the ref bent down to tie his shoelaces just as the oppo's CF punched the ball in the net. Correct calls don't get remembered down the ages.
Poor decisions get blown out of proportion by 24 hour rolling news channels, radio stations and internet blogs and we fans get sucked in to the hype, more than once I've had to give my head a shake, at the end of the day what's it to me if Raheem Sterling has a perfectly good goal chalked off? Did I give a ***** years ago if say Joe Royle had a good goal chalked off for City?
I've watched and loved this game for over half a century without VAR so I'm sure I'll get by if they decide to scrap it.