VAR

[Stranded]

Like someone wants it all to fail.

Or like it doesn't really work very well in such a fluid sport?

I know it was deemed to have worked ok at the World Cup, but did it really? I remember a number of decisions that weren't given England's way when I think they should've been and it just wasn't given much attention because we won and were riding the crest of wave of positivity as a result. There wasn't analysis on both sides of the coin like there are in a Premier League game because ITV/BBC were purely focused on England's perspective.

The use of the pitch screens at the WC was alright, admittedly, but it still slowed the games down more than I'd like them to. With a tournament of 64 games, spread over a short amount of time it just doesn't give the same level of exposure and [over]analysis that we get with the Premier League.

Same goes for the CL, to an extent, but we've still seen controversy during last years CL campaign.

For me it just doesn't work.

As a side note, I don't think its the PL who have decided how it's been implemented, it's the PGMOL, or whatever they call themselves, isn't it? They were all for it, so I'm not sure they're conspiring to see it fail. Could be wrong though.

Is football really that fluid?

The ball is out of play i.e. the game is stopped for over 30 to 35 mins of any game, it's just that we accept players ambling over to take a corner, free kick as part of the game rather than the waste of time it actually is. Not saying adding another time waster is the answer but who is to say that in 2+ years VAR is just accepted and we don't really notice and real difference.

It is clearly not working in the PL at the moment but that is so much more to do with the process they have decided to use rather than the technology. They have gone at it in a half hearted way which in turn has caused most of the issues we are seeing.

[Snowflake Royal]

Like someone wants it all to fail.

Or like it doesn't really work very well in such a fluid sport?

I know it was deemed to have worked ok at the World Cup, but did it really? I remember a number of decisions that weren't given England's way when I think they should've been and it just wasn't given much attention because we won and were riding the crest of wave of positivity as a result. There wasn't analysis on both sides of the coin like there are in a Premier League game because ITV/BBC were purely focused on England's perspective.

The use of the pitch screens at the WC was alright, admittedly, but it still slowed the games down more than I'd like them to. With a tournament of 64 games, spread over a short amount of time it just doesn't give the same level of exposure and [over]analysis that we get with the Premier League.

Same goes for the CL, to an extent, but we've still seen controversy during last years CL campaign.

For me it just doesn't work.

As a side note, I don't think its the PL who have decided how it's been implemented, it's the PGMOL, or whatever they call themselves, isn't it? They were all for it, so I'm not sure they're conspiring to see it fail. Could be wrong though.

No. It not working when it's incredibly badly implemented isn't a sign it can't work.

[Hoop Blah]

Like someone wants it all to fail.

Or like it doesn't really work very well in such a fluid sport?

I know it was deemed to have worked ok at the World Cup, but did it really? I remember a number of decisions that weren't given England's way when I think they should've been and it just wasn't given much attention because we won and were riding the crest of wave of positivity as a result. There wasn't analysis on both sides of the coin like there are in a Premier League game because ITV/BBC were purely focused on England's perspective.

The use of the pitch screens at the WC was alright, admittedly, but it still slowed the games down more than I'd like them to. With a tournament of 64 games, spread over a short amount of time it just doesn't give the same level of exposure and [over]analysis that we get with the Premier League.

Same goes for the CL, to an extent, but we've still seen controversy during last years CL campaign.

For me it just doesn't work.

As a side note, I don't think its the PL who have decided how it's been implemented, it's the PGMOL, or whatever they call themselves, isn't it? They were all for it, so I'm not sure they're conspiring to see it fail. Could be wrong though.

Is football really that fluid?

The ball is out of play i.e. the game is stopped for over 30 to 35 mins of any game, it's just that we accept players ambling over to take a corner, free kick as part of the game rather than the waste of time it actually is. Not saying adding another time waster is the answer but who is to say that in 2+ years VAR is just accepted and we don't really notice and real difference.

It is clearly not working in the PL at the moment but that is so much more to do with the process they have decided to use rather than the technology. They have gone at it in a half hearted way which in turn has caused most of the issues we are seeing.

The majority of the action is fluid and not made up of defined sets of action in the same way as tennis, cricket or rugby, where the tech works reasonably well (not as well as some football fans make out IMO because there are plenty of flaws and negative impacts because of it in those sports).

Football is slowed down by gamesmanship and some obvious slower moments but they should really be addressed to keep the game fluid, not compounded by VAR stoppages for very little gain in improved accuracy of decision making (IMO).

[Old Man Andrews]

Or like it doesn't really work very well in such a fluid sport?

I know it was deemed to have worked ok at the World Cup, but did it really? I remember a number of decisions that weren't given England's way when I think they should've been and it just wasn't given much attention because we won and were riding the crest of wave of positivity as a result. There wasn't analysis on both sides of the coin like there are in a Premier League game because ITV/BBC were purely focused on England's perspective.

The use of the pitch screens at the WC was alright, admittedly, but it still slowed the games down more than I'd like them to. With a tournament of 64 games, spread over a short amount of time it just doesn't give the same level of exposure and [over]analysis that we get with the Premier League.

Same goes for the CL, to an extent, but we've still seen controversy during last years CL campaign.

For me it just doesn't work.

As a side note, I don't think its the PL who have decided how it's been implemented, it's the PGMOL, or whatever they call themselves, isn't it? They were all for it, so I'm not sure they're conspiring to see it fail. Could be wrong though.

Is football really that fluid?

The ball is out of play i.e. the game is stopped for over 30 to 35 mins of any game, it's just that we accept players ambling over to take a corner, free kick as part of the game rather than the waste of time it actually is. Not saying adding another time waster is the answer but who is to say that in 2+ years VAR is just accepted and we don't really notice and real difference.

It is clearly not working in the PL at the moment but that is so much more to do with the process they have decided to use rather than the technology. They have gone at it in a half hearted way which in turn has caused most of the issues we are seeing.

The majority of the action is fluid and not made up of defined sets of action in the same way as tennis, cricket or rugby, where the tech works reasonably well (not as well as some football fans make out IMO because there are plenty of flaws and negative impacts because of it in those sports).

Football is slowed down by gamesmanship and some obvious slower moments but they should really be addressed to keep the game fluid, not compounded by VAR stoppages for very little gain in improved accuracy of decision making (IMO).

Would you be in favour of the clock stopping althogether when an injury occurs, VAR checks or in the lead up to the taking of free kicks around the box and penalities? Do away with time added on completely?

[Hoop Blah]

Would you be in favour of the clock stopping althogether when an injury occurs, VAR checks or in the lead up to the taking of free kicks around the box and penalities? Do away with time added on completely?

I could see the advantage of taking away the responsibility of timekeeping from ref, it's something that they shouldn't need to worry about when it could be done by someone else, probably more accurately. How much you deem to be timewasting and how much just the natural flow of the game is the only real stumbling block I can think of.

I don't think physically stopping the clock is a good idea though as it would probably become a tactical play thing and I could see that making things more stop start as teams manipulate the restarts, or stoppages, to their advantage. It would, IMO, be the first step towards stopping the game for commercial breaks too.

Stopping the clock for the VAR interventions might be a good idea though. That's out of the control of the teams and so not open to abuse.

[Snowflake Royal]

75 / 80 minutes and the clock managed off the field with stoppages for every stop in play would be fine IMO.

Plus physios to come on for injuries without the need to stop the match too.

[Hendo]

75 / 80 minutes and the clock managed off the field with stoppages for every stop in play would be fine IMO.

Plus physios to come on for injuries without the need to stop the match too.

That'd never work, you'd get too many players/teams abusing it by kicking it towards the physio/injured player.

[Old Man Andrews]

75 / 80 minutes and the clock managed off the field with stoppages for every stop in play would be fine IMO.

Plus physios to come on for injuries without the need to stop the match too.

That'd never work, you'd get too many players/teams abusing it by kicking it towards the physio/injured player.

Instant red card will sort that out fairly quickly plus you won't see players going down so much. If they are injured and can move then they have to leave the pitch at the nearest exit.

[genome]

If Spurs are successful in their appeal will you concede you are wrong Sanguine?

Absolutely no chance will it get overturned, not sure it's a good look for the FA to be overturning red cards for leg breaks, whether right or not

Well this is embarrassing

[Old Man Andrews]

If Spurs are successful in their appeal will you concede you are wrong Sanguine?

Absolutely no chance will it get overturned, not sure it's a good look for the FA to be overturning red cards for leg breaks, whether right or not

Well this is embarrassing

Look I had to be right about something eventually, don't beat yourself up about it

[Snowflake Royal]

75 / 80 minutes and the clock managed off the field with stoppages for every stop in play would be fine IMO.

Plus physios to come on for injuries without the need to stop the match too.

That'd never work, you'd get too many players/teams abusing it by kicking it towards the physio/injured player.

Instant red card will sort that out fairly quickly plus you won't see players going down so much. If they are injured and can move then they have to leave the pitch at the nearest exit.

Drop ball for the team most recently in possession if it touches them. Yellow card for kicking it at them. Apply the 'don't be a dick' rule.

[stealthpapes]

I don't think physically stopping the clock is a good idea though as it would probably become a tactical play thing and I could see that making things more stop start as teams manipulate the restarts, or stoppages, to their advantage. It would, IMO, be the first step towards stopping the game for commercial breaks too.

This already is happening.

One of the 'unseen' things Pulis-era Stoke did was keep the ball in play well over 5 minutes less than every other team. If the balls not in play, the other team can't score.

[Sanguine]

I remember a number of decisions that weren't given England's way when I think they should've been

Sorry HB, I still think you've got a fundamental misunderstanding of what VAR is supposed to do. As well as the objective stuff, it is to support referees in making better subjective decisions. That still doesn't mean you'll agree with all of them.

[Hoop Blah]

I don't think physically stopping the clock is a good idea though as it would probably become a tactical play thing and I could see that making things more stop start as teams manipulate the restarts, or stoppages, to their advantage. It would, IMO, be the first step towards stopping the game for commercial breaks too.

This already is happening.

One of the 'unseen' things Pulis-era Stoke did was keep the ball in play well over 5 minutes less than every other team. If the balls not in play, the other team can't score.

Of course it's already happening but I think it would become a lot more significant and common place. I probably could've worded it to make that more obvious, I just didn't think it was that necessary.

Interesting stat on Stoke though.

[Hoop Blah]

I remember a number of decisions that weren't given England's way when I think they should've been

Sorry HB, I still think you've got a fundamental misunderstanding of what VAR is supposed to do. As well as the objective stuff, it is to support referees in making better subjective decisions. That still doesn't mean you'll agree with all of them.

Obviously I don't expect every decision to the way I think it should be, although at least then they'd be correct if they did.

My point is that there were some pretty blatant fouls that probably should've been penalties to England that weren't given and, IIRC, VAR didn't even take a look at them at the time, they were just missed, or ignored, by the on pitch ref and the VAR. Of course they may have decided they weren't fouls, but they obviously were and they got them wrong.

[Snowflake Royal]

I don't think physically stopping the clock is a good idea though as it would probably become a tactical play thing and I could see that making things more stop start as teams manipulate the restarts, or stoppages, to their advantage. It would, IMO, be the first step towards stopping the game for commercial breaks too.

This already is happening.

One of the 'unseen' things Pulis-era Stoke did was keep the ball in play well over 5 minutes less than every other team. If the balls not in play, the other team can't score.

Of course it's already happening but I think it would become a lot more significant and common place. I probably could've worded it to make that more obvious, I just didn't think it was that necessary.

Interesting stat on Stoke though.

Combine it with no stoppages for injuries and physios coming on in play, plus more yellows for time wasting (maybe an orange sin bin) and it might improve.

[John Madejski's Wallet]

Just need to come back to what an absolute shambles both VAR and the general refereeing was jn that Everton-Spurs game

3 pens not given by VAR that all should have been given considering the 'accidently stepping on a foot' the other day.

And just LOL at getting a red for a simple ankle tap

[Winston Biscuit]

[The Enfield Royal71]

It needs to go. Absolute shambles.

[Hoop Blah]

To the naked eye that looks like the defenders knee is playing him on.

To make matters worse that wasn't even the cross from which they scored. I've not seen it yet but according to Durham and The Moose on TalkSport (I know, I know) it should've been seen as two different phases of play.