VAR eh?

That is VAR, humans are part of the system and humans make mistakes. Anything that routinely kills the moment is a backward step for me. If the reason for VAR is trying to counter the trial by TV pundit then it's clearly failing so other than that what actually is the point. Doesn't even take the heat off the ref, just makes them look indecisive which isn't a great look for a ref. More pain than gain.
 
electric_eel said:
That is VAR, humans are part of the system and humans make mistakes. Anything that routinely kills the moment is a backward step for me. If the reason for VAR is trying to counter the trial by TV pundit then it's clearly failing so other than that what actually is the point. Doesn't even take the heat off the ref, just makes them look indecisive which isn't a great look for a ref. More pain than gain.
Click to expand...
For me that is spot on👏
 
The best of it is that there are actually two chances to amend the decision...the VAR guy AND his assistant who both look at it independently
 
20togo said:
You fully understand the point I was making. Like it or not he went over the ball and it was a potentially leg breaking tackle. Unfortunate or not, it was a red card.
Click to expand...
It was dangerous and a red. Paul Pogba had the same trick and he was sent off at least once for it
 
Long-shanks said:
I agree VAR is awful. Not fit for purpose.

I disagree that all refs are dogshit though - all refs are human, they make mistakes, 98.5% of there decisions are probably correct though. To vilify them and hound them has consequences - consequences that are seen right down to grass roots level football with young 13 year old kids wanting to be referees
Click to expand...
The Finkelstein study from a few years ago showed that the majority of elite refs had something like a 90 plus percentage correct rate for decisions that are not likely to affect a game. It drops to about 70ish on average for critical and game changing decisions. It pointed out that some refs, and I seem to remember it named the refs, had a critical decision making correct at slightly higher than random chance in statistical terms.
 
I thought we lived in the high tech 21st Century. Surely, there must be higher tech way of completing the final assessment of whether someone is truly offside. Computers, if finely programmed, should be able to scan a screen in micro-seconds, to determine whether someone is offside or not? 🤔 The ridiculous debacle at Tottenham yesterday, could ultimately cost Liverpool millions. Having two (possibly hung-over) VAR officials, is clearly NOT the answer.
 
Costero Poderoso said:
The Finkelstein study from a few years ago showed that the majority of elite refs had something like a 90 plus percentage correct rate for decisions that are not likely to affect a game. It drops to about 70ish on average for critical and game changing decisions. It pointed out that some refs, and I seem to remember it named the refs, had a critical decision making correct at slightly higher than random chance in statistical terms.
Click to expand...
Good knowledge! Didnt realise any kind of study like this had ever taken place. Be an interesting read that - have you any link? Thanks
 
VAR is a disaster. As far as i a concerned. it might be ok to work out whether a ball crossed the line. As in tennis but as to actual decisions no . I Hvent seen the highlights but there was a guy on TIK TOK going mental . AND he made some valid points. offside decisions are absolutley crucial. THEY have to be correct. This could cost promotion or more importantly relegation..
 
TangerineAde said:
I thought we lived in the high tech 21st Century. Surely, there must be higher tech way of completing the final assessment of whether someone is truly offside. Computers, if finely programmed, should be able to scan a screen in micro-seconds, to determine whether someone is offside or not? 🤔 The ridiculous debacle at Tottenham yesterday, could ultimately cost Liverpool millions. Having two (possibly hung-over) VAR officials, is clearly NOT the answer.
Click to expand...
And there we have the reason for VAR in a nutshell: it "could ultimately cost Liverpool millions." VAR's not there to improve the decision-making in a sport's competition. It's there to protect the huge investments committed by the super-rich. That's why the European Cup was changed to the Champions League....it reduced the financial gamble for the big clubs.
 
we did then who would miss ten a side scraps and rubbish refs. YES i would . WE would never be relegated or promoted by VAR. Just hope that a referring decision goes against us, YES we had plenty in the Pl but lower down at least a human being makes a fuck up. Not a robot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: no9
So it turns out the VAR ref was reffing in the UAE 36 hours previously. Probably asleep at the desk.
 
JOHNMAJORTOM said:
VAR is a disaster. As far as i a concerned. it might be ok to work out whether a ball crossed the line. As in tennis but as to actual decisions no . I Hvent seen the highlights but there was a guy on TIK TOK going mental . AND he made some valid points. offside decisions are absolutley crucial. THEY have to be correct. This could cost promotion or more importantly relegation..
Click to expand...
think you are missing a key point. This offside was a major HUMAN error. I doubt you can name any other occasion where var has got an offside decision wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top