18 Jul 2020 08:12:56
VAR, success or failure?

The principle is sound and it has corrected some bad decisions but it’s also confirmed it’s fair share. I realise it’s only as good as the people using it but I am left scratching my head at some decisions. The penalty that Bailey conceded against Bournemouth for example, it looked pretty clear that it his his shoulder. The penalty Fernandes won against Villa was never a penalty. I know some decisions will be open to interpretation but those 2 just seemed bizarre, and they are not the only ones.

We’ve talked about the offside nonsense, if you have to look at it for more than 30 seconds then it isn’t a clear and obvious error, we were fortunate on Thursday, I still don’t see how their ‘goal’ was deemed off side.

Overall, great concept, badly executed, a more common sense approach is needed. If we continue to use the phrase clear and obvious error, then that should be the guiding principle.

1.) 18 Jul 2020
18 Jul 2020 08:45:45
I'd say it is a work in progress. It will take a couple of seasons more to fine tune it. Although, the refs in charge if VAR need to be impartial and not afraid of going against the refs decision.

2.) 18 Jul 2020
18 Jul 2020 09:42:44
Football is often subjective and open to interpretation therefore introducing VAR was always going to be problematic in my opinion.

We're in this position because people couldn't accept the referees decision. Curiously we're still in the same position as people now can't accept the VAR decision. Football is open to interpretation and using technology to try and alter decisions that are often subjective and open to interpretation was always going to provide inconsistent results as the infringement is often in the eye of the beholder and rarely a matter of fact.

Did the game really need a forensic examination of predominantly subjective decisions where often referees can't even agree let alone players, managers or fans.

Unless it's a glaringly obvious mistake, which let's be honest are relatively few and far between I'd go with the on-field decision or certainly encourage the use of the pitch side monitors so the referee remains the principle decision maker.

I'm not convinced VAR was needed and nothing I have seen has changed my mind thus far.

3.) 18 Jul 2020
18 Jul 2020 09:48:34
Tony, it really does ones head in. But i think there are certain decisions that require a human touch per se. For instance, a penalty or a foul are things that the onfield referee is the closest to. VAR can only look at it for a clear misjudgement or a clear and obvious error, like whether a player was fouled or was it a dive. Or handball decision, whether it hit the arm or not. Those are decisions that have an element of doubt and may be seen as being made by a human. Was the arm close to the body, was it flailing. Was the ball hit too close to the man or not. These require human interpretation of the laws. Having said that, refs watch each others backs. Bailly one i thought was a pen as he moved his hand to the ball and it did hit him right on the joint of the shoulder and arm, human interpretation again. Bruno one was never a penalty.

But on the offside rule, unless the rule changes i think VAR is right. It is like the goal line tech. Even if its a millimetre, off means off. As one of the refs said, its a matter of fact rather than human interpretation.

4.) 18 Jul 2020
18 Jul 2020 10:13:08
VAR is a technology. It is not right or wrong. The issue is that the standard of officiating is poor, and refs are trying to use the technology as a decision maker rather than a tool to help them make decisions.

5.) 18 Jul 2020
18 Jul 2020 10:42:27
I didn't really want VAR and since it has come in it hasn't really changed my mind .
I think it would be better if the ref reviewed it on the pitch tho at least then the man on the pitch is still in charge of the game.

6.) 18 Jul 2020
18 Jul 2020 11:12:34
Agree jred.
And also, the referee should have access to pitch side monitor.

I also feel VAR should intervene play and send players off for nasty challenges (If the on-pitch referee misses the incident) .

{Ed002's Note - The referee has access to a pitch-side monitor.}

7.) 18 Jul 2020
18 Jul 2020 11:12:35
VAR is a work in progress, typically as is the English mentality we have taken something that on the whole works elsewhere around the world but think we can do it better so deliberately use it in a different way then wonder why is isn't as successful as those using it abroad.

8.) 18 Jul 2020
18 Jul 2020 12:23:53
For the marginal offside decisions, I feel an 'umpire's call' situation similar to cricket, where you stick with the onfield decision should the difference be miniscule. Yes, Jordan Ayew was technically offside looking at the images the other day, but if that's outside the margin of error for the technogy, then I feel it should be 'umpire's call'.

9.) 18 Jul 2020
18 Jul 2020 12:50:47
If you had seen real Madrid's VAR decisions, you would question whether it has been successful abroad.

I struggle to see how it will work going forward.

10.) 18 Jul 2020
18 Jul 2020 13:08:37
Can be improved upon massively.
Agree with jred ref on pitch should review the monitor at lot more than we see particularly for very close or the more subjective calls.

11.) 18 Jul 2020
18 Jul 2020 14:50:16
I love VAR and tbh i think Utd have done ok by it . We have definitely had more correct decisions in our favour. 😀😀.

12.) 18 Jul 2020
18 Jul 2020 18:20:55
VAR is rubbish but that's what makes it OK. I'm against the principle of VAR because it makes the game too clinical. In practice it creates more controversy that it solves.

Anything that makes the game more dramatic is good. I hope either they get rid of VAR or keep it like it is. I don't want to see it working effectively.