Totally agree, there's nothing wrong with video assistance in principle, but the way it has been implemented in football is a complete shambles.
In Rugby Union, if a player appears to have scored a try, but there may be some doubt about it, the Ref can refer it to the TMO. He will then put the footage up on the big screen, so that the on-field officials and the spectators, at the ground or on TV, can see what is being looked at, in slow motion and with different camera angles if necessary. They can also hear the conversation between the Ref and the TMO.
If the on-field decision was 'try', then there has to be a clear reason not to award it, eg a forward pass in the build up, a foot in touch, failing to ground the ball properly, and so on.
If the Ref ruled 'no try', then the video has to show the ball properly and legally grounded for the Ref to change that decision. At all times, it is the Referee, not the TMO, who makes the final decision.
These protocols mean that the outcome is clear and obvious, and there is very rarely any disagreement by coaches and fans. Football should have copied that system, and the whole VAR debate would now be redundant.
I think this decision in the Liverpool game, as amusing as it undoubtedly was, is a red herring.
Even if VAR worked perfectly the way it is supposed to and got every decision correct it would still be a terrible idea.
Tom was right earlier up this thread though, we as supporters have brought this upon ourselves by whinging incessantly about every perceived injustice on message boards and phone ins, often parroting lines from pundits who don't actually know the laws.
I am in agreement with @bargepole on this. I like the fact that the referee is called "sir" in rugby and feel it will advance respect to the officials. Any backchat and the ref can reward the offender by moving the free kick further forward by 10 metres.
We used to have a referee called Fred Weaving in my Sunday morning football days, he was a no nonsense character. Any lip and it was a booking. Many teams referred to him as a "Hitler" but it worked. In fact we used to use him to our advantage in that we never gave him backchat, never argued with the decisions he made. We left all that to the opposition and more often than not it worked, sure as eggs are eggs the opposition would end up frothing at the mouth and usually had less men on the pitch than they started with!
I think that the VAR Official needs to be at the stadium's too, not in Stockley Park which is in Hillingdon. Make the decisions on the PA, everyone can hear the thought process and justification and stops everyone moaning "Why have they made that decision?"
For some reason football referees act in some kind of undeserved omnipotent way. Even with the VAR guys they are looking to be 'the guy'. I watched the Australia Portugal WRC game at the weekend. There was a great moment where the on-field official and the VAR official were having an open and respectful discussion about what had just happened and what the outcome should be. We were all able to listen to it and understand their thinking and perspectives. It added to the game. It came to the right conclusion. I understood why (and I know very little about rugby). The current set up seems to put the pressure on individuals as opposed to informed group decisions. Surely a discussion based decision on Saturday evening would have led to one of them saying 'what? you disallowed the goal. oh wow. well in that case its a goal'.
I feel for the officials but they don't help themselves.
And as for Liverpool considering what steps to take .... oh go fcuk off.
VAR has taken goal joy out of football. A goal is scored and in most cases cheers are muted knowing that someone in an office is scrutinising every aspect of the goal and its build up.
Goal line technology yes, waiting for a toe nail to be judged over a double line is a joyless.
Not that most people listened but the concerns came up in most test scenarios and international tournaments, was widely used and hated in the A league in Oz and some youth tournaments. We just see more of the fallout here
The self important commentators are as guilty, if not more guilty to than fans in making it unworkable. Funny how they don't replay their commentators being rubbish, they were alerted to the offside, looked at a picture that clearly showed it onside and then glossed over it as soon as it wasn't given only to then have blind fury when someone pointed it out later.
They are the ones who replay it for weeks each time and drive the controversy when most fans have moved on with their day.
VAR itself is not the problem. The issue is that football hasn't fundamentally got to grips with how to restore the authority of referees in the game and their use of VAR demonstrates this very clearly. As has been mentioned already, in other sports the whole decision making process is audible and this acts to enlighten players and spectators alike, it demonstrates the process in action and thereby provides the foundation of the ref's authority. In football the decision making remains mystical as if passed down from on high but that just creates a vacuum into which everyone pours their own reckon. They need to have a fundamental think about how to go about this and then implement it in a joined up fashion.
Totally agree, the storm round this will inevitably see more tinkering with the rules that will only make things less clear and erode the refs reputation and authority, and you can bet that the rules will be dropped in favour of an obscure interpretation of common sense that is then argued next time we have controversy. Anyone remember the respect campaign, only captains talking to refs or even the extra 15 mins we were supposed to be getting on each half if there was any time wasting?
Agree with @eric_plant and @floyd - even if working perfectly, VAR takes away the greatest joy within a game (spontaneous celebration of a goal), and even if it was perfect, there would be a robotic joylessness to it. As it is, "letter of the law" often feels against the spirit of the game anyway, as a toe or hair offside does not give any real advantage, so goals that feel legitimate according to the spirit of the game are still ruled out.
So you are saying that fans should be allowed to celebrate a 'goal', even when the player who put the ball in the net was offside when the ball was passed to him? That seems to be an issue with Law 11 rather than VAR.
The actual wording defining an offside position is ''any part of the head, body or feet is nearer to the opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent''.
Perhaps the words ''and gains an advantage'' should be added to that definition, although the interpretation of advantage will necessarily be subjective.
Yes, I'm saying we should go back to the days when a goal was a goal when given on the pitch. The Premier League is almost unwatchable at times, and for me, what has been sacrificed in the name of "getting it right" is too much.
Put it this way - in the Championship season we had a lot of terrible decisions go against us that might have been corrected with VAR, but I would much, much rather we suffered the slings and arrows as we did, than have had VAR involved. Football is supposed to be entertainment, not a sterile analysis of the Zapruder film.
The thing with VAR and offside is that the camera is NEVER in line with the last defender. Has a former official, I had several assessments where I was told that I wasn't in line to make the correct call.....
When the laws of the game were invented, it was meant to have a fast, free-flowing game but we don't have the technology or the decision process quick enough to keep up with the decisions that need making
One of the sheer joys of watching football as a supporter is KNOWING that the goal your team has been awarded should never have been allowed.
And the pleasure of holding a long-lasting grudge against a team who got away with a game-changing wrong decision against your team.
These are all part of what makes being a football supporter such an enriching experience (albeit de-riching in financial terms).
VAR in football is soulless. The only remotely good thing about it is the utter hilarity involved how useless we are in the most expensive league in the world in applying it even half-competently.
What noone has ever explained to me is, if having VAR is so essential to getting the correct decision and that getting the correct decision is so essential to football, what game do the majority of supporters get to watch when VAR isn't a thing in most football grounds?
It must be logical to conclude that we are missing out on something and being sold an inferior product that isn't really football?
So, to summarise all this, VAR as used in the PL is a clunky system, with unexplained decisions handed down from some dark room at Stockley Park, and still getting it wrong some of the time. This causes much moaning from fans and coaches.
Whereas, in the lower divisions, offsides depend upon the linesman's view, and whether or not the flag goes up, rightly or wrongly. Fans and coaches still moan when they believe their side has been affected by a wrong decision.
It's boring when you know the result is pretty much being decided by a bunch of men in a room in another city. It's no longer watching a sporting competition between two sets of elite athletes, trying to outwit the other through guile, skill, tactical nous and a touch of the dark arts - it's watching some old men playing FIFA.
Unless the officials ate bias or bent, over a period of time each team will have a equal number of wrong decisions. Therefore does VAR actually benefit any club in the long term, particularly when some of the VAR decisions themselves turn out to be erroneous?
When a game comes down to a studio full of largely dislikable ex-players arguing like tuppenny lawyers about why a goal should stand or not then I think we have lost the point of the game in the first place.
The first red was an unfortunate happenstance, but it is a red all day long, Jones is over the top of the ball and out of control, he makes contact with the standing leg, could have led to a serious injury. Jota's two yellows were both justified too, he knows exactly what he is doing when crossing behind a player with the ball as he is breaking forward into space, he is just hoping that it will look innocuous and at Anfield he would get away with it all day long. The second yellow is nailed on, he didn't like getting robbed and he went into a challenge which he was never going to win the ball back from, he was late and nowhere near it and he took the player down.
Comments
Funny how it's not a complete shambles in other competitions
Totally agree, there's nothing wrong with video assistance in principle, but the way it has been implemented in football is a complete shambles.
In Rugby Union, if a player appears to have scored a try, but there may be some doubt about it, the Ref can refer it to the TMO. He will then put the footage up on the big screen, so that the on-field officials and the spectators, at the ground or on TV, can see what is being looked at, in slow motion and with different camera angles if necessary. They can also hear the conversation between the Ref and the TMO.
If the on-field decision was 'try', then there has to be a clear reason not to award it, eg a forward pass in the build up, a foot in touch, failing to ground the ball properly, and so on.
If the Ref ruled 'no try', then the video has to show the ball properly and legally grounded for the Ref to change that decision. At all times, it is the Referee, not the TMO, who makes the final decision.
These protocols mean that the outcome is clear and obvious, and there is very rarely any disagreement by coaches and fans. Football should have copied that system, and the whole VAR debate would now be redundant.
I think this decision in the Liverpool game, as amusing as it undoubtedly was, is a red herring.
Even if VAR worked perfectly the way it is supposed to and got every decision correct it would still be a terrible idea.
Tom was right earlier up this thread though, we as supporters have brought this upon ourselves by whinging incessantly about every perceived injustice on message boards and phone ins, often parroting lines from pundits who don't actually know the laws.
I am in agreement with @bargepole on this. I like the fact that the referee is called "sir" in rugby and feel it will advance respect to the officials. Any backchat and the ref can reward the offender by moving the free kick further forward by 10 metres.
We used to have a referee called Fred Weaving in my Sunday morning football days, he was a no nonsense character. Any lip and it was a booking. Many teams referred to him as a "Hitler" but it worked. In fact we used to use him to our advantage in that we never gave him backchat, never argued with the decisions he made. We left all that to the opposition and more often than not it worked, sure as eggs are eggs the opposition would end up frothing at the mouth and usually had less men on the pitch than they started with!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDZC4tz9yFQ
I think that the VAR Official needs to be at the stadium's too, not in Stockley Park which is in Hillingdon. Make the decisions on the PA, everyone can hear the thought process and justification and stops everyone moaning "Why have they made that decision?"
It works for Rugby and Cricket, why not Football?
For some reason football referees act in some kind of undeserved omnipotent way. Even with the VAR guys they are looking to be 'the guy'. I watched the Australia Portugal WRC game at the weekend. There was a great moment where the on-field official and the VAR official were having an open and respectful discussion about what had just happened and what the outcome should be. We were all able to listen to it and understand their thinking and perspectives. It added to the game. It came to the right conclusion. I understood why (and I know very little about rugby). The current set up seems to put the pressure on individuals as opposed to informed group decisions. Surely a discussion based decision on Saturday evening would have led to one of them saying 'what? you disallowed the goal. oh wow. well in that case its a goal'.
I feel for the officials but they don't help themselves.
And as for Liverpool considering what steps to take .... oh go fcuk off.
Yes, that’s a good point. I don’t follow other European leagues closely enough to know why that is, but I’m sure there are lessons to be learnt.
Even if it works perfectly VAR ruins the single best thing about football though.
Oh, I don't *like* VAR; I've just accepted it's here to stay and I think it could be applied so much better.
VAR has taken goal joy out of football. A goal is scored and in most cases cheers are muted knowing that someone in an office is scrutinising every aspect of the goal and its build up.
Goal line technology yes, waiting for a toe nail to be judged over a double line is a joyless.
Not that most people listened but the concerns came up in most test scenarios and international tournaments, was widely used and hated in the A league in Oz and some youth tournaments. We just see more of the fallout here
The self important commentators are as guilty, if not more guilty to than fans in making it unworkable. Funny how they don't replay their commentators being rubbish, they were alerted to the offside, looked at a picture that clearly showed it onside and then glossed over it as soon as it wasn't given only to then have blind fury when someone pointed it out later.
They are the ones who replay it for weeks each time and drive the controversy when most fans have moved on with their day.
VAR itself is not the problem. The issue is that football hasn't fundamentally got to grips with how to restore the authority of referees in the game and their use of VAR demonstrates this very clearly. As has been mentioned already, in other sports the whole decision making process is audible and this acts to enlighten players and spectators alike, it demonstrates the process in action and thereby provides the foundation of the ref's authority. In football the decision making remains mystical as if passed down from on high but that just creates a vacuum into which everyone pours their own reckon. They need to have a fundamental think about how to go about this and then implement it in a joined up fashion.
Totally agree, the storm round this will inevitably see more tinkering with the rules that will only make things less clear and erode the refs reputation and authority, and you can bet that the rules will be dropped in favour of an obscure interpretation of common sense that is then argued next time we have controversy. Anyone remember the respect campaign, only captains talking to refs or even the extra 15 mins we were supposed to be getting on each half if there was any time wasting?
Agree with @eric_plant and @floyd - even if working perfectly, VAR takes away the greatest joy within a game (spontaneous celebration of a goal), and even if it was perfect, there would be a robotic joylessness to it. As it is, "letter of the law" often feels against the spirit of the game anyway, as a toe or hair offside does not give any real advantage, so goals that feel legitimate according to the spirit of the game are still ruled out.
So you are saying that fans should be allowed to celebrate a 'goal', even when the player who put the ball in the net was offside when the ball was passed to him? That seems to be an issue with Law 11 rather than VAR.
The actual wording defining an offside position is ''any part of the head, body or feet is nearer to the opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent''.
Perhaps the words ''and gains an advantage'' should be added to that definition, although the interpretation of advantage will necessarily be subjective.
Yes, I'm saying we should go back to the days when a goal was a goal when given on the pitch. The Premier League is almost unwatchable at times, and for me, what has been sacrificed in the name of "getting it right" is too much.
Put it this way - in the Championship season we had a lot of terrible decisions go against us that might have been corrected with VAR, but I would much, much rather we suffered the slings and arrows as we did, than have had VAR involved. Football is supposed to be entertainment, not a sterile analysis of the Zapruder film.
The thing with VAR and offside is that the camera is NEVER in line with the last defender. Has a former official, I had several assessments where I was told that I wasn't in line to make the correct call.....
When the laws of the game were invented, it was meant to have a fast, free-flowing game but we don't have the technology or the decision process quick enough to keep up with the decisions that need making
One of the sheer joys of watching football as a supporter is KNOWING that the goal your team has been awarded should never have been allowed.
And the pleasure of holding a long-lasting grudge against a team who got away with a game-changing wrong decision against your team.
These are all part of what makes being a football supporter such an enriching experience (albeit de-riching in financial terms).
VAR in football is soulless. The only remotely good thing about it is the utter hilarity involved how useless we are in the most expensive league in the world in applying it even half-competently.
Agree with all of that @bookertease . VAR exists for TV to fill its schedules with outraged pundits droning on about wanting consistency.
I can’t even bear to watch Match of the Day anymore. The Premier League - technically brilliant but (for me) an utter bore-fest.
What noone has ever explained to me is, if having VAR is so essential to getting the correct decision and that getting the correct decision is so essential to football, what game do the majority of supporters get to watch when VAR isn't a thing in most football grounds?
It must be logical to conclude that we are missing out on something and being sold an inferior product that isn't really football?
I want my money back ...
The VAR element was farcical, but I'm not sure how the Spurs - Liverpool game could possibly be described as boring!
So, to summarise all this, VAR as used in the PL is a clunky system, with unexplained decisions handed down from some dark room at Stockley Park, and still getting it wrong some of the time. This causes much moaning from fans and coaches.
Whereas, in the lower divisions, offsides depend upon the linesman's view, and whether or not the flag goes up, rightly or wrongly. Fans and coaches still moan when they believe their side has been affected by a wrong decision.
It seems to be an unwinnable argument.
As far as I can tell the only people who really like VAR are the TV companies, and potentially managers when it suits their narrative.
I absolutely hate it and would love it to be scrapped however I feel the investment and mini industry that has evolved to develop it will resist.
It's boring when you know the result is pretty much being decided by a bunch of men in a room in another city. It's no longer watching a sporting competition between two sets of elite athletes, trying to outwit the other through guile, skill, tactical nous and a touch of the dark arts - it's watching some old men playing FIFA.
Unless the officials ate bias or bent, over a period of time each team will have a equal number of wrong decisions. Therefore does VAR actually benefit any club in the long term, particularly when some of the VAR decisions themselves turn out to be erroneous?
I doubt it. And I get Liverpool's frustration, but they and their fans are really embarrassing themselves with their rabid reaction.
I think it's absolutely fair for them to lose their shit about it. One of their red cards was utter nonsense too.
When a game comes down to a studio full of largely dislikable ex-players arguing like tuppenny lawyers about why a goal should stand or not then I think we have lost the point of the game in the first place.
The first red was an unfortunate happenstance, but it is a red all day long, Jones is over the top of the ball and out of control, he makes contact with the standing leg, could have led to a serious injury. Jota's two yellows were both justified too, he knows exactly what he is doing when crossing behind a player with the ball as he is breaking forward into space, he is just hoping that it will look innocuous and at Anfield he would get away with it all day long. The second yellow is nailed on, he didn't like getting robbed and he went into a challenge which he was never going to win the ball back from, he was late and nowhere near it and he took the player down.
It’s just me. I find the whole PL circus tiring. I’m sure there are great games still - it’s just not for me!
Agree other than on the first Jota yellow - I'm not sure what else he's supposed do there.