@eric_plant said:
you don't go to games so you wouldn't understand, but in answer to your question then yes, putting up with the occasional incorrect decision is easily a price worth paying for not having the best thing about football ruined
absolute no brainer
Absolutely.
DevC, two decisions over the course of goodness knows how many years is hardly worth ruining the whole fun of being a football fan IMO. Mistakes happen. That's life. The sooner the authorities stop trying to sterilise the beautiful game the better.
@DevC 'Which brings us to the sole remaining question - is the benefit of getting more decisions right worth the cost, if any, of disrupting the flow and supporter enjoyment.'
I'm going to guess you are talking about financial cost on this as you've proven time and time again you place no value in emotion, entertainment or hundred years of history.
Would that be a fair assumption?
Talking purely financially I can see an argument that the money a top side might get from getting in the Champions League on an over turned decision or staying in the Premier League on a wrongly given goal might out weigh the cost of the system. That same calculation can't work lower down the leagues though.
For me the whole debate is skewed in the wrong direction. I would argue it's poor refereeing that is the problem. This is due to ref's having too many directives in their heads and lets be honest the increased level of cheating in the game. Address these issues and the need for video referees reduces massively. Punish players that cheat, punish managers who's teams get punished for cheating and punish clubs who do this. Help referees make better decisions.
For me cheats can't complain about the odd wrong call on a foul. It's actually what they are trying to achieve. Will video evidence root them out quicker? Doesn't seem to be working so far.
its not just two decisions, Quartered. VAR awarded a goal to Leicester this year in its first game I believe that the lino had incorrectly ruled out for offside.
No you assume wrongly, Mr Middle. Nothing in my post was to do with money. Plainly it is desirable if as many decisions as possible are correct - surely you wouldn't argue with that. Plainly technology is likely to get more decisions right than one man's eyes (although still not all - that is still beyond us). It is almost impossible for one man with one instant view to get marginal decisions happening incredibly quickly correct.
So the question is, is the benefit of getting more decisions right worth the disbenefit (word changed from cost) if any in flow of the game and supporter enjoyment of key moments.
truth is none of us know yet as they are just trialling it to find out and trying to optimise how to use it. Too many people seem to have already made their mind up without waiting to see. Change can sometimes be beneficial.
@Right_in_the_Middle said:
DevC 'Which brings us to the sole remaining question - is the benefit of getting more decisions right worth the cost, if any, of disrupting the flow and supporter enjoyment.'
I'm going to guess you are talking about financial cost on this as you've proven time and time again you place no value in emotion, entertainment or hundred years of history.
Would that be a fair assumption?
Talking purely financially I can see an argument that the money a top side might get from getting in the Champions League on an over turned decision or staying in the Premier League on a wrongly given goal might out weigh the cost of the system. That same calculation can't work lower down the leagues though.
For me the whole debate is skewed in the wrong direction. I would argue it's poor refereeing that is the problem. This is due to ref's having too many directives in their heads and lets be honest the increased level of cheating in the game. Address these issues and the need for video referees reduces massively. Punish players that cheat, punish managers who's teams get punished for cheating and punish clubs who do this. Help referees make better decisions.
For me cheats can't complain about the odd wrong call on a foul. It's actually what they are trying to achieve. Will video evidence root them out quicker? Doesn't seem to be working so far.
@ChasHarps I know what you mean but I am at heart a Forest fan as I was brought up there...but I am an ST holder at Adams Park and want nothing more than the team to be up there with the big boys the way the likes of Burton and Wigan have managed it. As for VAR I'm not a fan as the ups and downs of football are just that, but I feel it's implementation will improve and eventually it will be just be accepted. As others have pointed out though...the chances of it ever being introduced in League One and Two before we are all being biffed about by idiots in care homes is slim.
I've long suspected that the only serious advocates of VAR are not only people who don't go to games, but who have forgotten what it's like to go to games. Thanks @DevC for confirming that view.
For those who remember that football is not a tv show, VAR is worthless.
Great post @Right_in_the_Middle.
The all-important financial consequences of questionable decisions by officials (note that I didn’t say “incorrect”) affecting the outcome of a match are carillions of times greater at the higher levels than they are at our level.
Surely, frustrating though it is when we are "wronged" by a clear and obvious incorrect decision by an official, a balance is reached over the course of time? Then we would have nothing to whinge/gloat over on this forum?
Well apart from the decisions made by our own board/manager/coach etc.
@Wendoverman
I totally understand supporters,who have there boyhood team from where they grew up, but for whatever reason have moved quite a distance, and now follow the local team, but still have affection for their home town team.
But in Mr DevC case, he switched allegiance to a team 20 miles down the road, because they were riding on the crest of wave.
A good job the majority of the Loakes Park faithful, didn't desert the Wanderers in there barron times, as we probably wouldn't have a club at all.
I think when debating with Mr DevC, you need to realise he doesn't hold the Wanderers close to his heart, like many posters on this site do.
I just don't see VAR working at our level where a multi-camera angle is required to DEFINITIVELY settle an ambiguity. With rugby a try is awarded when a ref sees a incident from backwards, forwards, left, right, pitch-level etc and even then there is the chance for doubt.
How is a fourth division club going to provide multi-camera angles that cover the whole pitch.
Its a nice experiment but lets keep at that (ie used but not by the referee) until the cost and reliability is proven. Emotionally and technically i just don't see it
@DevC 'It is almost impossible for one man with one instant view to get marginal decisions happening incredibly quickly correct.'
Firstly there are three officials but more importantly the sport has been played perfectly well for years and don't you think that if your statement was true it would have caused more of a problem than it has? Referees have managed at all levels to get most things right and up to the now most have accepted this.
Lots of decisions aren't clear cut black and white cases. A human needs to interpret what has happened and decide intent, contact, context and many other things. A lot of that is lost in a slow motion replay or a multi angle view. It can be argued for days whether a tackle with no contact but significant intent is a foul. How certain can a video referee be on a handball?
All these things are an unneeded interference in the game but sorry to mention it again. Eric's point about the loss of emotion at the point when emotion is paramount should knock any scheme on the head straight away.
At the end of the day this is - like the Champions League/Europe League - all at the behest of the richest clubs of the world who, set to lose millions with one poor decision or mistake, are trying to take every last bit of doubt or chance out of the game. I don't like VAR, doubt we will see it at our level, but fear it is not something that the authorities have any intention of halting. This is one of the main reasons I enjoy my games at Adams Park more than watching millionaires, however skillful, on Match of the Day.
This might sound a bit “jumpers for goal posts” but the attractiveness of football for me is it’s accessibilty for any, and all levels, to have a kick about with exactly the same rules and (largely) the same equipment in your back garden as is required in the premier league.
The addition of more technology, which comes with its own rules on when and how and why to use it, means it’s starts to diverge from what goes on at grass roots.
It should be as close as possible at the very top, to the very bottom in terms of “things needed” to have a game.
I'd rather the FA concentrated on providing better training for match officials, perhaps allowing them to go full time. That would surely help improve the ratio of correct decisions without absolutely destroying the game as a spectacle, which from what I've seen, VAR does.
Think of all the times, in the guff between games on MOTD, when, after multiple replays from different angles, Lineker et al still can't agree on if an incident was a foul or not. I certainly don't like the idea of mutedly celebrating a Wycombe goal, because I'm waiting to hear back from some bloke sat in a van in the carpark whether or not Bayo shoved his man out the way a few seconds earlier, just so I can treat the blast of a whistle and a pointing gesture with a warm round of applause and a half-hearted cheer like they do in rugby.
I am in favour of using goal-line technology to confirm whether or not the ball has completely crossed the line. That is a purely objective decision: measurable and observable, with the likelihood of disputable cases extremely low. The system that is in use in some competitions seems to provide a very quick Yes/No answer - quicker than the time it would take for the referee to go and consult his assistant - so no issues in that regard.
I am not in favour of going beyond that and using VAR for confirming or overturning subjective decisions during the course of the match; less still if it comes to be used by referees INSTEAD of being confident enough to make subjective decisions without first quadruple checking the replays.
I have been thinking about this as I read through this thread and I tihnk the following sums it up for me. One of the memories that will live long from this season for my son and I is of a cold, wet evening in Crewe. When the winning goal went in I rather lost it, indulging in utterly spontaneous "jumping around, going mental and hugging strangers" behaviour of the kind that @eric_plant refers to above. My son talked repeatedly, and very excitedly, all the way home about how, whilst I was leaping around hugging others, random fellow fans were hugging, high-fiving and bouncng up and down with him. I was still buzzing off that feeling three days later: far more than a scraped win at lowly Crewe probably deserved, but that instantaneous, spontaneous release was quite something and reminded me just why I keep going to watch Wycombe - for moments like that.
@Jonny_King Has hits the nail on the head when he refers to reacting to "the blast of a whistle and a pointing gesture with a warm round of applause and a half-hearted cheer". Had there been a need to wait for a VAR review for that winning goal, by the time it was finally awarded, even if it only took 30-45 seconds to reach the verdict, all spontaneity would have been lost. I most likely would have roared and clapped loudly, hugged my son (as I am wont to do when Wycombe score) and been very happy. There would have been no hugging of random strangers, because that would have felt somehow contrived and false if I had had time to make a deliberate decision to do so. I am certain also that I would have pretty much forgotten about the match in a few months, if not weeks, whereas I know that many years from now my son and I will still sometimes reminisce about that memorable night in Crewe where we, and all around us, completely lost it when Craig Mackail-Smith scored the late, late winner.
I eagerly await DevC's "Earth is flat" thread where we're told that we're just not giving the idea enough time, and that as soon as we all start falling off the edges we'll realise the truth.
Someone should start a fanzine and get some of the eloquent, memory-drenched idealistic posters on here to contribute to it. Sell it for about £1.50 on match days.
Comments
Aren't you on the wrong Forum Dev?
Absolutely.
DevC, two decisions over the course of goodness knows how many years is hardly worth ruining the whole fun of being a football fan IMO. Mistakes happen. That's life. The sooner the authorities stop trying to sterilise the beautiful game the better.
@DevC 'Which brings us to the sole remaining question - is the benefit of getting more decisions right worth the cost, if any, of disrupting the flow and supporter enjoyment.'
I'm going to guess you are talking about financial cost on this as you've proven time and time again you place no value in emotion, entertainment or hundred years of history.
Would that be a fair assumption?
Talking purely financially I can see an argument that the money a top side might get from getting in the Champions League on an over turned decision or staying in the Premier League on a wrongly given goal might out weigh the cost of the system. That same calculation can't work lower down the leagues though.
For me the whole debate is skewed in the wrong direction. I would argue it's poor refereeing that is the problem. This is due to ref's having too many directives in their heads and lets be honest the increased level of cheating in the game. Address these issues and the need for video referees reduces massively. Punish players that cheat, punish managers who's teams get punished for cheating and punish clubs who do this. Help referees make better decisions.
For me cheats can't complain about the odd wrong call on a foul. It's actually what they are trying to achieve. Will video evidence root them out quicker? Doesn't seem to be working so far.
its not just two decisions, Quartered. VAR awarded a goal to Leicester this year in its first game I believe that the lino had incorrectly ruled out for offside.
No you assume wrongly, Mr Middle. Nothing in my post was to do with money. Plainly it is desirable if as many decisions as possible are correct - surely you wouldn't argue with that. Plainly technology is likely to get more decisions right than one man's eyes (although still not all - that is still beyond us). It is almost impossible for one man with one instant view to get marginal decisions happening incredibly quickly correct.
So the question is, is the benefit of getting more decisions right worth the disbenefit (word changed from cost) if any in flow of the game and supporter enjoyment of key moments.
truth is none of us know yet as they are just trialling it to find out and trying to optimise how to use it. Too many people seem to have already made their mind up without waiting to see. Change can sometimes be beneficial.
Excellent post.
@ChasHarps I know what you mean but I am at heart a Forest fan as I was brought up there...but I am an ST holder at Adams Park and want nothing more than the team to be up there with the big boys the way the likes of Burton and Wigan have managed it. As for VAR I'm not a fan as the ups and downs of football are just that, but I feel it's implementation will improve and eventually it will be just be accepted. As others have pointed out though...the chances of it ever being introduced in League One and Two before we are all being biffed about by idiots in care homes is slim.
Having said that I could not name more than three or four of the present Forest team so perhaps I have been Wycombised!
I've long suspected that the only serious advocates of VAR are not only people who don't go to games, but who have forgotten what it's like to go to games. Thanks @DevC for confirming that view.
For those who remember that football is not a tv show, VAR is worthless.
Great post @Right_in_the_Middle.
The all-important financial consequences of questionable decisions by officials (note that I didn’t say “incorrect”) affecting the outcome of a match are carillions of times greater at the higher levels than they are at our level.
Surely, frustrating though it is when we are "wronged" by a clear and obvious incorrect decision by an official, a balance is reached over the course of time? Then we would have nothing to whinge/gloat over on this forum?
Well apart from the decisions made by our own board/manager/coach etc.
@Wendoverman
I totally understand supporters,who have there boyhood team from where they grew up, but for whatever reason have moved quite a distance, and now follow the local team, but still have affection for their home town team.
But in Mr DevC case, he switched allegiance to a team 20 miles down the road, because they were riding on the crest of wave.
A good job the majority of the Loakes Park faithful, didn't desert the Wanderers in there barron times, as we probably wouldn't have a club at all.
I think when debating with Mr DevC, you need to realise he doesn't hold the Wanderers close to his heart, like many posters on this site do.
I just don't see VAR working at our level where a multi-camera angle is required to DEFINITIVELY settle an ambiguity. With rugby a try is awarded when a ref sees a incident from backwards, forwards, left, right, pitch-level etc and even then there is the chance for doubt.
How is a fourth division club going to provide multi-camera angles that cover the whole pitch.
Its a nice experiment but lets keep at that (ie used but not by the referee) until the cost and reliability is proven. Emotionally and technically i just don't see it
We need to get the scoreboard functioning correctly first
Let alone the 'big screen'!
Be interesting in the cups...when VAR might be available at a Prem ground...but NOT at a League Two team...
VAR is bollocks. I don't understand how there's even a debate here.
because @DevC
@drcongo where would we be if a load of bollocks was not a valid discussion point on the Gasroom?
@DevC 'It is almost impossible for one man with one instant view to get marginal decisions happening incredibly quickly correct.'
Firstly there are three officials but more importantly the sport has been played perfectly well for years and don't you think that if your statement was true it would have caused more of a problem than it has? Referees have managed at all levels to get most things right and up to the now most have accepted this.
Lots of decisions aren't clear cut black and white cases. A human needs to interpret what has happened and decide intent, contact, context and many other things. A lot of that is lost in a slow motion replay or a multi angle view. It can be argued for days whether a tackle with no contact but significant intent is a foul. How certain can a video referee be on a handball?
All these things are an unneeded interference in the game but sorry to mention it again. Eric's point about the loss of emotion at the point when emotion is paramount should knock any scheme on the head straight away.
At the end of the day this is - like the Champions League/Europe League - all at the behest of the richest clubs of the world who, set to lose millions with one poor decision or mistake, are trying to take every last bit of doubt or chance out of the game. I don't like VAR, doubt we will see it at our level, but fear it is not something that the authorities have any intention of halting. This is one of the main reasons I enjoy my games at Adams Park more than watching millionaires, however skillful, on Match of the Day.
This might sound a bit “jumpers for goal posts” but the attractiveness of football for me is it’s accessibilty for any, and all levels, to have a kick about with exactly the same rules and (largely) the same equipment in your back garden as is required in the premier league.
The addition of more technology, which comes with its own rules on when and how and why to use it, means it’s starts to diverge from what goes on at grass roots.
It should be as close as possible at the very top, to the very bottom in terms of “things needed” to have a game.
I'd rather the FA concentrated on providing better training for match officials, perhaps allowing them to go full time. That would surely help improve the ratio of correct decisions without absolutely destroying the game as a spectacle, which from what I've seen, VAR does.
Think of all the times, in the guff between games on MOTD, when, after multiple replays from different angles, Lineker et al still can't agree on if an incident was a foul or not. I certainly don't like the idea of mutedly celebrating a Wycombe goal, because I'm waiting to hear back from some bloke sat in a van in the carpark whether or not Bayo shoved his man out the way a few seconds earlier, just so I can treat the blast of a whistle and a pointing gesture with a warm round of applause and a half-hearted cheer like they do in rugby.
All of this ^
100% Sooner its ditched the better. It's a football destroyer.
I am in favour of using goal-line technology to confirm whether or not the ball has completely crossed the line. That is a purely objective decision: measurable and observable, with the likelihood of disputable cases extremely low. The system that is in use in some competitions seems to provide a very quick Yes/No answer - quicker than the time it would take for the referee to go and consult his assistant - so no issues in that regard.
I am not in favour of going beyond that and using VAR for confirming or overturning subjective decisions during the course of the match; less still if it comes to be used by referees INSTEAD of being confident enough to make subjective decisions without first quadruple checking the replays.
I have been thinking about this as I read through this thread and I tihnk the following sums it up for me. One of the memories that will live long from this season for my son and I is of a cold, wet evening in Crewe. When the winning goal went in I rather lost it, indulging in utterly spontaneous "jumping around, going mental and hugging strangers" behaviour of the kind that @eric_plant refers to above. My son talked repeatedly, and very excitedly, all the way home about how, whilst I was leaping around hugging others, random fellow fans were hugging, high-fiving and bouncng up and down with him. I was still buzzing off that feeling three days later: far more than a scraped win at lowly Crewe probably deserved, but that instantaneous, spontaneous release was quite something and reminded me just why I keep going to watch Wycombe - for moments like that.
@Jonny_King Has hits the nail on the head when he refers to reacting to "the blast of a whistle and a pointing gesture with a warm round of applause and a half-hearted cheer". Had there been a need to wait for a VAR review for that winning goal, by the time it was finally awarded, even if it only took 30-45 seconds to reach the verdict, all spontaneity would have been lost. I most likely would have roared and clapped loudly, hugged my son (as I am wont to do when Wycombe score) and been very happy. There would have been no hugging of random strangers, because that would have felt somehow contrived and false if I had had time to make a deliberate decision to do so. I am certain also that I would have pretty much forgotten about the match in a few months, if not weeks, whereas I know that many years from now my son and I will still sometimes reminisce about that memorable night in Crewe where we, and all around us, completely lost it when Craig Mackail-Smith scored the late, late winner.
what @Uncle_T said.
I eagerly await DevC's "Earth is flat" thread where we're told that we're just not giving the idea enough time, and that as soon as we all start falling off the edges we'll realise the truth.
@Uncle_T What a fantiastic, lovely post.
brilliant post, and a superbly evocative picture painting of what it truly means to be supporter
Someone should start a fanzine and get some of the eloquent, memory-drenched idealistic posters on here to contribute to it. Sell it for about £1.50 on match days.