@Wendoverman Funnily enough, having written my post I thought maybe I should have kept it back and submitted it to @Jonny_King for publication instead.
I really haven't made up my mind about VAR. I think I'm against it. But I would like to make a couple of points that I don't think have been made in this thread so far. If they have, I apologise.
People have suggested that video technology has led to led to more negative decision making. But is it not the case that, in cricket, the reverse is true in relation to front foot LBWs? Umpires have come to trust Hawkeye and are now prepared to give batsmen out when their front foot is a yard down the pitch.
The second point from cricket is that the review system is supposed only to correct obvious injustices, and this is achieved, partly by the "umpire's call" default when the review is not clear-cut, but also by restricting the number of reviews a captain can make to a low number (depending on the game format) of unsuccessful reviews. If, say, for VAR in football the manager or captain was only allowed one unsuccessful review per game, the appeal would be exceptional and the fans' elation as the ball hit the net scarcely if at all diluted.
Plus, a small but to me not insignificant benefit, Arsène Wenger would never be able to say he hadn't seen the incident again.
Good post @Uncle_T. The system is on trial in the PL with FA approval and we must wait and see what the statisticians and experts decide over time. The PL may have a financial view but the FA are notorious 'stick in the mud's' and for once that attitude may help the traditional live spectacle of a football match.
I can see both sides of this and to be honest I haven't really decided where I sit as yet, although I tend to be in favor of no review/referral. I guess it's a little similar to the difference between a Speed/Bus lane camera and the police watching the same 'offence' occur. The camera provides a snapshot in time and removes all that is human in a situation and the police have the ability to objectively and subjectively decide upon action. Robotic football however...............
I think if you ask most active (no disrespect to those who don’t or can’t attend much) fans they will be firmly against VAR for the most basic fact that it will slow down a quick moving sport (leaving aside our time-wasting).
Ask any manager, chair(wo)man at the higher levels where their livelihoods could depend on the most accurate decision being given and the majority will probably be in favour.
It will inevitably be introduced into the Premier. To which I care a flying fig.
@Uncle_T Go for it! I recycle things I write elsewhere all the time and without knowing how much of a Wanderer/Gasroom crossover there is, I'm sure publishing your story would introduce to at least a few new people. No rush if you do want to, as the next one has already been printed, but if you want to submit for the next edition (out late April) then just drop me an email: [email protected]
This goes for everyone. There are some brilliant, thoughtful, clever things written on here that I'd be only too happy to publish.
I haven't seen any of the matches which have featured VAR so I feel unable to judge. But I hope that those on here who are so against it being adopted are not the same people on here who bemoan the unprofessionalism of lower league referees each time a match goes against us. Either you like the game judged correctly, with delays, or you like an endearing amateurishness to decision making. I myself am agnostic but instinctively veering towards the former opinion.
As for technology, it's moving fast. You can now watch the game from the perspective of each player on the pitch in real time based entirely on footage recorded from the stands. All it needs is a few hundred high definition webcams and a mega strong Internet connection. Artificial intelligence is also moving on apace. Give it five years and decisions will be made in real time without any recourse to assistant referees in darkened rooms. And even non league teams will be able to afford the technology as standard.
@aloysius it's unworkable. If that's the future then im out and following tiddly winks. Just imagine soon we won't need foul mouthed fans we can cast a crowd into a stadium and they can cheer for 90 minutes. The players can practice dance moves on the plastic pitch while waltzing past static defenders in the non contact sport. When they need a breather they can be subbed by one of 15 subs on the full touchline bench. Is this still the game I love?
Good grief a Gasroom debate has actually caused me to change my mind. I had been in favour of VAR on the basis of wanting to see the correct decision made.
While I still hope for that from the match officials I am persuaded by the arguments that any delay in making important decisions will ultimately drain the excitement from football.
Those who argue that you must either accept poor referee decisions or accept the rise of VAR review technology are wrong. There is another alternative ...
Improve the training and performance of the match officials and let them get the decisions right (more often) in the first place. Sure they'll still get some wrong from time to time but at least the game will still be exciting.
Unless the VAR can make instant decisions, and quite frankly the technology clearly can't at the moment because a human has to review the footage, it will never be acceptable to the majority of fans who pay to watch the match live.
I do accept that a trial was necessary but for me the trial is already proving that the technology isn't yet ready to be used in football.
No for me too. And I have no problem with the use of review technology in cricket, tennis or the NFL (although I still seethe over the Tuck Rule decision in Foxborough in ‘02). They are different sports with different flow and pacing. However the PL is mainly watched on TV by people who are perhaps a shade less passionate about the result and will get replays from all angles within moments. I wonder if a poll of TV supporters/customers would be in favour, live match attendees against? And which is the bigger market?
At present it’s a no from me, but as @aloysius says technology is advancing at a pace. There’s little reason to dismiss out of hand some future assistance to refereee decision making if it has no cost to the flow of the game.
You'd think a slow, stop/start, made for tv sport like American Football would be perfect for VAR, but the way it's been used this year has made the NFL almost unwatchable.
It's only a matter of time until the "fans" sat at home watching premier league games get to vote on decisions via the red button, a dedicated Sky mobile app or premium rate text messages. It's the thin end of the wedge.
What I could be in favour of, would be a machine learning algorithm trained on hundreds of thousands of correct and incorrect decisions that watches the game through multiple cameras, lidar and radar, and if it spots something, sends a message to the referee. The holdups are what I object to most with VAR.
@drcongo said:
What I could be in favour of, would be a machine learning algorithm trained on hundreds of thousands of correct and incorrect decisions that watches the game through multiple cameras, lidar and radar, and if it spots something, sends a message to the referee. The holdups are what I object to most with VAR.
Maybe you should design that system - it should be a doddle after the intricacies of Gasroom 2.0.
@SEWanderer said:
With VAR - Luke might not have been sent off, their penalty might not have been awarded and we would not have experienced everything that followed.
Another VAR farce in Italy tonight which many won't hear about from the Premier League obsessed British media.
Genoa scored a perfectly good goal which the referee awarded. He got the nod from upstairs to review it after which he disallowed because slow motion showed the ball had bounced up and hit the scorer's hand (and possibly because the home team was Lazio)
I watched the MOTD highlights of Liverpool v Spurs. After the match the ‘pundits’ spent many minutes reviewing and discussing the first penalty decision, but couldn’t decide whether it was offside or not. Bizarrely, Mark Lawrenson then suggested that having VAR would have resolved the problem! A prime example of someone who’s in favour of VAR but completely oblivious to its failings. How would VAR have helped when the ‘experts’ in the studio, under no pressure and with the ability to watch endless replays, still couldn’t decide on what should be a simple decision. Offside or not offside?
Comments
Write your views on VAR @Uncle_T and send it to @Jonny_King. @drcongo perhaps a bit too blunt.
@Wendoverman Funnily enough, having written my post I thought maybe I should have kept it back and submitted it to @Jonny_King for publication instead.
only ten people post on the Gasroom @Uncle_T and I'm three of them. I am sure @Jonny_King would be more than happy to put it out to a wider audience.
I really haven't made up my mind about VAR. I think I'm against it. But I would like to make a couple of points that I don't think have been made in this thread so far. If they have, I apologise.
People have suggested that video technology has led to led to more negative decision making. But is it not the case that, in cricket, the reverse is true in relation to front foot LBWs? Umpires have come to trust Hawkeye and are now prepared to give batsmen out when their front foot is a yard down the pitch.
The second point from cricket is that the review system is supposed only to correct obvious injustices, and this is achieved, partly by the "umpire's call" default when the review is not clear-cut, but also by restricting the number of reviews a captain can make to a low number (depending on the game format) of unsuccessful reviews. If, say, for VAR in football the manager or captain was only allowed one unsuccessful review per game, the appeal would be exceptional and the fans' elation as the ball hit the net scarcely if at all diluted.
Plus, a small but to me not insignificant benefit, Arsène Wenger would never be able to say he hadn't seen the incident again.
Good post @Uncle_T. The system is on trial in the PL with FA approval and we must wait and see what the statisticians and experts decide over time. The PL may have a financial view but the FA are notorious 'stick in the mud's' and for once that attitude may help the traditional live spectacle of a football match.
I can see both sides of this and to be honest I haven't really decided where I sit as yet, although I tend to be in favor of no review/referral. I guess it's a little similar to the difference between a Speed/Bus lane camera and the police watching the same 'offence' occur. The camera provides a snapshot in time and removes all that is human in a situation and the police have the ability to objectively and subjectively decide upon action. Robotic football however...............
Wow I had better check my medication as I agree with DevC.
I think if you ask most active (no disrespect to those who don’t or can’t attend much) fans they will be firmly against VAR for the most basic fact that it will slow down a quick moving sport (leaving aside our time-wasting).
Ask any manager, chair(wo)man at the higher levels where their livelihoods could depend on the most accurate decision being given and the majority will probably be in favour.
It will inevitably be introduced into the Premier. To which I care a flying fig.
@Uncle_T Go for it! I recycle things I write elsewhere all the time and without knowing how much of a Wanderer/Gasroom crossover there is, I'm sure publishing your story would introduce to at least a few new people. No rush if you do want to, as the next one has already been printed, but if you want to submit for the next edition (out late April) then just drop me an email: [email protected]
This goes for everyone. There are some brilliant, thoughtful, clever things written on here that I'd be only too happy to publish.
I haven't seen any of the matches which have featured VAR so I feel unable to judge. But I hope that those on here who are so against it being adopted are not the same people on here who bemoan the unprofessionalism of lower league referees each time a match goes against us. Either you like the game judged correctly, with delays, or you like an endearing amateurishness to decision making. I myself am agnostic but instinctively veering towards the former opinion.
As for technology, it's moving fast. You can now watch the game from the perspective of each player on the pitch in real time based entirely on footage recorded from the stands. All it needs is a few hundred high definition webcams and a mega strong Internet connection. Artificial intelligence is also moving on apace. Give it five years and decisions will be made in real time without any recourse to assistant referees in darkened rooms. And even non league teams will be able to afford the technology as standard.
It's coming, whether we want it or not.
@aloysius it's unworkable. If that's the future then im out and following tiddly winks. Just imagine soon we won't need foul mouthed fans we can cast a crowd into a stadium and they can cheer for 90 minutes. The players can practice dance moves on the plastic pitch while waltzing past static defenders in the non contact sport. When they need a breather they can be subbed by one of 15 subs on the full touchline bench. Is this still the game I love?
Nah @M3G it can’t be.
Good grief a Gasroom debate has actually caused me to change my mind. I had been in favour of VAR on the basis of wanting to see the correct decision made.
While I still hope for that from the match officials I am persuaded by the arguments that any delay in making important decisions will ultimately drain the excitement from football.
Those who argue that you must either accept poor referee decisions or accept the rise of VAR review technology are wrong. There is another alternative ...
Improve the training and performance of the match officials and let them get the decisions right (more often) in the first place. Sure they'll still get some wrong from time to time but at least the game will still be exciting.
Unless the VAR can make instant decisions, and quite frankly the technology clearly can't at the moment because a human has to review the footage, it will never be acceptable to the majority of fans who pay to watch the match live.
I do accept that a trial was necessary but for me the trial is already proving that the technology isn't yet ready to be used in football.
It’s a “no” from me. Not changed my mind but was on the fence. Very uncomfortable.
No for me too. And I have no problem with the use of review technology in cricket, tennis or the NFL (although I still seethe over the Tuck Rule decision in Foxborough in ‘02). They are different sports with different flow and pacing. However the PL is mainly watched on TV by people who are perhaps a shade less passionate about the result and will get replays from all angles within moments. I wonder if a poll of TV supporters/customers would be in favour, live match attendees against? And which is the bigger market?
At present it’s a no from me, but as @aloysius says technology is advancing at a pace. There’s little reason to dismiss out of hand some future assistance to refereee decision making if it has no cost to the flow of the game.
What @Chris said, from me.
You'd think a slow, stop/start, made for tv sport like American Football would be perfect for VAR, but the way it's been used this year has made the NFL almost unwatchable.
It's only a matter of time until the "fans" sat at home watching premier league games get to vote on decisions via the red button, a dedicated Sky mobile app or premium rate text messages. It's the thin end of the wedge.
What I could be in favour of, would be a machine learning algorithm trained on hundreds of thousands of correct and incorrect decisions that watches the game through multiple cameras, lidar and radar, and if it spots something, sends a message to the referee. The holdups are what I object to most with VAR.
not using fat linos and referees would be good.
And ensuring that they go to Specsavers at least once a year.
Maybe you should design that system - it should be a doddle after the intricacies of Gasroom 2.0.
Just wish Bean's goal had been referred to VAR
Would have really heightened the tension of the occasion and allowed "two bouts of hysteria for one goal"
With VAR - Luke might not have been sent off, their penalty might not have been awarded and we would not have experienced everything that followed.
The paradox of VAR summed up perfectly!
@SEWanderer there is no arguing with that!(cue someone arguing with that!)
Another VAR farce in Italy tonight which many won't hear about from the Premier League obsessed British media.
Genoa scored a perfectly good goal which the referee awarded. He got the nod from upstairs to review it after which he disallowed because slow motion showed the ball had bounced up and hit the scorer's hand (and possibly because the home team was Lazio)
From your description, that sounds like a pretty optimal use of the system.
You have a different interpretation of the laws to me then
I watched the MOTD highlights of Liverpool v Spurs. After the match the ‘pundits’ spent many minutes reviewing and discussing the first penalty decision, but couldn’t decide whether it was offside or not. Bizarrely, Mark Lawrenson then suggested that having VAR would have resolved the problem! A prime example of someone who’s in favour of VAR but completely oblivious to its failings. How would VAR have helped when the ‘experts’ in the studio, under no pressure and with the ability to watch endless replays, still couldn’t decide on what should be a simple decision. Offside or not offside?