"But tv evidence and replays would have given the referee more information on which to judge his decision rather than the split second impression he has to base it on now."
That is not, and never has been, the point of VAR @DevC.
VAR is about getting the key decisions as right as is possible and it is surely obvious that the more information the referee has the more right key decisions will be, accepting that they will inevitably often be subjective.
Booker, when I go to football (rare these days - Yeovil is one of just two games when I live closer than you do and then only just - next year there may be none), I go to watch my team win and to enjoy the skill of the players achieving that and the community of the supporters. I don't go to football to see the referee making bad decisions. While I accept that is inevitable at present, the less of those the better for me.
I don't blame referees for making bad decisions - it is almost impossible for them to do it much better with one look and obviously referees need to learn to use the technology effectively. that is the purpose of the trial.
But it is very possible that if the two referees had the opportunity to see what actually happened rather than what a fleeting glimpse in real time made them think happened, the semi final of the champions league may have been man city v juventus rather than Liverpool v real. it shouldn't (as much as practical) be referees and their wrong decisions that decide that, it should be the skills of the players.
I think chance and luck should be exorcised from everything in life....thus excitement, which often clouds judgement can be removed from all human activities and we can all just bumble along with our lives.
is excitement at a football match for you Wendover mainly the hope that the referee may make a mistake or the hope that a player may pull off a brilliant bit of skill and fire into the top corner.
The way I saw it last night, although Juventus made a brilliant comeback they were never dominant and Real Madrid could have scored on several other occasions. Over the 2 leg tie Real deserved to progress.
Football usually settles the best team as winner even if the referee gets the odd decision wrong (last night was a blatant pen though).
Off the top of my head I can think of the Maradona goal, the Lampard "goal" and the disallowed City "goal" on Tuesday night as decisions proven by TV to have been incorrect. In each of these cases I still think the better team went through in all ties. Argentina/Germany/Liverpool.
I don't want VAR but I expect it is here to stay. Penalty calls are always going to be subjective and I'm not sure how VAR can help change that.
Here's another way of looking at it @DevC and I know I'm absolutely going to regret doing this, but hey-ho, I've committed now.
If they developed a super-duper sex robot that could guarantee you the absolute best sex of your life every time, would you switch to that, or would you stick with humans and run the risk of having some bad sex every now and then?
(I only use this analogy because I've just seen there's a documentary about sex robots on iPlayer. I haven't watched it, although, truthfully, I probably will.)
Back on topic, the referee/lino getting the odd decision wrong, is the main fodder for top up discussion, throughout football. Attending real football matches for 45+ years, it has always been the same. 10,000 witnesses in a stadium, at least 33% of them seeing the same incident, will mostly have a differing viewpoint on the same event. Watching WWFC live for 24+ years, over that time, I believe, it all evens out. Some you win, some you lose, it's the way of football. At 3rd & 4th tier level, I doubt there will ever be enough money spare to implement VAR, so the debates about every major decision will rage on and long may it continue. VAR is only for the armchair supporter and I will only be that, when I am too decrepit to attend proper football, at which point, I hope to ensure I have "Dignitas" on speed dial and the funds to use their services!
Replays have worked well in cricket, and not just for armchair supporters. I’m not against replays in football in principle, but I don’t see a practical way it can be implemented with current technology.
If there were a way to ensure that refereeing decisions were 100% correct all of the time without any cost (so no slowing down of the game) I would be in favour of that. But we are a long way from that place. My preference is definitely towards keeping the flow of the game and accepting that referees will make mistakes.
Worth a look at the way hockey does it at international level. Probably the best implementation for a sport where the flow of the game is integral. VAR has to be about stopping the howler rather than making borderline judgement calls.
In terms of making fewer poor decisions the only way for me is to find ways to cut out the level of cheating going on in the game. Referees don't stand a chance of being any good when they are being conned left, right and centre. Players have no real right to complain about refereeing errors whilst they have plans to con them at every turn.
There is far more subjectivity in football, than other sports and therefore struggles to work, as you can't define how much contact has to be made for a foul to be given. Shown by endless debates that are had at games, after games and in TV studios watching constant slow mo replays.
I can see it working for offsides, if done quickly (which it's currently not) as a rule can be adapted to make a definite objective decision.
As for fouls, if they want to use it, it should only be for clear cut errors.
Offsides and goals I can see the point if a referee can be alerted by a third party at speed, but I cannot see that being implemented at our level any time soon. I'm with the 'it all evens out' school and if we are relegated by a dodgy decision on the last day of the season...it's because we were crap enough to be down there in the first place. Of course, as a football fan I reserve the right to completely contradict myself within any given time frame depending on circumstances.
@Right_in_the_Middle I've not watched much hockey so I'd be interested to see how that works.
I agree about cheating, but similar to VAR I don't see a practical way to remove this kind of thing from the game when there are, as @SEWanderer says, such subjective situations. Players will always make the most of tackles which may be borderline fouls and its very hard to legislate against. Refereeing must be extremely challenging and I have every sympathy for the officials.
Comments
"But tv evidence and replays would have given the referee more information on which to judge his decision rather than the split second impression he has to base it on now."
That is not, and never has been, the point of VAR @DevC.
I don't pay good money to watch a referee watching the telly.
I don't understand your comment, York.
VAR is about getting the key decisions as right as is possible and it is surely obvious that the more information the referee has the more right key decisions will be, accepting that they will inevitably often be subjective.
Booker, when I go to football (rare these days - Yeovil is one of just two games when I live closer than you do and then only just - next year there may be none), I go to watch my team win and to enjoy the skill of the players achieving that and the community of the supporters. I don't go to football to see the referee making bad decisions. While I accept that is inevitable at present, the less of those the better for me.
I don't blame referees for making bad decisions - it is almost impossible for them to do it much better with one look and obviously referees need to learn to use the technology effectively. that is the purpose of the trial.
But it is very possible that if the two referees had the opportunity to see what actually happened rather than what a fleeting glimpse in real time made them think happened, the semi final of the champions league may have been man city v juventus rather than Liverpool v real. it shouldn't (as much as practical) be referees and their wrong decisions that decide that, it should be the skills of the players.
I think chance and luck should be exorcised from everything in life....thus excitement, which often clouds judgement can be removed from all human activities and we can all just bumble along with our lives.
is excitement at a football match for you Wendover mainly the hope that the referee may make a mistake or the hope that a player may pull off a brilliant bit of skill and fire into the top corner.
If a referee makes a mistake that leads to a Wycombe goal I’m all for it.
No...the excitement for me is standing next to some boring twat telling me how it could all be improved by technology.
Also @Devc what's wrong with being excited about the chance for both of the above?
The way I saw it last night, although Juventus made a brilliant comeback they were never dominant and Real Madrid could have scored on several other occasions. Over the 2 leg tie Real deserved to progress.
Football usually settles the best team as winner even if the referee gets the odd decision wrong (last night was a blatant pen though).
Off the top of my head I can think of the Maradona goal, the Lampard "goal" and the disallowed City "goal" on Tuesday night as decisions proven by TV to have been incorrect. In each of these cases I still think the better team went through in all ties. Argentina/Germany/Liverpool.
I don't want VAR but I expect it is here to stay. Penalty calls are always going to be subjective and I'm not sure how VAR can help change that.
VAR for me is very much like Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the opposition
I knew it would be bad, but it's even worse than I imagined
Don’t worry @eric_plant, he won’t be leader of the opposition long. He’ll be PM soon enough.
(Hopefully more correct than my US election prediction.)
Here's another way of looking at it @DevC and I know I'm absolutely going to regret doing this, but hey-ho, I've committed now.
If they developed a super-duper sex robot that could guarantee you the absolute best sex of your life every time, would you switch to that, or would you stick with humans and run the risk of having some bad sex every now and then?
(I only use this analogy because I've just seen there's a documentary about sex robots on iPlayer. I haven't watched it, although, truthfully, I probably will.)
Can the sex robot look like Tony Adams?
I don't know if they're bespoke exactly, but probably.
When sex robots appear it's time to close the thread.
@Wendoverman The sex robots will see this and when the rebellion happens they'll kill you first.
(after having sex with you)
Wouldn't the sex robots still use VAR to ensure there was no u detected foul play in the box?
Brilliant!
@Jonny_King but what a way to go. As long as it was not the TonyAdamsbot.
@devc is thinking hard about this one
Back on topic, the referee/lino getting the odd decision wrong, is the main fodder for top up discussion, throughout football. Attending real football matches for 45+ years, it has always been the same. 10,000 witnesses in a stadium, at least 33% of them seeing the same incident, will mostly have a differing viewpoint on the same event. Watching WWFC live for 24+ years, over that time, I believe, it all evens out. Some you win, some you lose, it's the way of football. At 3rd & 4th tier level, I doubt there will ever be enough money spare to implement VAR, so the debates about every major decision will rage on and long may it continue. VAR is only for the armchair supporter and I will only be that, when I am too decrepit to attend proper football, at which point, I hope to ensure I have "Dignitas" on speed dial and the funds to use their services!
Replays have worked well in cricket, and not just for armchair supporters. I’m not against replays in football in principle, but I don’t see a practical way it can be implemented with current technology.
If there were a way to ensure that refereeing decisions were 100% correct all of the time without any cost (so no slowing down of the game) I would be in favour of that. But we are a long way from that place. My preference is definitely towards keeping the flow of the game and accepting that referees will make mistakes.
Worth a look at the way hockey does it at international level. Probably the best implementation for a sport where the flow of the game is integral. VAR has to be about stopping the howler rather than making borderline judgement calls.
In terms of making fewer poor decisions the only way for me is to find ways to cut out the level of cheating going on in the game. Referees don't stand a chance of being any good when they are being conned left, right and centre. Players have no real right to complain about refereeing errors whilst they have plans to con them at every turn.
There is far more subjectivity in football, than other sports and therefore struggles to work, as you can't define how much contact has to be made for a foul to be given. Shown by endless debates that are had at games, after games and in TV studios watching constant slow mo replays.
I can see it working for offsides, if done quickly (which it's currently not) as a rule can be adapted to make a definite objective decision.
As for fouls, if they want to use it, it should only be for clear cut errors.
To be fair to VAR, its hardly stifled discussion of decisions has it? This thread alone is testament to that
Offsides and goals I can see the point if a referee can be alerted by a third party at speed, but I cannot see that being implemented at our level any time soon. I'm with the 'it all evens out' school and if we are relegated by a dodgy decision on the last day of the season...it's because we were crap enough to be down there in the first place. Of course, as a football fan I reserve the right to completely contradict myself within any given time frame depending on circumstances.
@Right_in_the_Middle I've not watched much hockey so I'd be interested to see how that works.
I agree about cheating, but similar to VAR I don't see a practical way to remove this kind of thing from the game when there are, as @SEWanderer says, such subjective situations. Players will always make the most of tackles which may be borderline fouls and its very hard to legislate against. Refereeing must be extremely challenging and I have every sympathy for the officials.