Don't tell me that the VAR Thread is still going?

If any part of the torsos or thighs are overlapping, onside. Just like a ball going over the goal line or out touch - any overlap, no matter how slight, and the ball is still in play.

And since we've debated elsewhere about how to get rid of dumb penalties being given for diving when players are in non-goal threatening situations in the box, I just kind of stumbled upon on an idea randomly. Here goes:
Reduce the size of the box. Instead of 18 yards from both posts, measure 18 yards from the center of the goal. The box really has no function being so big since goalkeepers aren't roaming around picking up back passes or collecting throw-ins with their hands.
Or if we don't want to do that, create those two four yard alleys on either side of the box in which all fouls are simply given as direct kicks on goal with no defenders between the ball and the goal.

 

For a while now you've been preaching that the AR keep the flag down for offside let VAR do it. Well VAR did their job and got one right.
If the AR had been allowed to raise her flag, it was a simple call.

The ref did make the call and it was Goal. VAR f'cked that one up. When the word came down with their reasoning they "claimed" the the keeper had control of the ball. Even you could see that was bull pucky.
The comms, the experts in the studio with their replays even did.

Seems you reluctantly got that right.

 

VAR takes the news again.
Watched the U21 game. Austria v Germany. Another controversy over a PK there. High ball floated into the box. The German keeper, eye on the ball makes a huge leap to collect it. An Austrian attacker running in. Not going for the ball. Doesn't jump for it just gets on the way and gets flattened. Penalty from the ref. backed up by VAR.

Two comms and the halftime panel call BS.
The penalty was scored and counts. The difference between a win and a draw for Germany.

A lot of people who supported var are having second thoughts.

.

 

VAR = continued poor subjective decisions, but with the added benefits of constant confusion + wasted time + totally po'd fans.

 

I wonder how a fan poll would go at this point - the most recent ones I can find are over a year old ......

 

It seems to be that your post echoes the main thoughts and conversations of fans of the sport after every game that I have seen recently.
Is that the way it's supposed to be?

When I've had a chance to chat with anyone about the WWC or the U21 VAR comes up before anything else.

I'm hoping that when we get VAR in the prem this season that they could limit the amount of strangulation it has over the game. (It, giving VAR as an entity )

Perhaps just for rule items as in offside when the ref of AR could have missed it. Sometimes with the speed of the game it's hard to call. But the ref and AR should call what they see first.

I understand that VAR is only to be used in certain situation but right now VAR has far to much control of the game. With people crying for it everyone someone falls over. It again being 3 fallable people watching telly. Give control back to the Ref.

Too bad it's not something like the goaline checker the ref carries on his wrist. Instant on the pitch call. Instead of the long winded wait followed by the ref having to go and review the review.

Then talking of long winded, I'll shut up now.

 

Personally like you I agreed with the refs call. Goal. Especially after the replay.
I was just stating the comments of the TV comms and half time crew. They'd lost or losing confidence in VAR after being supporters of it. Derrick Rae a comm I respect. Then Lalas one I don't I didn't hear a single person call it the other way. So I don't think I was being that disingenuous.

 

The box does possess the function of being the area that the goalkeeper can reasonably be expected to control.

You couldn't really do that because a stuart pierce, roberto Carlos or John Arne Riise would score every time....

 

There was a kooky one in the Colombia game where a guy remonstrated with the ref that he hadn't fouled the player. The ref gave him a yellow card for overdone annoyance.... VAR looked at it and overruled the foul. The ref then decided to rescind the yellow (which was incorrect because the guy got that for being abusive, which he was - even though he had every right to be pissed)...
What would the ref have done had it been a second yellow.....and he'd sent the guy off...??

 

terrible call.........

 

This is mostly about the reffing at WCC but there is an interesting blurp on women's version of VAR.

FIFA face calls to bring in male referees for Women's World Cup after ugly scenes marred England's win over Cameroon

There are growing demands for FIFA to consider using both male and female referees at future Women's World Cups after Cameroon's behaviour on Sunday.

Full Story:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...male-referees-officiate-Womens-World-Cup.html

 

well done FIFA, go all-in on the sexism why dontcha? effing idiots. Blatter lives on !!

 

Well, you know, do you want credible referring or simply all-women refs? Some of them have been good, but the Chinese and Bulgarian refs should be doing U-9's. The German ref was very good and easily in command of her game.

 

Why did they close the other VAR thread?
*** *********** ************ ****************
Back to this thing- for Hobo....

↑
It is of no use whatsoever analyzing this number which included vast amounts of games where VAR doesn't happen...
Actually it is of great use, because people want to know what the overall effect of VAR is over a great number of matches. You can say it's of no use, but that's flat out incorrect. This is a measurement of VAR stoppage in the real world, the amount of time we can expect VAR to affect our club during the course of the season -- average is 55 seconds, let's just round up to 1 minute. 38 minutes per prem season is the effect of introducing VAR.

It's amazing this needs to be parsed to this degree. If you find no use for that I don't know what to tell you, but it's a useful thing to know. Especially! if you want to improve VAR... this baseline is useful to know if for some reason any individual data set has a much higher or lower number... what are they doing right (or wrong) to cause such a fluctuation?

These are good things to know. You not recognizing this, is once again, not relevant.
******* *** ********* *******************

Averages like that might be fine for you to use as indicators of how often we'll be bored across a season, and extrapolate from that that it evens out somehow in the mind because of that -- but I have to tell you, that is ludicrous, most people only care about VAR stoppages insofar as they are actually happening, not when they are not.
When one is repulsed by VAR one does not start wallowing in the idea that it is somehow not so bad really ... because it wasn't happening last week and probably won't happen next week either. This averaging measurement, as I said in the other thread is utterly meaningless.
When you have a headache, for example - your immediate thought isn't -we;ll, this is really okay, because usually I don't have it - in fact 99.99% of the time I don't have one, so this is okay....
Which is basically what your theory of VAR averages is saying.

But you are free to choose to believe otherwise......

 

but that decision is now up for review .....

 

hah ....

 

does it count as 1000 if 50% of it is a few of us repeating ourselves??

 

It seems to me that most of the VAR arguments in the other thread about what could be addressed seem to start from an erroneous proposition that there are only two possibles:
a). What VAR addresses.
b). What does not count for discussion because VAR does not address it.
But the fact is that there are not just two variant ways of looking at this. There are the two above and there is the one where it obviously COULD be addressed by VAR IF the VAR rules were to simply be changed to be so constituted. How much change the system could bear is debatable (and eminently so).