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

this little exchange was triggered by you saying "A ball off the defenders head that instantly pings into someone's hand a foot away, that's a call that would be overturned. Pretty obvious." and claiming that VAR would have overruled the ref.

I raised the e.g. of the CL Final penalty to make the point that a whole boatload of pens call are not "obvious" - and that one was a great example.

do you ever read post-game comments from ex-players and ex-refs, when there's been a controversial game decision? the guys who are experts (do this shit for a living) can't agree on close pen calls after staring at slo-mo's for hours. you stating that "it's obvious" to bolster your love of VAR is simply an opinion stated as fact. obvious to you doesn't = obvious to everyone else, or anyone else.

think of the Spurs-City CL game where Spurs forward knocked the ball in after it hit his hip/hand. you can look at replays forever and it's still not at all obvious if it was handball or not (VAR allowed it).

as for the date of the doc I linked .... totally irrelevant - the handball rule hasn't changed in decades !!!!!!

 

I know it changed - the new rule isn't in effect yet.

show me where the Laws discuss exemptions.

 

I'm not trying to compare two incidents that are (arguably) identical.

the issue here is you saying an event is an "obvious" pen that VAR would have caught, as a way to bolster your VAR viewpoint.

there are very few pens that are not debatable - and often they are extremely debatable even by unbiased experts. decisions from VAR reviews are frequently just as subjective as real-time calls, and always will be. for every spectator who says "nailed-on pen!" there's another (maybe sitting right next to him) who says "no, he dived!", VAR doesn't, and won't, eliminate that.

if it could, VAR decisions wouldn't require multiple sets of eyes, multiple multi-angle replays, and so much time, and would eliminate controversy.

 

NO IT'S NOT!!!

Sorry, just wanted to get in on the yelling...

 

Did they miss it or did they just keep their flags down. Looks to me the ref was waiting for the decision to come down.
I was with friends and said that one will come back, looked offside to me. At least 2"

The second one was a lot harder, My first thought was she whiffed it, but the view from behind made it so. and the silly b**h missed

7 minutes added on. I cudda had a shower by then.

 

bump

 

excellent article, followed by very interesting comments ...

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...oul-var-era-controversy-copa-america-football

The thought that VAR may end controversy has proved laughably misguided; if anything it has made the controversies worse because incidents that would have been seen as a referee making an understandable call in a difficult situation are perceived as being part of a wider failure of process, which is a small step from all-out conspiracy.
.................................................................
This is another outcome of VAR: no one, no matter how much football they have watched, can quite trust their eyes. The instinct players, referees and viewers have built up over years, the sense that something just looks like a foul, no longer applies. Worse, the law is different at different times and in different parts of the pitch. Some things – incidents in the box or leading to a goal – will be checked, creating strict liability; others will not. It used to be that a shove on the halfway line would bring a whistle but you could probably get away with it in the box; now the polarities have reversed and the slightest contact in the box is liable to bring sanction.

 

interesting and relevant facts to ponder ...

Tennis
2 players - playing area about 2,100 sq ft - 11 officials at top matches
Basketball
10 players - playing area about 4,700 sq ft - 3 officials (NBA)
Football
22 players - playing area varies, but minimum is about 45,000 sq ft - 3 officials, 2 of whom can't enter the field of play

can anyone guess what could be done to improve officiating, without resorting to VAR?

hmmmm ....??

anyone .... ??

 

What else would I call it? I'd call it close and the ar kept the flag down for var confirmation.

I don't know exactly when they should keep the flag down. Do you know the actual ruling on that. Some do keep it down when it's close like that one.
Some keep it down even when it's an obvious call.

 

In the early days of us Sawker. 2 refs on the pitch was tried. 1 for each half. Each with full control of their half, no discussions.
But then they tried a lot of things out because dumb Mericans are not smart enough to follow the laws of association football.

But then Amercans watch the game with the most rules and sub sections of those rules Evan.

I asked google how many rules are there in an NFL game. The answer 17...! But not one reply have a definitive answer for all the variances. Im pretty certain the average us sports fan would never have a problem with the laws of footy once explained. All one had to do is coach kids and you'll see how fast.

OK. Back to VAR. someone explain that to me.

 

Did Zach get your login or something?

 

giving it some thought but I may well go that route, yes. this appeals to me:

> ref isn't sure so asks ARs for input -- or one of the 4 AR's give him a shout about a missed call
> if after discussion ref is still unsure ref alone decides if HE then needs to look at a TV on the sideline
> ref watches replay (or not)
> ref makes the decision
> done

advantages:
- same process as now, with added advantage of 2x the ARs so 66% better view of events
- no chance of play being stopped and play called back after the VARs have finished arguing and finally alerted the ref
- eliminates the total BS scenario of teams being called back onto the pitch!
- fans know wtf is going on at all times

 

You'll never (or rarely anyway) catch me arguing about the minutiae of a right and wrong call. I may disagree anout a close call, but what's the point of trying to microscope such a thing.
Now, microscoping why I would toss out VAR is much easier ...
starting with the point of what's the point of going into a thing any deeper than th eview of the linesman and the referee.
The main gist of Hobo's original argument was for it to counteract those few glaring occasions when your team (or any team) gets totally screwed.
Whereas, most of these recent discussions are being conducted over (as Sam stated) the kinds of things where experts find it hard to agree a half hour later in the discussion studio...
Hardly the stuff of fan-crucifixion-agonistes.... mostly.... no - it's mostly the stuff of bore-me-stupid........

 

in case you mix me up with Sam, I'm advocating for 1 ref, 2 linesmen and a 4th official...with a camera on the goal-line ...
that's the one I like...