The very very circular VAR Thread

How does a non-penalty call in a corner grab scramble get differentiated so that a coach can't demand a VAR replay from a similar call in standard open play?

Doesn't make sense.....
(I mean - look - It makes sense in that you and I both know how we "already" differentiate that, the same way everyone does .... - but a coach who sees a penalty infringement is gonna want to use the avenue that will bolster his case.... No?)

 

I basically can't see hoow complaining will not be a good reason for VAR penalty review on every 2nd corner .....

 

Because each manager only gets one chance to ask for VAR (unless he is right). So highly unlikely to blow it on something unless he is convinced he is right.

 

"VARs are being trialled for clear and obvious errors, or serious missed incidents, relating to specific incidents in three ‘game changing’ situations – goals, penalty/no penalty decisions and straight red cards, plus mistaken identity for red or yellow cards.

The VAR automatically checks every such incident and if a clear and obvious error has occurred the referee is informed; the referee can then confirm or change the original decision based on the information from the VAR, or the referee looks at a replay on the side of the pitch. The original decision is only changed if it was clearly and obviously wrong."

Those are the VAR rules as trialed in FA cup.

I don't really care what coaches complain about. They already complain about everything that doesn't go their way. I couldn't care less if another thing they start complaining about is VAR. The bottom line is VAR, as implemented above, adds minimal amount of time to matches and gets more calls correct. Period. Coaches and their complaints can go ******** themselves.

 

The point is, even if not perfect, it will catch many of the blatantly obvious wrong calls.

 

But how (in God's or anyone else's name ) does that allow for the purpose of the technology, which is the overturning of bad decisions?

Someone counting the possdibility of bad decisions and coming up with the answer "1" before the game starts. Brilliant logic that.....

 

Every corner is a penalty claim. No one bugs the ref about it very much because there's no point. With this VAR there would (if people wnated to be absolute) be every possible point in bugging them about grabbing ....

Don't get me wrong - I don't want that to happen, but it seeems they are going to have to inherently deny the logic of upholding the rules, in order to get themselves out of this particular problematic issue ......

To wit:
We all KNOW that fouls go on all the time at corners. We all know that refs can't really differentiuate them. We all know that penalties would be the result. We all know that VAR can be used for such differentiation.
So WHY are we not saying VAR this???

 

I say let the call shappen. It's a game (as decised) with referees and linesmen using their eyes. That's all it should be (IMO). Get over it .... Hail Ludd!

 

This doesn't matter. First of all, they bitch about this already, and second of all we've already seen what it looks like... read the rules, look at the WBA match. There were 8 corners in that match... but not 8 stoppages for the ref to look at VAR. Ask yourself why.

It's very simple, it's an acceptable part of the game.

The only times it will be called out in VAR are the egregious examples, like in the WBA match in the FA cup. Every tug of an arm or nudge in the back isn't a penalty, and thus every time it happens during a corner doesn't deserve a penalty. That's just not how the game is called. BUT when it denies a scoring chance or it happens to a player that has a play on the ball, that is what VAR will actually help, to more accurately identify those specific plays which I don't think happen nearly as much as you may suggest. That's a good thing, to have VAR find that balance between physicality that affects play and physicality that doesn't, because that's something that's easy to miss as a ref crew that's at best 20 yards from the action.

 

Ah, ok. So this is your ACTUAL point. We just agree to disagree. I want the calls gotten correctly as often as possible, I don't find it charming or traditional or "part of the game" that a ref misses a call because "that's how it's always been". I don't care how things have always been when it comes at the expense of correctly identifying which team actually won. Get the calls right.

VAR will get more calls right at little cost, and it's just a matter of time. Sooner it's in, the more calls that change the outcome of matches will be correctly made.

How do you feel about goal-line tech?

 

Don't need it. A linesman is paid to judge it.

 

But what gives you the right to differentiate... getting the calls right would involve rectifying the lying little fouls that constantly go on at corners. I'm willing to live with them because they are how I mentally view the game (with flaws). However your reasoning states, by implication, that such things should not be allowed...

How do we ever know that the arm preventing someone from jumping isn't preventing him from scoring the goal? Answer = you can't know this...

 

Don't forget the ref can also call for VAR whenever he is unsure of his decision.

VAR should eliminate most of the blatantly obviously wrong decisions.

It's not going to make things perfect. Just better!

 

They DO need it. The amount of close calls have already correctly ruled out or in dozens of goals at this point. That's what the technology is for. But this sentiment certainly speaks to your mindset -- a practically transparent piece of tech that doesn't change the game at all you'd dismiss despite it doing something that humans clearly cannot consistently do. That's telling.

First of all I'm not taking or claiming "the right" -- this is a movement that's happening already. I'm only saying why I welcome it.

Second of all, my reasoning states that if these fouls are egregious and deny an attacker a play on the ball they can be ruled on correctly. Not every bump or every bit of contact, but the important moments that everyone looks at afterwards and says "why the hell wasn't THIS called?"

And I don't need to, because it's about getting the egregious things right. Here are the rules again -- "clear and obvious errors", "serious missed incidents", "game-changing situations". I repeat, not all 8 corners were ruled on using VAR in the WBA-LIV match, were they? No, they weren't.

You are happy to allow the perfect be the enemy of the good, but more than that you're arguing against the good in an argument that's already lost. I won't do either of those things, mostly because I want the calls to be made correctly more often (and you clearly don't), but also because this is just a matter of time. So, we just agree to disagree.

 

So don't have a ref on the pitch is your answer.
Just use a couple if guys watching TV. (That's what VAR is by the way )
You and your endless arguments are just a joke in here.

 

I was not suggesting that the offside rule be eliminated. I said "modified"

 

Wait - there was another semi final game today?