Wolves propose vote to scrap VAR.

[JK]

Well played Wolves - will the other clubs actually listen to the fans and get rid though?

 

[Portishead]

Well played Wolves - will the other clubs actually listen to the fans and get rid though?

No. Too much reputation and finance invested in it. Plus UEFA strong arm influence. Clubs and managers secretly love it as an easy deflection scapegoat for a poor team performance.

 

[northender2]

I still think, if used properly, VAR can be a good addition to the game, the problem is, its not being used in the way it was originally intended, they seem to have forgotten the 'clear and obvious' part, if it takes 5 minutes to draw some lines on a pitch, then it isnt clear and obvious

 

[raefil]

I still think, if used properly, VAR can be a good addition to the game, the problem is, its not being used in the way it was originally intended, they seem to have forgotten the 'clear and obvious' part, if it takes 5 minutes to draw some lines on a pitch, then it isnt clear and obvious

Doesnt the, "Clear and obvious," ruling only come into play for penalties?

 

[MBcha]

It should be kept but just paired back, used only for things such as confirming a penalty decision or to make the on field ref aware of off the ball incidents that he may have missed.

 

[Regardless]

It should be kept but just paired back, used only for things such as confirming a penalty decision or to make the on field ref aware of off the ball incidents that he may have missed.

IMO that’s fine in principle - but just won’t work in practice. There are too many grey area decisions - such that it’s not worth the hassle, expense and most importantly, damaging the spontaneity of the game when so few decisions would be being corrected.
Of course you could use it to remove “clear and obvious”… but then you run into grey areas there too. If you only overturn decisions that are 100% certainly wrong, there will be all hell breaking out for decisions being upheld when they are something like 90-99% certainly wrong.

Football should grow a backbone and accept the refs’ decisions. It won’t though. This motion will fail for the reasons Portishead describes.

 

[JK]

It should be kept but just paired back, used only for things such as confirming a penalty decision or to make the on field ref aware of off the ball incidents that he may have missed.

Just missed one again tonight.

Newcastle should have had a penalty.

 

[northender0602]

Get it scrapped, it’s shite.

 

[northender0602]

Doesnt the, "Clear and obvious," ruling only come into play for penalties?

Should be same for offside, it should be obvious without having to draw lines.

 

[norky84]

Just missed one again tonight.

Newcastle should have had a penalty.

And the thing is, some say it's down to the people using it incorrectly. It's the same in every country. It won't change as it's always going to be someone's opinion.

For the time it takes to still decisions wrong, and the negative atmosphere it creates for the paying customer at games and on tv, it needs to be scrapped. Just keep goal line technology.

 

[Hypnotoad]

Vote should just “scrape” through 😂

 

[outreacher]

Get shut, 10 mins to decide if a player's bid toe is offside, pathetic.

 

[Dannypne7]

Absolutely 0% chance of it being scrapped, sadly.

 

[hulabaloo]

There is a place for it, but serious work needs to be done on it. The ridiculous offside margins for a starter.

 

[tucano]

I assume it’ll be the three promoted clubs that get to vote rather than those relegated?

 

[Regardless]

There is a place for it, but serious work needs to be done on it. The ridiculous offside margins for a starter.

I can imagine a slight improvement in offside decision procedures - but what do you seriously propose? A 200mm margin of error? We would then have VAR procrastinating over whether someone was 199mm offside or 201mm.

If you’re offside, you’re offside. If you’re going to use technology to determine that then you’re in trouble.

And what if they spot a contentious tackle or handball when reviewing? Do they ignore that?

 

[raefil]

I can imagine a slight improvement in offside decision procedures - but what do you seriously propose? A 200mm margin of error? We would then have VAR procrastinating over whether someone was 199mm offside or 201mm.

If you’re offside, you’re offside. If you’re going to use technology to determine that then you’re in trouble.

And what if they spot a contentious tackle or handball when reviewing? Do they ignore that?

Cricket and Tennis` use of it is the way forward.

2 challenges, made by the captain, per half. challenge retained if proven correct. 30 seconds for the challenge to be made.

 

[Regardless]

Cricket and Tennis` use of it is the way forward.

2 challenges, made by the captain, per half. challenge retained if proven correct. 30 seconds for the challenge to be made.

Interesting. But not sure. That’s still 8 checks a game - basically pretty much every time the ball goes in the net.
And cricket and tennis have natural breaks after every delivery/ point so those decisions can be made without breaking the flow. In footy, what if someone is brought down in the box and no pen is given. How will the attacking team consult on whether to challenge while concentrating on the continuing attack (or breakaway from the other side?) And would they need to wait for a break in play (which might be 2 minutes after) to make the challenge?
I am firmly in the “scrap it camp” for all categories of decision that are not ALWAYS completely factual. I can only think of goal-line/by-line/side-line decisions. Arguably encroachment and keeper-movement at penalties. Once you get into handballs and fouls and offsides, you always run into grey areas.

 

[Bodney Rewes]

Cricket and Tennis` use of it is the way forward.

2 challenges, made by the captain, per half. challenge retained if proven correct. 30 seconds for the challenge to be made.

It'd be an interesting change to it. The onus would be on the players to spot the errors. If the game finishes and a penalty shout was missed, the players will be partly responsible.

 

[Bodney Rewes]

Interesting. But not sure. That’s still 8 checks a game - basically pretty much every time the ball goes in the net.
And cricket and tennis have natural breaks after every delivery/ point so those decisions can be made without breaking the flow. In footy, what if someone is brought down in the box and no pen is given. How will the attacking team consult on whether to challenge while concentrating on the continuing attack (or breakaway from the other side?) And would they need to wait for a break in play (which might be 2 minutes after) to make the challenge?
I am firmly in the “scrap it camp” for all categories of decision that are not ALWAYS completely factual. I can only think of goal-line/by-line/side-line decisions. Arguably encroachment and keeper-movement at penalties. Once you get into handballs and fouls and offsides, you always run into grey areas.

It would be 8 checks at most although I imagine players would be cautious about using them all in case they run out and miss the chance to use it for a more important decision