Tam wrote:

I think Y Va's point about it being for the benefit of the TV audience is very valid. I can imagine being frustrated in the crowd at not knowing what is going on. 

I disagree. I've been to several Bundesliga grounds last season when VAR was used and if anything it adds to the suspense. Not knowing whether your team's goal will stand, a player might be sent off or a penalty given etc it gets you close to a heart attack but I wouldn't say it's frustrating at all. Also most of the time if you pay attention to the match it's obvious which part of the previous situation is under contention anyway, I don't think I've seen a situation where neither me or anyone around me knew what was going on.

jones wrote:

Tam wrote:

I think Y Va's point about it being for the benefit of the TV audience is very valid. I can imagine being frustrated in the crowd at not knowing what is going on. 

I disagree. I've been to several Bundesliga grounds last season when VAR was used and if anything it adds to the suspense. Not knowing whether your team's goal will stand, a player might be sent off or a penalty given etc it gets you close to a heart attack but I wouldn't say it's frustrating at all. Also most of the time if you pay attention to the match it's obvious which part of the previous situation is under contention anyway, I don't think I've seen a situation where neither me or anyone around me knew what was going on.

Agreed. I think the only advantage the TV audience has is they are seeing 100 replays and listening to Alexi Lalas talking about there is no honour in soccer. The fans in the ground have some uncertainty at times. But it's really for the best. We've complained so much about injustices like Lampard's goal at the World Cup. Do folks have an alternative or a better way to implement this solution?

Claudius wrote:

Agreed. I think the only advantage the TV audience has is they are seeing 100 replays and listening to Alexi Lalas talking about there is no honour in soccer. The fans in the ground have some uncertainty at times. But it's really for the best. We've complained so much about injustices like Lampard's goal at the World Cup. Do folks have an alternative or a better way to implement this solution?

ugh..  dont get me started on this turd waffle. 

jones wrote:

Tam wrote:

I think Y Va's point about it being for the benefit of the TV audience is very valid. I can imagine being frustrated in the crowd at not knowing what is going on. 

I disagree. I've been to several Bundesliga grounds last season when VAR was used and if anything it adds to the suspense. Not knowing whether your team's goal will stand, a player might be sent off or a penalty given etc it gets you close to a heart attack but I wouldn't say it's frustrating at all. Also most of the time if you pay attention to the match it's obvious which part of the previous situation is under contention anyway, I don't think I've seen a situation where neither me or anyone around me knew what was going on.

What was your experience of how it was handled by the referee and how the players reacted to it?

It seems to me to have worked well in most games, but the ones that have threatened to boil over like Portugal and Iran get the headlines. I wonder if the reactions in that game were intensified because of what was at stake at the world cup or if it's more along the lines of what we could expect in league matches?

It was implemented reasonably well, there's no full team behind the screens like at the World Cup and I don't think linesmen were asked to keep the flag down when they're not certain either so this tournament is actually a good step forward from the way it's used in European football.

In most cases players' reactions were very subdued like after GLT came in which eliminated the grounds on which to discuss things with the ref.

However as always technology is rarely enough to completely erase the chance of human ineptitude fucking things up and so even looking at a replay which clearly shows what occurred refs often refused to correct their previous calls out of pride or other dumb reasons.

Even worse and in my opinion the biggest room for improvement is the footage that's presented to the ref. Most of the time for some reason it's not the same as the footage on TV which usually shows an incident from different angles - in the domestic cup final for example when there was a big call for a penalty in injury time the screen kept showing the same ₁ sec scene where contact is made over and over instead of showing the full scene. Looking just at the short clip you'd say it's a stonewall pen, the bigger picture however showed after the foul a different player got the ball and got his shot off at goal which was saved ie not a penalty. This type of bias from the bloke in charge of the video is obviously going to lead refs to make certain decisions but it looks like they're not making the same mistake in Russia.

VARs been terrible IMO. Delays between the ball hitting the back of the net and it being declared a goal are stupidly long in some instances and it really kills the emotion of the game. If VAR is going to stay I hope they find a very different way to implement it because this is rubbish.

I also think the rules will need changes if VAR is going to be used because almost every corner could be flagged up for review and a penalty given if they go by the letter of the law.

Isn't that a good thing though? Players will quickly stop if they know they'll get punished. It's up to them to adapt and learn that they can't get away with this shit anymore.

I had those exact concerns with VAR when folks were advocating it's introduction and the way it was implemented in the FA Cup/League Cup was terrible. But I think it's been ok at the world cup. Needs refinement, but I've not found it to really disrupt games and the majority of the time it's led to a fairer game. I also kinda like the suspense.

goon wrote:

Isn't that a good thing though? Players will quickly stop if they know they'll get punished. It's up to them to adapt and learn that they can't get away with this shit anymore.

I think this is going to be one of the biggest rewards with VAT too. It's another one of those changes that is going to be generational, but it will definitely improve football across the board. Defenders won't do illegal shit if they know there's a retroactive red card waiting for them when the rerun airs. Strikers won't dive as much if they get punished for it every time. It'll take a few years for everyone to adjust but that's the new reality. Referees just need to keep the hard line and punish everyone accordingly. A player like Pepe would be obsolete in a world with VAR. Everybody wins.

I like suspense that comes from football not from waiting 5 minutes for a ref to make a decision.

I don't think "oh well the players will learn to deal with it" is a solution either. The rules were written for referees not for VAR. If every foul on a football pitch was caught then the game would become unrecognisable.

This world cup has just made all my worried about it ruining the pace of the game come true.

That's like saying the laws were written for incompetent police officers, so when Robocop finally gets invented we'll have to legalise armed robbery to prevent overcrowding in prisons.

If every corner can be flagged up for review with VAR, that just means the referees didn't follow the rules without it.

Qwiss! wrote:

I like suspense that comes from football not from waiting 5 minutes for a ref to make a decision.

I don't think "oh well the players will learn to deal with it" is a solution either. The rules were written for referees not for VAR. If every foul on a football pitch was caught then the game would become unrecognisable.

This world cup has just made all my worried about it ruining the pace of the game come true.

The pace of the game is a nonsensical argument. It was already horrible, at least now we are actually waiting for something, instead of just another poor decision to lament.

I think what can be improved going forward is scrapping the need for the referee to go all the way to the touchline to have a second viewing. Despite the fact that VAR have already seen the footage.

The ref don't even need to go to the touchline to see actually, they can either trust the VAR team or see it themselves. Most of them chose to see it though.

Can't believe that was Banega's first start in the WC.

banduan wrote:

Can't believe that was Banega's first start in the WC.

Still salivating over that pass

The pass was a great one but Messi still had a lot of work to do in that situation.

Probably the best goal of the tournament from a technical perspective.

I would agree Mirth. The pass is delightful and Messi's first touch without breaking stride is a real thing of beauty and a lot harder to pull off than it looks at first glance.

The most astounding thing about that goal is that Messi traps a 25 meter pass with his thigh while moving, takes another touch with his foot, and then actually accelerates with the ball. I read that he speeds up from 26 km/h to 32 km/h after he has received the pass.

Messi's second touch was even better than the first. Truly astounding technical ability in that little man.

Regarding VAR, shit still confuses me. Do the VAR team tell the ref "That should have been called a penalty" or "You might want to take a look at this again, possible penalty"??

VAR says the ref is wrong. Ref can choose to believe them and overturn on the spot, or check to make sure.

All major decisions as they are currently defined are confirmed by VAR.

I imagine if for some reason the VAR cannot confirm, the ref would take a look.

I'm genuinely having trouble understanding how anyone could have a problem with VAR in the current implementation. It seems so logical and natural. The weird suggestion that it is somehow making set pieces more important baffles me, and the entirely ludicrous suggestion that it is making the game more like American Football is hysterical.

Some people prefer sport and games to stay close to how is played in your backyard with friends growing up as much as possible. If you don't see it, you don't see it and probably prefer the non-existent perfection and fairness in games and decisions.

It's already so far away from the backyard with friends, and so much more is at stake. No, none of the arguments of subjectivity, etc make sense to me, it's just people hating change as usual. Subjectivity isn't even compromised, there is no attempt at perfection here, and it has categorically made games more entertaining, not less, because it mitigates the fear refs have these days of doing much of anything except wave play on, and when they feel like being the star they might have an idiotic red card or penalty award overturned. The tension of a tight decision being made on the touchline is far better than the outrage of a mistake, and I mean it is objectively better for the game.

This is a sport that has allowed corruption and incompetence at every level for far too long. When the game itself is cleaner and more about the playing than the reffing, it is a far better spectacle. No, VAR doesn't make it more about decisions. In general, it makes it more about what actually happened on the pitch, which is by it's very nature more about actually playing football rather than administrating it.

This isn't a matter of opinion as far as I'm concerned. To be against this is to be firmly on the wrong side of history.

Yep. No use fighting the VAR tech. Implementation should only get better over time as well

The side-effect i'm most looking forward to is a reduction in diving and i hope it leads to the elimination of shit like this

I realise it's weak referees who fuel this by not blowing for fouls if the player doesn't go down but it's still annoying.

That's why I enjoyed the performance of the Mexican referee last night in the Uruguay-Portugal game. Didn't fall for anything cheap and didn't overreact to players play-acting.