VAR & Martin Atkinson

Quoted from jimgtfc

It’s the down right stubbornness of the VAR team not to overrule the referee, or allow him to review the footage pitch side that irks me. I hate VAR, it’s showed that it’s far from practical in football with the amount of controversy around it already, there’s too many grey areas in the rules and the only black and white issue is goal line technology which has been 100% perfect since it’s inception. They keep saying it needs time to bed in and everyone to adjust, absolute rubbish. There will still be the same issues in years to come. VAR isn’t suitable in football and needs disbanding as soon as possible in my opinion.

Rant over 😅

You hate VAR but want its use to be more wide-ranging?  It's correct in my view for areas of the rules that are left to the referee's discretion, such as how much contact constitutes 'tripping', VAR should not overrule the on-field officials' decision.  It's there for howlers and offsides, usually resulting in a fairer outcome.

I'm against VAR.

I believe technology should be used to bring clarity on black and white issues. There's no arguing.

Thing is, we now have technology that is being interpreted by humans, who are also considering the human interpretation that the ref gives on the field. It's always going to be a massive grey area.

Technology has no heart — it can't afford to. It needs to be absolutely clinical. And VAR, when used for free kicks and penalty decisions, isn't going to solve that. Not with a human interpreting the footage.

Human errors will still occur in using the technology.

I'm happy with goal-line technology, and I'd be happy if VAR can decide once and for all what the offside rule should be (and stick to it). That's about it for me. I could maybe accept its intervention for red card offences but, even then, it's down to interpretation.

Quoted from RichMariner

I'm against VAR.

I believe technology should be used to bring clarity on black and white issues. There's no arguing.

Thing is, we now have technology that is being interpreted by humans, who are also considering the human interpretation that the ref gives on the field. It's always going to be a massive grey area.

Technology has no heart — it can't afford to. It needs to be absolutely clinical. And VAR, when used for free kicks and penalty decisions, isn't going to solve that. Not with a human interpreting the footage.

Human errors will still occur in using the technology.

I'm happy with goal-line technology, and I'd be happy if VAR can decide once and for all what the offside rule should be (and stick to it). That's about it for me. I could maybe accept its intervention for red card offences but, even then, it's down to interpretation.

And there's the rub RichMariner

It's all about interpretation.... opinions and judgements in other words where one individual sees something and arrives at a decision and another sees the same incident and arrives at another decision

The other thing that I worry about is the fact that of all the games played across the weekend, there are just 10 represented by this technology.

I know the Premier League is the supposed flagship of English football and there are big bucks at stake but if there are laws of the game that are applied by referees across the board, but only in the PL is there an "instant" review it makes a bit of a mockery of the "level playing field" that all other games have to live with

We've gone about 150 years just accepting what a referee saw ( or missed ) and we've lived with it.... now they're arguing about centimetres and the slightest of touches.

I can't say that VAR has improved the game really.... all it's done is bring a different kind of argument in to the arena

Quoted from MarinerDevil

You hate VAR but want its use to be more wide-ranging?  It's correct in my view for areas of the rules that are left to the referee's discretion, such as how much contact constitutes 'tripping', VAR should not overrule the on-field officials' decision.  It's there for howlers and offsides, usually resulting in a fairer outcome.

It’s certainly an interesting argument. I’d like it taking out of the game altogether but that’s not going to happen so for me if they are insistent on it then they need to utilise it. Currently it’s only offsides and handballs that VAR is being used for, they might as well stop referring to it for potential fouls and penalties because they won’t overrule the on pitch official. Look at Watford and Duelofeu on Saturday, blatant penalty but the referee leaves it for VAR who just go with the on field decision anyway, it’s ridiculous. So much of football is down to opinion and if one person thinks it’s a foul another one might not. For what it’s worth I think Origi is fouled in the build up yesterday, he doesn’t see the foul coming from behind and goes down, but that’s what I mean, fouls are subjective to opinion.

I think VAR would work better if only the referee could change his decision, but only after looking at the screen first. If the referee needs a second opinion it should be from the fourth official only. So you do not need a 'top' referee in the VAR center.

The referee on the pitch needs to be in complete control!

Like cricket.. two VARs per team per match and asked for by the manager to the 4th official within 5 seconds of the incident. Lose one VAR for the manager getting it wrong, keep it if he's right. That is.. if we have to have VAR..

VAR is shite and is the end of football as we know it . It has certainly not worked, we actually have more controversy not less

Clanger dropped in the Sheff Utd v Arsenal match by the VAR team. Blatant shirt pull in the Sheff Utd box in the 6th minute. Sky didn't even pick up on it until Emery pointed it out in his post match interview.

VAR rules out an Ajax goal for off-side against Chelsea, tightest of margins but off-side is off-side, well done VAR.

The offsides have always been right, cruel when it's so tight but it's the same for everyone.

Some balls ups elsewhere though, the bar so high as to be unreachable with regards to 'clear and obvious error' it seems.