VAR Again

Just sailed through another qualifying campaign unbeaten, current world #3, probably the most exciting young player in the world in our ranks, a captain who is absolutely obilterating Bundesliga, Euro finalists last time round and clear progression being made under a manager that's harnessed a togetherness in the squad we've not seen since 1990. But yes let's focus on drawing with North Macedonia in a dead rubber.

Quoted from mimma

It's called keeping possession, if you think England are bad doing it, then watch Spain.

I understand keeping possession, but then there’s what you do with it. We’ve just played 2 teams we should be beating, one of them comfortably. We didn’t have a shot on target against Malta until the 63rd minute. So what’s the point in keeping possession if there’s no end product, play for a 0-0 draw ??

I think VAR should be used sparingly not for every sodding decision. Why not adopt the system in cricket where each team is allowed a set number of appeals, say one each half. Then we would get a maximum four var checks a game.

Quoted from RonMariner

I think VAR should be used sparingly not for every sodding decision. Why not adopt the system in cricket where each team is allowed a set number of appeals, say one each half. Then we would get a maximum four var checks a game.

Great point Ron. I would prefer it to be scrapped but that won't happen, so we have to find a sensible way forward.

Like a lot of well meaning interventions VAR has unleashed unintended consequences which is starting to ruin the game as a spectacle. The people on VAR duty seem desperate to find something to give them a purpose; refs don't seem to have the courage to apply common sense and you have to wonder about the integrity of the game when you see some decisions.

For those who say it is not VAR which is at fault it is the people who run it, that will never end will it? Decisions in football are just too subjective to have a definitive correct decision in far too many cases.

Cricket has a natural stop/start nature though. With football, when would the appeal go in? When the ball goes out of play? But then the ball might not go out of play for 5 minutes.

Quoted from Abdul19

Cricket has a natural stop/start nature though. With football, when would the appeal go in? When the ball goes out of play? But then the ball might not go out of play for 5 minutes.

Many var incidents concern whether or not a player is offside when the game is stopped as the ball is in the net. It’s true that the game continues for a while concerning penalty  checks, but that is true under the current system too, and the game is brought back if a penalty is awarded.
Not perfect I know, but less disruptive than the situation we have now.

Quoted from Abdul19

Cricket has a natural stop/start nature though. With football, when would the appeal go in? When the ball goes out of play? But then the ball might not go out of play for 5 minutes.

It could lead to all sorts of skulduggery.

The only problem with VAR. is the time it takes to make a decision not the amount of times it is used in a game.

Clear and obvious mistake is the term they say but don't use that when looking at the  offside and then come up with decision that puts a players toe or elbow offside.

Just take one look at the move and if it's not clear and obvious play on. It's not rocket science.

Thinking on this a bit more, the point of VAR was supposed to be the elimination of major mistakes such as the Lampard ‘goal’ against Germany.

Given that it’s pretty unusual to have two errors of that magnitude in a single game, the number of appeals could be limited to one per game for each team. Then we would have a maximum of 2 VAR delays per game. If teams used their appeal frivolously, it would be their loss if they then were not able to challenge a truly dodgy decision later on. It’s why in cricket teams often decide not to review decisions if they don’t think it’s likely to succeed. They don’t want to waste their limited appeals.

Quoted from RonMariner

Thinking on this a bit more, the point of VAR was supposed to be the elimination of major mistakes such as the Lampard ‘goal’ against Germany.

Given that it’s pretty unusual to have two errors of that magnitude in a single game, the number of appeals could be limited to one per game for each team. Then we would have a maximum of 2 VAR delays per game. If teams used their appeal frivolously, it would be their loss if they then were not able to challenge a truly dodgy decision later on. It’s why in cricket teams often decide not to review decisions if they don’t think it’s likely to succeed. They don’t want to waste their limited appeals.

All you needed for that was goalline technology.