Other sports worth following

Pross

blazing_saddles said:

Dorset_Boy said:

VAR works really well in both codes of rugby.

Except it is being over used thus causing endless delays in play.
It's not as if there weren't enough already.

This. Even the most obvious try gets referred by as the ref is scared of the uproar of getting it wrong. On balance I think the system is a definite positive but refs do seem to have become averse to making a decision without it.

ddraver

The response to VAR in football goes a long way to proving our previous discussions that "Judged Sports" are indeed, sports...

elbowloh

ddraver said:

The response to VAR in football goes a long way to proving our previous discussions that "Judged Sports" are indeed, sports...

Football doesn't need to be judged though. A goal is given if the whole of the ball is over the whole of the line. That's it as far as scoring goes.

With, say, diving, that is definitely not the case. Two people jump off a board into the water. They won't get 1 point each for that.

surrey_commuter

elbowloh said:

ddraver said:

The response to VAR in football goes a long way to proving our previous discussions that "Judged Sports" are indeed, sports...

Football doesn't need to be judged though. A goal is given if the whole of the ball is over the whole of the line. That's it as far as scoring goes.

With, say, diving, that is definitely not the case. Two people jump off a board into the water. They won't get 1 point each for that.

Now there is an idea - diving comps could be the most dives you can do in a fixed period of time

Dorset_Boy

Pross said:

blazing_saddles said:

Dorset_Boy said:

VAR works really well in both codes of rugby.

Except it is being over used thus causing endless delays in play.
It's not as if there weren't enough already.

This. Even the most obvious try gets referred by as the ref is scared of the uproar of getting it wrong. On balance I think the system is a definite positive but refs do seem to have become averse to making a decision without it.

Interesting that two folks in Wales have that view.
As a Bath fan, it should have been used after 120 seconds on Friday night, and a couple of other times when it wasn't. It was used after Wayne made another wrong call, but he decided to award a PT and yellow card instead!
I think in the english game it is being used well. I don't watch any Pro14 or whatever it is these days so can't comment on that.

More importantly, has Eddie useless Butler been sacked by the BBC yet? Worst ever Welsh no 8, worst ever commentator, crap jorno to go with it all!

blazing_saddles

Dorset_Boy said:

Pross said:

blazing_saddles said:

Dorset_Boy said:

VAR works really well in both codes of rugby.

Except it is being over used thus causing endless delays in play.
It's not as if there weren't enough already.

This. Even the most obvious try gets referred by as the ref is scared of the uproar of getting it wrong. On balance I think the system is a definite positive but refs do seem to have become averse to making a decision without it.

Interesting that two folks in Wales have that view.
As a Bath fan, it should have been used after 120 seconds on Friday night, and a couple of other times when it wasn't. It was used after Wayne made another wrong call, but he decided to award a PT and yellow card instead!
I think in the english game it is being used well. I don't watch any Pro14 or whatever it is these days so can't comment on that.

More importantly, has Eddie useless Butler been sacked by the BBC yet? Worst ever Welsh no 8, worst ever commentator, censored jorno to go with it all!

Sounds like it isn’t working so well in the Gallagher after all.
FWIW I think the French are the worst culprits for over using VAR.
I watch more top french rugby these days than Pro 14.
Some of their refs seem totally reliant upon it.

Here refs do use the term: “Just to check” (usually tries) too much.
My biggest complaint is the slowing down of replays inevitably in relation to foul play, which often leads to incorrect sanctions.

Worst of all remains reffing inconsistencies

Dorset_Boy

Blazing - yes agree about inconsistencies, Wayne Barnes was a big culprit of that on Friday evening.

john80

surrey_commuter said:

elbowloh said:

ddraver said:

The response to VAR in football goes a long way to proving our previous discussions that "Judged Sports" are indeed, sports...

Football doesn't need to be judged though. A goal is given if the whole of the ball is over the whole of the line. That's it as far as scoring goes.

With, say, diving, that is definitely not the case. Two people jump off a board into the water. They won't get 1 point each for that.

Now there is an idea - diving comps could be the most dives you can do in a fixed period of time

Cardio and gravity. What's not to like.

TheBigBean

Wrong thread

bompington

surrey_commuter said:

elbowloh said:

ddraver said:

The response to VAR in football goes a long way to proving our previous discussions that "Judged Sports" are indeed, sports...

Football doesn't need to be judged though. A goal is given if the whole of the ball is over the whole of the line. That's it as far as scoring goes.

With, say, diving, that is definitely not the case. Two people jump off a board into the water. They won't get 1 point each for that.

Now there is an idea - diving comps could be the most dives you can do in a fixed period of time

Everesting on a 10m board? Just 885 repeats....

bompington

bompington said:

surrey_commuter said:

elbowloh said:

ddraver said:

The response to VAR in football goes a long way to proving our previous discussions that "Judged Sports" are indeed, sports...

Football doesn't need to be judged though. A goal is given if the whole of the ball is over the whole of the line. That's it as far as scoring goes.

With, say, diving, that is definitely not the case. Two people jump off a board into the water. They won't get 1 point each for that.

Now there is an idea - diving comps could be the most dives you can do in a fixed period of time

Everesting on a 10m board? Just 885 repeats....

... or actually fewer if you count the depth achieved with each dive.

elbowloh

Wowsers Penny.

C4 have won the rights to England's test/one day and T20 series in India.

Good stuff.

rick_chasey

Was always bemused when fans pre-var wanted var.

Always figured moaning about the ref was what brought them together.

I guess moaning about var does the same now.

morstar

I find the whole VAR thing interesting.
With 7 or 8 years refereeing ice hockey, I reckon I only wanted clarification of a goal on half a dozen occasions but, when you genuinely don’t know if it was a goal or not, without it is a very difficult position to be in.

Just to confirm I never had Video replay in my refereeing career. And let’s not discuss the partiality of the goal judge who is just a volunteer supporter/relative of the home team with zero qualifications.

joe_totale-2

Regarding VAR in football, I'd prefer a system like cricket or American Football where the manager gets to appeal one decision a half. Throwing a flag onto the field is optional.

If your appeal is upheld by VAR, you can make another one that half.

At least it adds a bit of drama to things, I fear that now the genie is out of the bottle we'll never just ditch VAR despite the fact that not knowing whether to celebrate when your team scores a goal is one of the stupidest things ever.

TheBigBean

One definite upside of VAR in football is catching off the ball incidents. In the past, they would be punished retrospectively, so would disadvantage the perpetrator in the future, but give no advantage to the victim.

There are two issue with VAR in football. The out of date offside law which they attempt to enforce to the nearest millimetre and the confusion around handball in general. Both could be fixed.

Pross

morstar said:

I find the whole VAR thing interesting.
With 7 or 8 years refereeing ice hockey, I reckon I only wanted clarification of a goal on half a dozen occasions but, when you genuinely don’t know if it was a goal or not, without it is a very difficult position to be in.

Just to confirm I never had Video replay in my refereeing career. And let’s not discuss the partiality of the goal judge who is just a volunteer supporter/relative of the home team with zero qualifications.

Outside the top two flights of rugby union in Wales the two teams have to supply touch judges. Some of the blatant cheating I've seen is incredible, on one occasion the ref had to tell the team we were playing to change their touch judge as he was team extra metres and taking metres off us on every kick. The worst I saw was a guy who would put his flag up on a conversion the second his player's foot touched the ball. He's the only person I've seen flag for a successful conversion when the other touch judge didn't. It takes some nerve in some of the places I've watched rugby to give a correct decision against the home team in front of their fans let alone blatantly cheat. You don't realise how much help the ref gets at the top of the game until you see them having to manage alone at lower levels, it's pretty much impossible to cover what is going on with the ball and watch for offsides or foul play off the ball.

Pross

TheBigBean said:

One definite upside of VAR in football is catching off the ball incidents. In the past, they would be punished retrospectively, so would disadvantage the perpetrator in the future, but give no advantage to the victim.

There are two issue with VAR in football. The out of date offside law which they attempt to enforce to the nearest millimetre and the confusion around handball in general. Both could be fixed.

I find the bleating about offside decisions through VAR to be strange though. It is one area where it is an absolute, if you are a millimetre in front and the technology allows the officials to see that then you are offside. It's far easier to do that than to try to interpret some sort of allowance. The bigger problem is the whole determining if someone is passive or active as it brings in interpretation. Handball is a really tricky one though.

elbowloh

Pross said:

TheBigBean said:

One definite upside of VAR in football is catching off the ball incidents. In the past, they would be punished retrospectively, so would disadvantage the perpetrator in the future, but give no advantage to the victim.

There are two issue with VAR in football. The out of date offside law which they attempt to enforce to the nearest millimetre and the confusion around handball in general. Both could be fixed.

I find the bleating about offside decisions through VAR to be strange though. It is one area where it is an absolute, if you are a millimetre in front and the technology allows the officials to see that then you are offside. It's far easier to do that than to try to interpret some sort of allowance. The bigger problem is the whole determining if someone is passive or active as it brings in interpretation. Handball is a really tricky one though.

It seems very arbitrary were they draw a line on someones toe or on someone's arm though for an offside...also it often appears that the screen shot where they draw the lines, isn't when the ball was kicked.

rick_chasey

TheBigBean said:

One definite upside of VAR in football is catching off the ball incidents. In the past, they would be punished retrospectively, so would disadvantage the perpetrator in the future, but give no advantage to the victim.

There are two issue with VAR in football. The out of date offside law which they attempt to enforce to the nearest millimetre and the confusion around handball in general. Both could be fixed.

how would you fix it?

surrey_commuter

Pross said:

TheBigBean said:

One definite upside of VAR in football is catching off the ball incidents. In the past, they would be punished retrospectively, so would disadvantage the perpetrator in the future, but give no advantage to the victim.

There are two issue with VAR in football. The out of date offside law which they attempt to enforce to the nearest millimetre and the confusion around handball in general. Both could be fixed.

I find the bleating about offside decisions through VAR to be strange though. It is one area where it is an absolute, if you are a millimetre in front and the technology allows the officials to see that then you are offside. It's far easier to do that than to try to interpret some sort of allowance. The bigger problem is the whole determining if someone is passive or active as it brings in interpretation. Handball is a really tricky one though.

When you give the ref an allowance to make a "sensible" decision the players just take the p1ss. I remember when they took a more relaxed approach to "ball to hand" and John Terry used to stand like a goalie effectively blocking crosses

surrey_commuter

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

One definite upside of VAR in football is catching off the ball incidents. In the past, they would be punished retrospectively, so would disadvantage the perpetrator in the future, but give no advantage to the victim.

There are two issue with VAR in football. The out of date offside law which they attempt to enforce to the nearest millimetre and the confusion around handball in general. Both could be fixed.

how would you fix it?

I would love to see a long term trial of abolishing off side, it would be interesting to see the unintended consequences and evolution of tactics

TheBigBean

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

One definite upside of VAR in football is catching off the ball incidents. In the past, they would be punished retrospectively, so would disadvantage the perpetrator in the future, but give no advantage to the victim.

There are two issue with VAR in football. The out of date offside law which they attempt to enforce to the nearest millimetre and the confusion around handball in general. Both could be fixed.

how would you fix it?

Offside based on torso only. Same concept as umpire's call in cricket, so the decision isn't overturned unless the official was wrong by a certain amount e.g. 30cm.

TheBigBean

Pross said:

TheBigBean said:

One definite upside of VAR in football is catching off the ball incidents. In the past, they would be punished retrospectively, so would disadvantage the perpetrator in the future, but give no advantage to the victim.

There are two issue with VAR in football. The out of date offside law which they attempt to enforce to the nearest millimetre and the confusion around handball in general. Both could be fixed.

I find the bleating about offside decisions through VAR to be strange though. It is one area where it is an absolute, if you are a millimetre in front and the technology allows the officials to see that then you are offside. It's far easier to do that than to try to interpret some sort of allowance. The bigger problem is the whole determining if someone is passive or active as it brings in interpretation. Handball is a really tricky one though.

Part of the problem for keen viewers of cricket is that a lot can happen between each frame of recording, so the moment the ball is kicked forward isn't very exact, and players can move well over a millimetre. Therefore see suggestion above.

Also, note that the offside rule was changed a while ago such that a player who is level is onside. That isn't the sort of change that gets made when things are measured to the nearest millimetre.

morstar

Pross said:

morstar said:

I find the whole VAR thing interesting.
With 7 or 8 years refereeing ice hockey, I reckon I only wanted clarification of a goal on half a dozen occasions but, when you genuinely don’t know if it was a goal or not, without it is a very difficult position to be in.

Just to confirm I never had Video replay in my refereeing career. And let’s not discuss the partiality of the goal judge who is just a volunteer supporter/relative of the home team with zero qualifications.

Outside the top two flights of rugby union in Wales the two teams have to supply touch judges. Some of the blatant cheating I've seen is incredible, on one occasion the ref had to tell the team we were playing to change their touch judge as he was team extra metres and taking metres off us on every kick. The worst I saw was a guy who would put his flag up on a conversion the second his player's foot touched the ball. He's the only person I've seen flag for a successful conversion when the other touch judge didn't. It takes some nerve in some of the places I've watched rugby to give a correct decision against the home team in front of their fans let alone blatantly cheat. You don't realise how much help the ref gets at the top of the game until you see them having to manage alone at lower levels, it's pretty much impossible to cover what is going on with the ball and watch for offsides or foul play off the ball.

I can only imagine.
Glad to say with the actual on ice officials, I only ever encountered one who I felt was biased and boy did he make my afternoon hard.

I find it hard to imagine what it must be like refereeing field sports such as football and rugby at a local level. As an ice hockey ref you have barriers to protect you and can even get rink staff to kick fans out if causing trouble.

skyblueamateur

Watching a Championship club it's refreshing not having VAR. I agree with goal line technology but reviewing every goal and decision is sucking the life out of football for me.

rick_chasey

TheBigBean said:

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

One definite upside of VAR in football is catching off the ball incidents. In the past, they would be punished retrospectively, so would disadvantage the perpetrator in the future, but give no advantage to the victim.

There are two issue with VAR in football. The out of date offside law which they attempt to enforce to the nearest millimetre and the confusion around handball in general. Both could be fixed.

how would you fix it?

Offside based on torso only. Same concept as umpire's call in cricket, so the decision isn't overturned unless the official was wrong by a certain amount e.g. 30cm.

Surely you're just moving the line of controversy? So is it 30cm or is it 29cm? and where does the torso end? Is he being penalised for tucking his shirt into his shorts? etc

TheBigBean

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

One definite upside of VAR in football is catching off the ball incidents. In the past, they would be punished retrospectively, so would disadvantage the perpetrator in the future, but give no advantage to the victim.

There are two issue with VAR in football. The out of date offside law which they attempt to enforce to the nearest millimetre and the confusion around handball in general. Both could be fixed.

how would you fix it?

Offside based on torso only. Same concept as umpire's call in cricket, so the decision isn't overturned unless the official was wrong by a certain amount e.g. 30cm.

Surely you're just moving the line of controversy? So is it 30cm or is it 29cm? and where does the torso end? Is he being penalised for tucking his shirt into his shorts? etc

It works well in cricket. If someone is 30cm offside it is enough to overturn it. Torso is much easier than looking at feet, knees etc. which is why it is used in athletics.

rick_chasey

Sure. I'd say cricket is a lot less dynamic that football in that respect.

it's more static.

All you'd get is people saying "it was 25cm, why did it go to var?" or some chat about how Luke Shaw gets away with being massively offside because he doesn't tuck his shirt in and it's around his thighs or that liverpool have an advantage because it's harder to pick out the torso in an all red kit.

In athletics there are rules around what you can wear ("must not impede the view of judges") - can't imagine that happening in football.

TheBigBean

You get similar discussions in cricket, but it still works well and much better than VAR in football. Fans don't object to really bad decisions being overturned, but do object to the idea that someone's toe was offside.