VAR was to most people’s minds brought in for those once every 5 or 10 games howlers, but instead becomes a 5-10 times per game event. We can’t celebrate goals, and we all basically hate the game now.
8 Likes
Basically what I alluded to in the game thread but essentially it has reduced the game to the moment of the foul rather than the moment in the game.
The VAR is stopping the footage on the ball’s contact with the arm, the foot on the shin, the arm on the face. What they’ve now eliminated is the entire sequence of play that has led to that infringement instead of taking in to account the offending player’s action in the immediate lead up to the foul.
Jay O’Shea and Pat Wood had eyes for the ball and absolutely no intent to take out the opposing player. This makes the play careless rather than reckless yet the VAR doesn’t focus on that, just the moment of impact. For a player to be sent off for Serious Foul Play then the action that player performed when carrying out the foul had to be reckless. Kicking someone in the shin isn’t necessarily reckless yet it appears now that the guidance for APL referees is saying any contact above the ankle is reckless.
Not only is it a poor implementation of the technology, it’s also a very poor bit of refereeing by the person in the middle for not seeing the incident in its entirety.
7 Likes
1 Like
Time to replay the Newcastle vs Melbourne grand final
11 Likes
Time to bin this shit. The errors it corrects don’t make up for its multitude of shortcomings.
8 Likes
At this point in time, Victory would tear Jets to pieces.
I miss good Newcastle from 2018. Was a fun battle all season but neither came out on top in the end.
1 Like
Bosnich: “It wasn’t as offside as you think”
2 Likes
This must be false. VAR prevents significant human errors by referees from influencing the outcome of a match. Otherwise why would we have it? It’s a foolproof process.
I don’t think the concept is shit though, it’s the application. The powers at be are using it the same way that the NRL does. They micromanage and look down to the last millimetre. The problem with that, is that it means refs lose confidence in what they do and they themselves start to overthink and then rely on VAR more and more.
It honestly shouldn’t be as difficult as they make it. Offside VAR calls should be directed to a linesman for instance, if they’re unsure, then it’s VAR, if the linesman makes an obvious mistake like 30cm, then it’s stopped, if not, play on. The obvious misses should still be carried through, but they have to be obvious and absolutely clear. None of this shit of, lets get the ref to have a look at it. It should literally be: “hey ref, Grant punched Berisha, stop play, red card.” The ref doesn’t have to see the replay, it’s why VAR is there. At the very least, there needs to be a 30 second time limit on VAR intervention. If you can’t figure out if a call is wrong in 30 seconds, then it definitely aint obvious.
3 Likes
Fixed
2 Likes
Agreed. Clear and obvious needs to be defined though.
If the officials aren’t sure of something they should let the play continue and highlight their uncertainty by notifying the VAR or the ref - “it wasn’t entirely clear the player was offside, we will need a check if this leads to a goal” type thing.
This would then mean if someone is 1cm offside the goal stands - because that isn’t actually clear and obvious, especially if the linesperson was 60M away - it’s completely unrealistic for them to be able to call that type of the decision, so having it overturned is stupid.
Likewise, you shouldn’t go back for a foul 45 seconds ago in the build up unless it’s something like a player getting elbowed in the head and it’s directly lead to the goal - that is it resulted in the turnover of possession which resulted in the goal.
Checking every single goal to see if anyone was a millimetre offside is farken dumb and a waste of time.
You could also introduce VAR as a captains challenge only, two per game which are retained if successful.
Captain’s (or coach’s) challenge would be better IMO - if you think it’s a howler then go for it, otherwise the ref’s in control. If teams use their challenges badly and lose then that’s on them, and they get a taste for how hard it is to get everything right.
1 Like
If something cannot be judged within 30 seconds it isn’t clear and obvious.
Lines on the field to see if a fingernail is in front of play, or millisecond by millisecond freeze frame to see if there is contact isn’t clear and obvious
4 Likes
The problem with not using the lines when determining offside is the parallax error that comes with viewing the footage.
The only way around this would be to change the competition rules and instruct the groundskeepers to mow narrower strips across the field. At the moment the standard is to have ~10m segments (this is why you no longer see those intricate patterns mowed into the playing surface) but if you were to reduce that to 5m then it would be easier to determine offside without the use of the digital lines.
It goes back to the age old argument of whether something is clear and obvious or not. If a player is clearly a meter or two offside and it was missed, that’s where VAR is useful. Nobody wants to sit there for five minutes figuring out whether they’re a millimeter offside or not. For some of the decisions, the lines appeared to be in exactly the same spot.
We don’t need to instruct groundskeepers to change a thing, in my opinion.
1 Like
VAR causing more issues.
You have to assume being fouled exempts you from the 2 minutes on the side line.
They’ve just cured cramp.
2 Likes
I doubt it. You could really take that to the nth degree to get such an exemption. If you’re really injured, you probably need two minutes on the sideline at minimum.