Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

 

VAR

RD2910 said:
But it's not an advantage that means anything to anyone apart from the other team in the same game, who should have the same advantage. It has no effect on the integrity of the competition.
Click to expand...
I've made this point multiple times myself...never seen a counterargument that makes sense.
 
tellmema said:
Suggested this the other day after the game....

Think 3 per team would be too much. 6 checks, each lasting 3 minutes takes too much time IMO. 2 per team would be ok.

Plus, only the ref asks for help. No "help" given without request.

Or, if VAR are to stay "active", and in order that it remains limited to "clear and obvious" mistake. VAR can only review in real time. Ref may ask for slow motion, not VAR slowing and telling.

Perhaps would help.
Click to expand...
This method is used in American Football, and has worked quite well for a number of years, that is, each team has a number of appeals that can be made. The appeal is only used up if the on-field decision is not overturned, i.e. if you turn out to be correct to challenge the decision, you shouldnt lose the ability to appeal future decisions.

It makes sense to do it this way, as you can rely upon teams to save their challenges for when it counts most, but also for when they feel they have a good chance of getting the original decision overturned. This solves the issue of var checks being made or not being made in the hands of dodgy match officials, but not the actual decision...so, half the problem resolved.
 
John from Bootle said:
Imo, VAR should be used only for the following incidents:

- Off the ball incidents, or non tackling violent behaviour.
- Offside, if no part of the attackers body is level with the defender. If the attacker is even marginally level, then it's not that clear and obvious, is it?
-Penalties where no contact has been made
-instances of the ball going out of play
Click to expand...
This is the most sensible thing re VAR I've read yet.

So simple to understand, so easy to implement, so clear for teams to not be able to complain about how VAR treated them. And so, so unlikely to be anything like what actually happens unfortunately.
 
Lineker said:
I've made this point multiple times myself...never seen a counterargument that makes sense.
Click to expand...

The counter argument is the same competition should have the same rules. Not some games lasting 100 minutes because of VAR, not some games being stop/start. Some games having human error and referees being swayed by a home crowd and some not.
 

MACCA75 said:
The counter argument is the same competition should have the same rules. Not some games lasting 100 minutes because of VAR, not some games being stop/start. Some games having human error and referees being swayed by a home crowd and some not.
Click to expand...
...100 minutes vs 95 happens literally every game that differing amounts of time are added on, because the time is added on to replace time used for non-footballing reasons.

not some games being stop/start.
Click to expand...
Both teams deal with the same issue
Some games having human error
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting that all of the games have referees that are equally good/error prone? Or do some games have different match officials than others, some of which are better than others...
swayed by a home crowd and some not
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting that the pressure on the referee is the same at Mordor as it is at Oxford Utd?
 
John from Bootle said:
Imo, VAR should be used only for the following incidents:

- Off the ball incidents, or non tackling violent behaviour.
- Offside, if no part of the attackers body is level with the defender. If the attacker is even marginally level, then it's not that clear and obvious, is it?
-Penalties where no contact has been made
-instances of the ball going out of play
Click to expand...

I genuinely think thats what it was for originally. But they've gone on a complete power trip with it and lost the plot. Its all about them now and they love being the centre of attention despite what they claim.
 
Gilbert.. said:
what does that matter. So if for example sunderland scored here at 0-0 and its chalked off incorrectly. Then newcastle win a replay and by the same token because of a VAR decision and then go on to win the cup they've gained an advantage because the away game didnt have VAR but the home game did way back in the 3rd round when they should have been knocked out.
Surely every game in the same competition has to either have it or not. You dont get some premier league games having it and some not.
Click to expand...
what does that matter. So if for example sunderland scored here at 0-0 and its chalked off incorrectly
Click to expand...
What if Newcastle get robbed by VAR? Both teams are facing the same conditions.
an advantage because the away game didnt have VAR
Click to expand...
Neither team had VAR in this game, so face the same conditions that impacts their ability to win or lose the game.

Some pitches are nicer than others...should the teams that are playing on a muddy field in sleet up north complain because some team down south is playing a different team in nicer conditions?
 
Lineker said:
What if Newcastle get robbed by VAR? Both teams are facing the same conditions.

Neither team had VAR in this game, so face the same conditions that impacts their ability to win or lose the game.

Some pitches are nicer than others...should the teams that are playing on a muddy field in sleet up north complain because some team down south is playing a different team in nicer conditions?
Click to expand...

I Know where you are coming from. You are talking about an individual game where both teams can either gain or lose out. But thats not the point. The flaw in the system is the example that a team can go on to win the cup over a replay that they should have been knocked out in the first tie but wasnt because there was no VAR but went through in the second game because there was. You've got to take that flaw out.
 
Gilbert.. said:
I Know where you are coming from. You are talking about an individual game where both teams can either gain or lose out. But thats not the point. The flaw in the system is the example that a team can go on to win the cup over a replay that they should have been knocked out in the first tie but wasnt because there was no VAR but went through in the second game because there was. You've got to take that flaw out.
Click to expand...
Agree to disagree...
 

Lineker said:
...100 minutes vs 95 happens literally every game that differing amounts of time are added on, because the time is added on to replace time used for non-footballing reasons.


Both teams deal with the same issue

Are you suggesting that all of the games have referees that are equally good/error prone? Or do some games have different match officials than others, some of which are better than others...

Are you suggesting that the pressure on the referee is the same at Mordor as it is at Oxford Utd?
Click to expand...

I’m unconvinced I’m afraid. VAR should have no part in the FA Cup.
 

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top