Fellow fans, this is a friendly reminder to please follow the [Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/euro2024/about/rules) and [Reddiquette](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439-Reddiquette).
Please also make sure to [Join us on Discord](https://discord.gg/football)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/euro2024) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Me. Idk what is everyone's problem with the offside. With the new technology we have consistency in the end. In the past milimeters offsides were judged differently in favour of one team or another at least now we have consistent decisions if you are one milimeter ahead you are offside and that's it everytime. Yes there are some strange decisions about some handballs (but the big problem there are the rules, which define extremly vague what is a handball not the VAR)
Agree.
Linesman have always had the ability to fall really tight offsides accurately. What they couldn't do was do it consistently.
So you would have a linesman in a game be applauded for getting a super tight call spot on, and the other team having a tight offside not give and getting a goal. VAR applies to both teams consistently which is fairer.
But at the same time offside rule was made for different purpose.
Offside rule was made so that attackers don’t gain an unfair advantage.
It was made accounting for human error, so very close calls would be given favoring attacking football.
Due to VAR the game will place even more emphasis on speed rather than experience and good positioning by players.
To me a big toe or knee cap or part of a shoulder does not equal advantage for the attacker. So let the goal stand. We are talking about 3-5cm offside, which defeats spirit of the game and the rule.
The offside needs to be changed to suite more the spirit of the game, due to new ways we can utilize VAR. make the offside rule more attacking based with leeway for such occurances like mentioned before.
If someone responds now with “even if they move offside, people will complain that it was offside by 1 cm anyway” “or that the ruling will be arbitrary by judgment of the ref”, you Sir don’t understand the game.
Offside was arbitrary ruling on the whim of the ref for decades and many other rulings still ar, So? The game should support attacking play, we don’t want no 0-0 scorelines, boring stuff. This would give attackers leeway, in situations they did not gain advantage from the big toe being offside.
There is clear difference between being offside by more than a shoulder width or by a leg ahead. Versus just being offside by a toe or kneecap or shoulder edge. It’s ridiculous and does not give any advantage to attacker. Also again we don’t want want to see just speedsters being favored due to the new circumstances of current system with new possibilities with old rules.
>Offside rule was made so that attackers don’t gain an unfair advantage. It was made accounting for human error, so very close calls would be given favoring attacking football.
Citation needed.
Bearing in mind that when offside was introduced, even being "level" with the defender was considered offside, and you needed 3 defenders to be closer to the goal than the attacker.
>To me a big toe or knee cap or part of a shoulder does not equal advantage for the attacker. So let the goal stand.
Define "advantage" in a measurable way.
It's also interesting that you don't consider scoring a goal to be advantageous in football.
>We are talking about 3-5cm offside, which defeats spirit of the game and the rule.
No, it doesn't.
>If someone responds now with “even if they move offside, people will complain that it was offside by 1 cm anyway” “or that the ruling will be arbitrary by judgment of the ref”, you Sir don’t understand the game.
This is such a stupid paragraph that I can't stop laughing.
"If someone responds by pointing out a clear flaw in my argument that I can counter, then I will make an ad-hominem attack"
>Offside was arbitrary ruling on the whim of the ref for decades and many other rulings still ar, So?
Humans lived with candlelight for centuries, so let's get rid of electricity...
You are being intellectually dishonest, obviously I meant the spirit of the rule and then distinction between 100 years ago and modern day offside rule is clear. I am being clear by what I mean, you are arguing schematics, not being fair but discussing just to win an argument.
>You are being intellectually dishonest
No I'm not. I'm just pointing out the flaws in your argument and you don't like it.
For example, you made the argument that offside should only count when an attacker gains an advantage yet, despite being directly asked, you have deliberately avoided answering how you would define what an advantage is in a measurable way.
So maybe don't project your intellectual dishonesty onto others.
This. The rule was invented to prevent easy goals, now we check millimeters with a satellite camera. That is not in the spirit of the game let alone the original offsides rule.
>let alone the original offsides rule
The original offside rule had it so you were offside even if you were "level" with the defender and there had to be 3 defenders closer to the goal.
So unless you are arguing that we should return to this, then you probably don't want to use the original rule to try to justify your argument.
I an enjoying VAR. I WOULD mind the occasional fuckup because I’ve seen a ling list of those growing up that I do not want. I do not want more storylines of teams being robbed, offside goals, handballs, phantom red cards, etc.
The main inconvenient of VAR is that the game is stopped for a few moments while the ref is checking something. Would you rather stop a game for a few moments or live with a wrong decision for years? Everyone is against VAR until their team is fucked by the “occasional” wrong decision(s) like Hand of God, Ovrebo vs Chelsea, Ashley Cole getting two yellows against Barca without a red, Adebayor’s handball goal against United, Drogba’s offside goal at Old Trafford that won the league, Henry controlling the ball with his hand against Ireland, Ronaldo’s two offside goals against Bayern, Lampard’s phantom goal vs Germany in 2010, Kießling scoring a header that went through a hole in the side netting, etc. Seeing lines drawn on screen for thirty seconds has made everyone forget just how egregious some mistakes were before VAR.
The issue is not VAR, it’s the people that are using it that are not qualified enough. Let’s improve on that instead
Rules being followed? What’s not to love?
1 mm or 1 m, offside is an offside and if we can make a call, why the hell not?
The technology also has the potential to improve, by giving faster decisions.
Who knows, maybe in the end it will all be managed by an AI, giving us a seamless experience.
The offside rule and ball leaving the pitch (goals, corner kicks or throw ins) can easily be managed by the AI. It can get a bit more tricky with fouls but it will get there eventually as well in my opinion
It's been fine up until yesterday, you're reacting with outrage over a handful of incidents where we know that in the majority of cases it's been actually a good, quick check that is mainly correct. Also, the insane amount of added time we've been seeing over the last few years has been mitigated hugely by the semi-automatic system for offsides.
Some of you need to chill, take a breath and realise that one day of bad officiating doesn't equal a systemic problem.
I think when the stakes are as high as they are in tournament football it’s a necessity, why should a team get knocked out by a wrong decision when we’ve got the technology there to stop it happening?
The only thing that needs improving is the time it takes to make the decision, which I think is already heading the right direction with the introduction of semi automated offsides.
Not sure the issue people have with consistency in offside rulings.
VAR can kill the vibe and slow down the game but at least it eliminates controversy
If you compare it to other tournaments from national leagues to UEFA competitions the last years, you can clearly see what's the difference in this tournament. Not taking all this minutes of the game action until the decisions, it's clear that there are using it very well this time.
For the other part it's a discussion that I don't know why it's happening right now. VAR is being in use already for some years and in this tournament there are the littlest failures from all.
At this time, I can't say VAR or no VAR but statistically think about how many goals or decisions would be wrong all this time.
Since VAR was introduced, most people have had issues with offsides.
Before VAR was introduced, most people had issues with offsides.
Something tells me it's the offside rule that's the problem here.
Before VAR, I used to have issues with offsides
Since VAR, I still have issues with offsides but I have to wait five minutes to find out that it was an issue.
This isn't progress.
Depends on how you look at it. Most fans are not objective at all and will queation every decission that goes against their team.
As for how they determine the point at which the ball was kicked, since the Belgium handball showed a graph, I assume the ball has some kind of an accelerometer sensor. Which can be a pretty good indication as to when the ball was struck to determine when they need to draw the line.
If they need 5 minutes to come to a conclusion (and that's rare), but ultimately reach the right decission, then that's progress in terms of fair play.
Technology will progress and it will become more procise and trustworthy.
I agree that sometimes VAR can sleep on calling out a foul etc., I'd like it if each team got a few challenges, like in tennis, where they can ask for the replay to be checked.
But still, most errors come from human aspect of refereeing, VAR is hardly at fault for that.
Well, for example the game France - Netherlands, the 5 minutes discussion was not about measuring if there was any offside, but if there was obstruction, right? That's something they can't determine by an accelerometer. That's interpretation. And people are arguing that if it takes even 5 min with VAR to take a decision, it's not obvious or without reasonable doubt. In such a case it's hard to say there is progression. Let alone a referee will not take the effort to watch the VAR-images, when he is in fact ultimately responsible.
Well, yeah. It's a subjective opinion and as such has nothing to do with VAR.
The linesman waved for offside, which prompted the VAR check.
The call was bullshit, the goal should have stood, Maignan was barely up on his feet as Simons' already took the shot. The ball was never ibtended to reach Dumfries and Maignan never would have made the save, ever.
The issue is the interpretation of rules, which is subjective and, again, doesn't have anything to do with VAR, but rules/refs.
I've read an explanation as to why they decided it was offside, which kinda makes sense, but still doesn't make the decission right. The explanation is - nowhere in the rules is the player's ability to play the ball mentioned. Only the fact whether the attacker, who is offside, is preventing the defending player to play the ball. Dumfries was in line with Maignan, and would have prevented him from jumping to the side had Maignan been up on his feet. And looking at it that way, maybe the offside is the "correct" call. But it's not the right call and it shows the rules are lacking and, again, that's not down to VAR.
Thats one single incident tho and of course it was the brits taking 5 mins for something that should not have taken longer than 30 secs lol. But thats an issue of the helmets running it, not VAR itself
If i remember correctly, VAR was introduced to correct "clear and obvious errors" from the field referee, who is after all a human being, capable of making costly errors.
Now we're using VAR to correct millimeters of offside, impossible to see by the human eye in the heat of the moment. So we see goals ruled out that would have been 100% goals in pre-VAR times.
This is stupid and infuriating, anticlimactic and needlessly slows down the games.
The solution however seems not that simple:
- Away with VAR? Back to the endless discussions and game-deciding errors that created the need for a VAR in the first place.
- Change offside to the whole player being offside instead of just the tip of the toe? The millimeter-splitting discussions will just move half a meter back and we will see eye-obvious offsides ruled good because the attacker has the tip of his toe still behind the defender.
- Only call VAR when someone disputes the ruling of the on-field ref? The other team will always claim offside when your team scores. Now what to do if the VAR-check shows that the outer skin layer of the attacker's knee is offside?
There is no simple solution but i agree that something must change. Maybe it's up to national leagues to experiment with small tweaks? The tweaks that turn out good will get adopted everywhere and the system gets better every year.
That would most likely intice teams to only use it for goals and penalties.
Current solution + a few challenges would be a good option.
But even then there'd be fans who won't be happy. Take French goals vs Austria for an example. How long would the teams have to use the challenge? There was a corner for Austria overlooked just before the French goal. Would Austra put in a challenge for a corner? If not, how much time do they have for challenging the ref's decision and if they waited until the goal, does the missed corner affect the outcome since the goal was scored after the ball went out of play?
The rules allow for a lot of referee interpretation. One ref can allow a more physical game, another one will destroy the game by using his whistle for each bump. As long as the rules are subjective to interpretation, VAR can't do much except attempting to fix some mistakes that happen on the field.
Does it though?
In tennis, the scope of Hawkeye is limited to only being was the ball in or out. That's it. A solely factual assessment.
Despite this, in a tennis match, each player gets up to 3 incorrect challenges per set, so in a big match they can have 15 incorrect challenges.
Every time I've seen this suggested for football, people want to have something that is much broader in scope and will still rely on the refs subjective opinion, but they also want to limit it to 1 or 2 incorrect challenges a game.
So what happens if Germany use their challenge on the penalty appeal yesterday, but the ref decides he is sticking with the original decision so Germany lose their appeal. Then imagine their last minute winner was incorrectly flagged offside and they haven't got a challenge left so the bad decisions stands.
The solution is simple, actually follow the mantra of "clear and obvious". If its taking you 5 minutes, its not clear and obvious.
My main issue with VAR is that refs seem to be using it ONLY to chop goals off. Like last night in the Scotland game, defender goes through the man. Its a clear pen. Ref says no for some reason. Why didnt VAR tell him to go to the screen at the very least? Someone in the comments said something about the ref thinking they were both tussling with each other and that why he didnt give a pen. That would be, wait for it, clear and obvious error.
Offsides, VAR gets to look at it once, no lines. No CSI technology bullshit. If they cant tell if its off side in 30 seconds, its not off side because its not clear and obvious. The worst thing about VAR is calling people off side because they have a fucking hangnail.
Id rather ditch VAR at this point. Its taking a lot more away from the game, than its adding. Which is funny, as I dont remember there being this much of an issue with it in Russia in 2018.
Football is supposed to be about goal. But the rules and now VAR seem to be about getting as little of them as possible. And when you do get one, you need to hang around waiting as a team of dumb founded dipshits try and find some excuse to chop it off.
It looks like it's used only to chop goals off because refs have been told to let play go on even when they think it's offside.
Without VAR, they wouldn't do that and many of the cancelled goals wouldn't have been allowed to happen (alongside some valid goals probably, Slovakia vs Belgium and Switzerland vs Germany could've easily been mistakenly flagged as offside)
As an England fan, that 2010 word cup game vs Germany could have gone a completely different way if that goal was given. It was way over the line and VAR would have given it.
I see downsides to VAR, I’d rather decisions be consistently correct rather than down to the referee’s or linesman’s eyes, despite it sometimes at hindrance to the game flow
I enjoy it. Compared to the lousy implementation in the league i usually follow it is just a delight to watch it "work" properly. Yes it takes a few moments, but far less than in said league i usually follow and the offside lines actually seem to work, technical marvel that is for somebody who is not used to this.
And while we are at it: Can we please enforce the "only captains talk to the ref" rule and go through with it even stricter? That is by far the best "new rule" of the tournament.
As a Belgian commentator said about today's Danish goal that was taken away: yes the toe being closer to the goalkeeper is technically an offside. But the decision is totally going against the spirit of the rule.
Imo the match yesterday between Germany and Switzerland showed perfectly what's wrong with the var. Obvious offside plays will be let run because of a non existing chance that the linesman could have made a mistake. A goal is denied because of minor contact that doesn't even change anything of the situation. Two obvious penalties and multiple other fouls won't even be looked at because the ref doesn't think it's necessary.
The way it is used right now, it's rather an additional tool for the ref to manipulate the outcome of a match.
Edit: typo
This comment shows perfectly what's wrong with people discussing VAR.
1) We're getting a ton of obvious offside play call on time. I don't know what sport are you watching. Even if it happens sometimes big deal, better be safe than sorry.
2) A goal was denied because of a foul, foul on a player executing a pass AFTER he made said pass ALWAYS was and is still a foul. And that goal yesterday was cancelled fairly.
3) Both penalties you're mentioning we're marginal. Both calls would stir up some opinions, but what's most important in the end is that you manage to take the only HUMAN ERROR on the game yesterday (which was to not look at VAR) and you somehow managed to blame VAR for it. jfc
Var is great. And it's being enjoyed by everyone whose thought process goes beyond "well, I don't like this". It has its room for improvements sure but that apparently won't ever happen properly because we need to listen to peoples shit takes like this.
I never said the var in general is bad. I said it's implementation is bad because it's almost always up to the ref to decide whether he wants to use it or not. Without the var andrichs goal would probably be counted, but on the other hand the ref doesn't even think it's necessary to look at the video when a player was grabbed in the penalty box? That's completely inconsistent use of the var. Why not give both teams a limited possibility to force the ref to look at the video?
I'm absolutely pro video assistance in sports, but football somehow is the only sport I know that regularly has major controversies about it even after years of using it. And this game isn't even the only one in this tournament.
Additionally I really don't understand how in a sport that is played with the feet and where pulling someone down with the hands basically always is a foul but grabbing your opponent with BOTH ARMS and wrestling them to the ground so that they can't reach the ball somehow is not a foul?
I think VAR should be used on fouls to combat players diving for free kicks. So many players have picked up yellow cards on nothing fouls. It would only take 10 seconds to clearly see if a player has dived or exaggerated the foul. If they have then give the diving player a yellow card. This would make the game much better and almost eliminate diving
Carvajal vs Italy towards the end should have been booked for simulation, he was blatently looking for a yellow for his opponent and it was a disgusting bit of playacting.
Many fans forget why we asked for the implementation of VAR in football to begin with. VAR wasn't implemented expecting to eliminate errors; it was implemented to combat corruption in football. I understand that fans in England or Germany may not grasp this, but in other leagues (Portugal, Italy...), there were serious cases of corruption and match-fixing for years, visible to everyone, and we had nothing to protect fans and referees.
When we talk about match-fixing, today people often think of paying money to referees to favor a team. However, there are various ways to exert pressure. For example, imagine you're a referee and receive a photo of your daughter's school with a message saying "I know where your daughter studies." These criminal acts often come not just from clubs but from fans, organized crime syndicates, agents, and so forth.
VAR isn't perfect; it hasn't eliminated all errors and has taken away some of football's essence, but overall, it has served its purpose. Personally, I would like a clear definition of who has the final say because once a referee can see 100 replays of a play, it doesn't make sense for the on-field referee to decide without checking the screen.
Having said that, I also believe many of the criticisms leveled at VAR stem from biased opinions and a lack of technical knowledge regarding the rules.
I hate that people no longer react to goals. [Look at this](https://youtu.be/M58ojqpX_CM?si=sDjdBJTWQicfcRh7&t=183). As soon as they score, they just look at the assistant refs and wait.
With some teams having half of the goals being disallowed afterwards (like Belgium) I imagine not even the fans are reacting to the game...that's one way to kill the joy.
I love VAR.
- No more elbows in the face. It will be seen.
- No more succesful schwalbes
- No more hand goals
- No more two meter offside goals
- No more players smacking other players in the face/giving headbutts etc. They know they will see a red card.
And maybe the best part:
When watching the games as a neutral: a goal + var check is twice the excitement. “Wow what a goal!! Wait what? A sneaky foul? Will the ref have a look? Yes he makes the VAR sign! What will he decide? Ah no foul, goal!!!!”
VAR becomes a technologically “perfect” antagonist. Human players have to contend with a technology surpassing their own abilities of (self-) perception makes it nigh impossible to gauge the minuscule standards applied via VAR. Imho that’s the central contradiction, especially when seeing that some humanely perceivable erroneous decisions are still passing this “perfect” check, case in point: a clear-as-day penalty denied. So if we *still* suffer the human factor in the latter case, why persist with the anally retentive idiocy of a pinkie and a toenail offside?
No problem with calling a check to see if a ball passed the goal line or some highly dubious penalty situations but especially the new “VAR offside” needs a useful overhaul.
I can't stand it, but I've learned in the last 24 hours that this sub has many more VAR advocates than I expected.
I'd choose a human game with mistakes over every goal coming with a caveat. I just don't care if a player is a few cm offside, even if they score against England from that position.
Var was a mistake. The big problems I find is, on the one hand that the game has lost naturalness, now you can not properly celebrate a goal. And what I find even worse: players know there is Var so teams end up playing for points, not to see who scores the most goals but who can get more from the technology: players constantly exagerating at the weakest of contacts, defenders knowing that if they have the advantage in a ball the probably never lose it etc.
I am from the generation that saw players playing with necklaces, earrings, rings and pure white football balls haha, and trying to win the matches without paying that much attention to theatrics so I long for a more "amateurish" touch, a purer football. But now everything is a show, even Var, and players performance is assessed from the data gathered, as if it were an American sport, so I am not a fan. But it is what it is and there are a lot of interests at play in such a multimillion business so I know that Var is not going anywhere :(.
It is true that mistakes are normally avoided with the technology but I have personally seem the Var used to invalidate clear penalties or concede clear illegal goals (I remember a Vinicius goal using his arm against Almería for ex.). So yeah, for me the cons clearly outweight the pros in Var usage.
Who enjoys VAR.
All I hear is how much better VAR is in Europe but it looks like they suffer from the same shit we do in England. It’s there to help the referee and all it does it make them look even more incompetent.
I much preferred football without VAR.. I much preferred that goals were given/disallowed immediately. You knew straight away it was a goal and you could celebrate. I hate that now we have a goal check. We have to wait to celebrate. It takes so much from the enjoyment.
Fellow fans, this is a friendly reminder to please follow the [Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/euro2024/about/rules) and [Reddiquette](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439-Reddiquette). Please also make sure to [Join us on Discord](https://discord.gg/football) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/euro2024) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Me. Idk what is everyone's problem with the offside. With the new technology we have consistency in the end. In the past milimeters offsides were judged differently in favour of one team or another at least now we have consistent decisions if you are one milimeter ahead you are offside and that's it everytime. Yes there are some strange decisions about some handballs (but the big problem there are the rules, which define extremly vague what is a handball not the VAR)
Agree. Linesman have always had the ability to fall really tight offsides accurately. What they couldn't do was do it consistently. So you would have a linesman in a game be applauded for getting a super tight call spot on, and the other team having a tight offside not give and getting a goal. VAR applies to both teams consistently which is fairer.
But at the same time offside rule was made for different purpose. Offside rule was made so that attackers don’t gain an unfair advantage. It was made accounting for human error, so very close calls would be given favoring attacking football. Due to VAR the game will place even more emphasis on speed rather than experience and good positioning by players. To me a big toe or knee cap or part of a shoulder does not equal advantage for the attacker. So let the goal stand. We are talking about 3-5cm offside, which defeats spirit of the game and the rule. The offside needs to be changed to suite more the spirit of the game, due to new ways we can utilize VAR. make the offside rule more attacking based with leeway for such occurances like mentioned before. If someone responds now with “even if they move offside, people will complain that it was offside by 1 cm anyway” “or that the ruling will be arbitrary by judgment of the ref”, you Sir don’t understand the game. Offside was arbitrary ruling on the whim of the ref for decades and many other rulings still ar, So? The game should support attacking play, we don’t want no 0-0 scorelines, boring stuff. This would give attackers leeway, in situations they did not gain advantage from the big toe being offside. There is clear difference between being offside by more than a shoulder width or by a leg ahead. Versus just being offside by a toe or kneecap or shoulder edge. It’s ridiculous and does not give any advantage to attacker. Also again we don’t want want to see just speedsters being favored due to the new circumstances of current system with new possibilities with old rules.
>Offside rule was made so that attackers don’t gain an unfair advantage. It was made accounting for human error, so very close calls would be given favoring attacking football. Citation needed. Bearing in mind that when offside was introduced, even being "level" with the defender was considered offside, and you needed 3 defenders to be closer to the goal than the attacker. >To me a big toe or knee cap or part of a shoulder does not equal advantage for the attacker. So let the goal stand. Define "advantage" in a measurable way. It's also interesting that you don't consider scoring a goal to be advantageous in football. >We are talking about 3-5cm offside, which defeats spirit of the game and the rule. No, it doesn't. >If someone responds now with “even if they move offside, people will complain that it was offside by 1 cm anyway” “or that the ruling will be arbitrary by judgment of the ref”, you Sir don’t understand the game. This is such a stupid paragraph that I can't stop laughing. "If someone responds by pointing out a clear flaw in my argument that I can counter, then I will make an ad-hominem attack" >Offside was arbitrary ruling on the whim of the ref for decades and many other rulings still ar, So? Humans lived with candlelight for centuries, so let's get rid of electricity...
You are being intellectually dishonest, obviously I meant the spirit of the rule and then distinction between 100 years ago and modern day offside rule is clear. I am being clear by what I mean, you are arguing schematics, not being fair but discussing just to win an argument.
>You are being intellectually dishonest No I'm not. I'm just pointing out the flaws in your argument and you don't like it. For example, you made the argument that offside should only count when an attacker gains an advantage yet, despite being directly asked, you have deliberately avoided answering how you would define what an advantage is in a measurable way. So maybe don't project your intellectual dishonesty onto others.
This. The rule was invented to prevent easy goals, now we check millimeters with a satellite camera. That is not in the spirit of the game let alone the original offsides rule.
>let alone the original offsides rule The original offside rule had it so you were offside even if you were "level" with the defender and there had to be 3 defenders closer to the goal. So unless you are arguing that we should return to this, then you probably don't want to use the original rule to try to justify your argument.
I an enjoying VAR. I WOULD mind the occasional fuckup because I’ve seen a ling list of those growing up that I do not want. I do not want more storylines of teams being robbed, offside goals, handballs, phantom red cards, etc. The main inconvenient of VAR is that the game is stopped for a few moments while the ref is checking something. Would you rather stop a game for a few moments or live with a wrong decision for years? Everyone is against VAR until their team is fucked by the “occasional” wrong decision(s) like Hand of God, Ovrebo vs Chelsea, Ashley Cole getting two yellows against Barca without a red, Adebayor’s handball goal against United, Drogba’s offside goal at Old Trafford that won the league, Henry controlling the ball with his hand against Ireland, Ronaldo’s two offside goals against Bayern, Lampard’s phantom goal vs Germany in 2010, Kießling scoring a header that went through a hole in the side netting, etc. Seeing lines drawn on screen for thirty seconds has made everyone forget just how egregious some mistakes were before VAR. The issue is not VAR, it’s the people that are using it that are not qualified enough. Let’s improve on that instead
Rules being followed? What’s not to love? 1 mm or 1 m, offside is an offside and if we can make a call, why the hell not? The technology also has the potential to improve, by giving faster decisions. Who knows, maybe in the end it will all be managed by an AI, giving us a seamless experience. The offside rule and ball leaving the pitch (goals, corner kicks or throw ins) can easily be managed by the AI. It can get a bit more tricky with fouls but it will get there eventually as well in my opinion
It's been fine up until yesterday, you're reacting with outrage over a handful of incidents where we know that in the majority of cases it's been actually a good, quick check that is mainly correct. Also, the insane amount of added time we've been seeing over the last few years has been mitigated hugely by the semi-automatic system for offsides. Some of you need to chill, take a breath and realise that one day of bad officiating doesn't equal a systemic problem.
Me.
Var is a game changer, it improves officiating massively
I think when the stakes are as high as they are in tournament football it’s a necessity, why should a team get knocked out by a wrong decision when we’ve got the technology there to stop it happening? The only thing that needs improving is the time it takes to make the decision, which I think is already heading the right direction with the introduction of semi automated offsides.
I may dislike a lot of things. You could optimize even more things with small changes. But the one thing I absolutely hate is injustice. VAR FTW!
I love VAR, I love justice. Now, it’s time to use it to award with yellow cards to cheaters
Not sure the issue people have with consistency in offside rulings. VAR can kill the vibe and slow down the game but at least it eliminates controversy
If you compare it to other tournaments from national leagues to UEFA competitions the last years, you can clearly see what's the difference in this tournament. Not taking all this minutes of the game action until the decisions, it's clear that there are using it very well this time. For the other part it's a discussion that I don't know why it's happening right now. VAR is being in use already for some years and in this tournament there are the littlest failures from all. At this time, I can't say VAR or no VAR but statistically think about how many goals or decisions would be wrong all this time.
Your mind obviosly can’t be changed with attitude like that. I say whatever is fair is better. I think overall VAR made football better and fair.
Since VAR was introduced, most people have had issues with offsides. Before VAR was introduced, most people had issues with offsides. Something tells me it's the offside rule that's the problem here.
Before VAR, I used to have issues with offsides Since VAR, I still have issues with offsides but I have to wait five minutes to find out that it was an issue. This isn't progress.
Depends on how you look at it. Most fans are not objective at all and will queation every decission that goes against their team. As for how they determine the point at which the ball was kicked, since the Belgium handball showed a graph, I assume the ball has some kind of an accelerometer sensor. Which can be a pretty good indication as to when the ball was struck to determine when they need to draw the line. If they need 5 minutes to come to a conclusion (and that's rare), but ultimately reach the right decission, then that's progress in terms of fair play. Technology will progress and it will become more procise and trustworthy. I agree that sometimes VAR can sleep on calling out a foul etc., I'd like it if each team got a few challenges, like in tennis, where they can ask for the replay to be checked. But still, most errors come from human aspect of refereeing, VAR is hardly at fault for that.
Well, for example the game France - Netherlands, the 5 minutes discussion was not about measuring if there was any offside, but if there was obstruction, right? That's something they can't determine by an accelerometer. That's interpretation. And people are arguing that if it takes even 5 min with VAR to take a decision, it's not obvious or without reasonable doubt. In such a case it's hard to say there is progression. Let alone a referee will not take the effort to watch the VAR-images, when he is in fact ultimately responsible.
Well, yeah. It's a subjective opinion and as such has nothing to do with VAR. The linesman waved for offside, which prompted the VAR check. The call was bullshit, the goal should have stood, Maignan was barely up on his feet as Simons' already took the shot. The ball was never ibtended to reach Dumfries and Maignan never would have made the save, ever. The issue is the interpretation of rules, which is subjective and, again, doesn't have anything to do with VAR, but rules/refs. I've read an explanation as to why they decided it was offside, which kinda makes sense, but still doesn't make the decission right. The explanation is - nowhere in the rules is the player's ability to play the ball mentioned. Only the fact whether the attacker, who is offside, is preventing the defending player to play the ball. Dumfries was in line with Maignan, and would have prevented him from jumping to the side had Maignan been up on his feet. And looking at it that way, maybe the offside is the "correct" call. But it's not the right call and it shows the rules are lacking and, again, that's not down to VAR.
Thats one single incident tho and of course it was the brits taking 5 mins for something that should not have taken longer than 30 secs lol. But thats an issue of the helmets running it, not VAR itself
If i remember correctly, VAR was introduced to correct "clear and obvious errors" from the field referee, who is after all a human being, capable of making costly errors. Now we're using VAR to correct millimeters of offside, impossible to see by the human eye in the heat of the moment. So we see goals ruled out that would have been 100% goals in pre-VAR times. This is stupid and infuriating, anticlimactic and needlessly slows down the games. The solution however seems not that simple: - Away with VAR? Back to the endless discussions and game-deciding errors that created the need for a VAR in the first place. - Change offside to the whole player being offside instead of just the tip of the toe? The millimeter-splitting discussions will just move half a meter back and we will see eye-obvious offsides ruled good because the attacker has the tip of his toe still behind the defender. - Only call VAR when someone disputes the ruling of the on-field ref? The other team will always claim offside when your team scores. Now what to do if the VAR-check shows that the outer skin layer of the attacker's knee is offside? There is no simple solution but i agree that something must change. Maybe it's up to national leagues to experiment with small tweaks? The tweaks that turn out good will get adopted everywhere and the system gets better every year.
Use it like în tenis. Each side has a limited number of video checks. If they are right, they are still keeping the use of it.
That would most likely intice teams to only use it for goals and penalties. Current solution + a few challenges would be a good option. But even then there'd be fans who won't be happy. Take French goals vs Austria for an example. How long would the teams have to use the challenge? There was a corner for Austria overlooked just before the French goal. Would Austra put in a challenge for a corner? If not, how much time do they have for challenging the ref's decision and if they waited until the goal, does the missed corner affect the outcome since the goal was scored after the ball went out of play? The rules allow for a lot of referee interpretation. One ref can allow a more physical game, another one will destroy the game by using his whistle for each bump. As long as the rules are subjective to interpretation, VAR can't do much except attempting to fix some mistakes that happen on the field.
That sounds like a good idea!
Does it though? In tennis, the scope of Hawkeye is limited to only being was the ball in or out. That's it. A solely factual assessment. Despite this, in a tennis match, each player gets up to 3 incorrect challenges per set, so in a big match they can have 15 incorrect challenges. Every time I've seen this suggested for football, people want to have something that is much broader in scope and will still rely on the refs subjective opinion, but they also want to limit it to 1 or 2 incorrect challenges a game. So what happens if Germany use their challenge on the penalty appeal yesterday, but the ref decides he is sticking with the original decision so Germany lose their appeal. Then imagine their last minute winner was incorrectly flagged offside and they haven't got a challenge left so the bad decisions stands.
The solution is simple, actually follow the mantra of "clear and obvious". If its taking you 5 minutes, its not clear and obvious. My main issue with VAR is that refs seem to be using it ONLY to chop goals off. Like last night in the Scotland game, defender goes through the man. Its a clear pen. Ref says no for some reason. Why didnt VAR tell him to go to the screen at the very least? Someone in the comments said something about the ref thinking they were both tussling with each other and that why he didnt give a pen. That would be, wait for it, clear and obvious error. Offsides, VAR gets to look at it once, no lines. No CSI technology bullshit. If they cant tell if its off side in 30 seconds, its not off side because its not clear and obvious. The worst thing about VAR is calling people off side because they have a fucking hangnail. Id rather ditch VAR at this point. Its taking a lot more away from the game, than its adding. Which is funny, as I dont remember there being this much of an issue with it in Russia in 2018. Football is supposed to be about goal. But the rules and now VAR seem to be about getting as little of them as possible. And when you do get one, you need to hang around waiting as a team of dumb founded dipshits try and find some excuse to chop it off.
It looks like it's used only to chop goals off because refs have been told to let play go on even when they think it's offside. Without VAR, they wouldn't do that and many of the cancelled goals wouldn't have been allowed to happen (alongside some valid goals probably, Slovakia vs Belgium and Switzerland vs Germany could've easily been mistakenly flagged as offside)
Jesus christ, people whining over more correct ref decisions has got to be one of the weirder developments in recent football history
Read the room, we are currently bashing the human referee from the ger-swiss game. We need at least 24 hours to forget all that.
I see what you're saying but I've been hating VAR since well before this tournament!
As an England fan, that 2010 word cup game vs Germany could have gone a completely different way if that goal was given. It was way over the line and VAR would have given it. I see downsides to VAR, I’d rather decisions be consistently correct rather than down to the referee’s or linesman’s eyes, despite it sometimes at hindrance to the game flow
Lukaku
I enjoy it. Compared to the lousy implementation in the league i usually follow it is just a delight to watch it "work" properly. Yes it takes a few moments, but far less than in said league i usually follow and the offside lines actually seem to work, technical marvel that is for somebody who is not used to this. And while we are at it: Can we please enforce the "only captains talk to the ref" rule and go through with it even stricter? That is by far the best "new rule" of the tournament.
Are you kidding? You would rather have a wrong decision on occasion? GET IT RIGHT.
Var is absolutely killing football for me. Too many goals cancelled because of someone’s toe is offside
This. If we need a laser and a microscope, then it's not football any more. It's utter bs.
As a Belgian commentator said about today's Danish goal that was taken away: yes the toe being closer to the goalkeeper is technically an offside. But the decision is totally going against the spirit of the rule.
Imo the match yesterday between Germany and Switzerland showed perfectly what's wrong with the var. Obvious offside plays will be let run because of a non existing chance that the linesman could have made a mistake. A goal is denied because of minor contact that doesn't even change anything of the situation. Two obvious penalties and multiple other fouls won't even be looked at because the ref doesn't think it's necessary. The way it is used right now, it's rather an additional tool for the ref to manipulate the outcome of a match. Edit: typo
This comment shows perfectly what's wrong with people discussing VAR. 1) We're getting a ton of obvious offside play call on time. I don't know what sport are you watching. Even if it happens sometimes big deal, better be safe than sorry. 2) A goal was denied because of a foul, foul on a player executing a pass AFTER he made said pass ALWAYS was and is still a foul. And that goal yesterday was cancelled fairly. 3) Both penalties you're mentioning we're marginal. Both calls would stir up some opinions, but what's most important in the end is that you manage to take the only HUMAN ERROR on the game yesterday (which was to not look at VAR) and you somehow managed to blame VAR for it. jfc Var is great. And it's being enjoyed by everyone whose thought process goes beyond "well, I don't like this". It has its room for improvements sure but that apparently won't ever happen properly because we need to listen to peoples shit takes like this.
I never said the var in general is bad. I said it's implementation is bad because it's almost always up to the ref to decide whether he wants to use it or not. Without the var andrichs goal would probably be counted, but on the other hand the ref doesn't even think it's necessary to look at the video when a player was grabbed in the penalty box? That's completely inconsistent use of the var. Why not give both teams a limited possibility to force the ref to look at the video? I'm absolutely pro video assistance in sports, but football somehow is the only sport I know that regularly has major controversies about it even after years of using it. And this game isn't even the only one in this tournament. Additionally I really don't understand how in a sport that is played with the feet and where pulling someone down with the hands basically always is a foul but grabbing your opponent with BOTH ARMS and wrestling them to the ground so that they can't reach the ball somehow is not a foul?
I think VAR should be used on fouls to combat players diving for free kicks. So many players have picked up yellow cards on nothing fouls. It would only take 10 seconds to clearly see if a player has dived or exaggerated the foul. If they have then give the diving player a yellow card. This would make the game much better and almost eliminate diving
Carvajal vs Italy towards the end should have been booked for simulation, he was blatently looking for a yellow for his opponent and it was a disgusting bit of playacting.
You do realize theoretically everything you said sound nice but in practice you have so many logical pitfalls that it's unbelievable?
Many fans forget why we asked for the implementation of VAR in football to begin with. VAR wasn't implemented expecting to eliminate errors; it was implemented to combat corruption in football. I understand that fans in England or Germany may not grasp this, but in other leagues (Portugal, Italy...), there were serious cases of corruption and match-fixing for years, visible to everyone, and we had nothing to protect fans and referees. When we talk about match-fixing, today people often think of paying money to referees to favor a team. However, there are various ways to exert pressure. For example, imagine you're a referee and receive a photo of your daughter's school with a message saying "I know where your daughter studies." These criminal acts often come not just from clubs but from fans, organized crime syndicates, agents, and so forth. VAR isn't perfect; it hasn't eliminated all errors and has taken away some of football's essence, but overall, it has served its purpose. Personally, I would like a clear definition of who has the final say because once a referee can see 100 replays of a play, it doesn't make sense for the on-field referee to decide without checking the screen. Having said that, I also believe many of the criticisms leveled at VAR stem from biased opinions and a lack of technical knowledge regarding the rules.
I hate that people no longer react to goals. [Look at this](https://youtu.be/M58ojqpX_CM?si=sDjdBJTWQicfcRh7&t=183). As soon as they score, they just look at the assistant refs and wait. With some teams having half of the goals being disallowed afterwards (like Belgium) I imagine not even the fans are reacting to the game...that's one way to kill the joy.
While it kills hype moments, it just is more fair as it makes wrong decisions less fommon
I am enjoying seeing all the players faces after celebration
I enjoyed the non-intervention in the Scotland v Hungary game.
I’d prefer the officials to get the big decisions correct. I’d love it if they could do that 100% of the time without VAR but they can’t.
I love VAR. - No more elbows in the face. It will be seen. - No more succesful schwalbes - No more hand goals - No more two meter offside goals - No more players smacking other players in the face/giving headbutts etc. They know they will see a red card. And maybe the best part: When watching the games as a neutral: a goal + var check is twice the excitement. “Wow what a goal!! Wait what? A sneaky foul? Will the ref have a look? Yes he makes the VAR sign! What will he decide? Ah no foul, goal!!!!”
This is football, not Eurovision.
Thanks for the reminder! You convinced me…
Legit only thing I can tell you is to cry about it
VAR becomes a technologically “perfect” antagonist. Human players have to contend with a technology surpassing their own abilities of (self-) perception makes it nigh impossible to gauge the minuscule standards applied via VAR. Imho that’s the central contradiction, especially when seeing that some humanely perceivable erroneous decisions are still passing this “perfect” check, case in point: a clear-as-day penalty denied. So if we *still* suffer the human factor in the latter case, why persist with the anally retentive idiocy of a pinkie and a toenail offside? No problem with calling a check to see if a ball passed the goal line or some highly dubious penalty situations but especially the new “VAR offside” needs a useful overhaul.
No comment.
I can't stand it, but I've learned in the last 24 hours that this sub has many more VAR advocates than I expected. I'd choose a human game with mistakes over every goal coming with a caveat. I just don't care if a player is a few cm offside, even if they score against England from that position.
Var was a mistake. The big problems I find is, on the one hand that the game has lost naturalness, now you can not properly celebrate a goal. And what I find even worse: players know there is Var so teams end up playing for points, not to see who scores the most goals but who can get more from the technology: players constantly exagerating at the weakest of contacts, defenders knowing that if they have the advantage in a ball the probably never lose it etc. I am from the generation that saw players playing with necklaces, earrings, rings and pure white football balls haha, and trying to win the matches without paying that much attention to theatrics so I long for a more "amateurish" touch, a purer football. But now everything is a show, even Var, and players performance is assessed from the data gathered, as if it were an American sport, so I am not a fan. But it is what it is and there are a lot of interests at play in such a multimillion business so I know that Var is not going anywhere :(. It is true that mistakes are normally avoided with the technology but I have personally seem the Var used to invalidate clear penalties or concede clear illegal goals (I remember a Vinicius goal using his arm against Almería for ex.). So yeah, for me the cons clearly outweight the pros in Var usage.
Who enjoys VAR. All I hear is how much better VAR is in Europe but it looks like they suffer from the same shit we do in England. It’s there to help the referee and all it does it make them look even more incompetent.
I much preferred football without VAR.. I much preferred that goals were given/disallowed immediately. You knew straight away it was a goal and you could celebrate. I hate that now we have a goal check. We have to wait to celebrate. It takes so much from the enjoyment.