VAR?

[Ginaro]

45 minutes ago, Leith Green said:

Wolves v Coventry, FA Cup .

Cov player got a high kick to the puss, blood on his cut nose etc.

Ref gave a foul but no card.

VAR review, no further action. 

Its clear that its all over the fucking shop and not just up here.

Not seen it, did the incident warrant a red card?

Edited March 16 by Ginaro

[Leith Green]

2 hours ago, Ginaro said:

Not seen it, did the incident warrant a red card?

No difference in that and the ones we discussed up here.

Frankly, I would say no, but a high boot in the face seems like a card every time now.

It's the confusion that annoys.

[The Master]

6 hours ago, Leith Green said:

Wolves v Coventry, FA Cup .

Cov player got a high kick to the puss, blood on his cut nose etc.

Ref gave a foul but no card.

VAR review, no further action. 

Its clear that its all over the fucking shop and not just up here.

The never-ending check to find something to rule out Coventry’s opener was also ridiculous. 

[AJF]

Interesting to see that the amount of errors made by VAR is increasing. Kind of pisses all over those in favour of it that say it will get better with time.

Also seems to make a bit of a mockery of our appeals system. One of the decisions that have been highlighted as being wrong was a red card shown to Sterling against Aberdeen. We actually appealed that and the appeal was thrown out. Now it’s being said that was incorrect.

Shambles.

[VincentGuerin]

Just now, AJF said:

Interesting to see that the amount of errors made by VAR is increasing. Kind of pisses all over those in favour of it that say it will get better with time.

Also seems to make a bit of a mockery of our appeals system. One of the decisions that have been highlighted as being wrong was a red card shown to Sterling against Aberdeen. We actually appealed that and the appeal was thrown out. Now it’s being said that was incorrect.

Shambles.

Whole thing is absolutely pointless, and the IRP as a concept is so obviously flawed a five-year old could pick holes in it.

[Dons_1988]

2 minutes ago, AJF said:

Interesting to see that the amount of errors made by VAR is increasing. Kind of pisses all over those in favour of it that say it will get better with time.

Also seems to make a bit of a mockery of our appeals system. One of the decisions that have been highlighted as being wrong was a red card shown to Sterling against Aberdeen. We actually appealed that and the appeal was thrown out. Now it’s being said that was incorrect.

Shambles.

The sterling one really just highlights why VAR is, and always will be, a failed project in its existing form. 

The on-field referee, the VAR referee, the appeals panel, and this wee independent review thing have all come up with a different answer.

And that is actually ok, the fact that 4 “qualified” parties interpret an incident differently is quite reasonable. But it completely devalues the entire concept of the magic technology to get decisions ‘right’. 

[FTOF]

16 minutes ago, AJF said:

Interesting to see that the amount of errors made by VAR is increasing. Kind of pisses all over those in favour of it that say it will get better with time.

Also seems to make a bit of a mockery of our appeals system. One of the decisions that have been highlighted as being wrong was a red card shown to Sterling against Aberdeen. We actually appealed that and the appeal was thrown out. Now it’s being said that was incorrect.

Shambles.

Same for us with the Bolton red card v Dundee.

He'd still have been sent off as it was his second yellow card, but he missed an extra match as a result of the red card, which was also appealed and thrown out.

Missed out on two penalties v Ross County and Hearts, which could have led to an extra three points.

[DukDukGoose]

2 hours ago, AJF said:

Interesting to see that the amount of errors made by VAR is increasing. Kind of pisses all over those in favour of it that say it will get better with time.

Also seems to make a bit of a mockery of our appeals system. One of the decisions that have been highlighted as being wrong was a red card shown to Sterling against Aberdeen. We actually appealed that and the appeal was thrown out. Now it’s being said that was incorrect.

Shambles.

VAR said they should look at the Sterling one, though?

Edited May 1 by DukDukGoose

[AJF]

29 minutes ago, DukDukGoose said:

VAR said they should look at the Sterling one, though?

To be fair, you’re right. I should maybe rephrase it to the amount of incorrect decisions made while VAR has been in use is increasing.

ETA: that is of course subjective and the opinion of the IRP panel.

Edited May 1 by AJF

[bennett]

 

Kilvarnock.

 

 

 

[Coventry Saint]

My mind is pretty much set at this stage. VAR is not improving football. It's making the spectator experience significantly worse, and we're still seeing incorrect decisions.

However, an incorrect decision by a shit ref in the heat of the moment is understandable. Mistakes by VAR - mistakes that they time to chew over; mistakes that we and Rangers have had appeals thrown out over - just seem so much more egregious.

Get it in the fucking sea.

Edited May 1 by Coventry Saint

[willywastecoat]

7 minutes ago, Coventry Saint said:

My mind is pretty much set at this stage. VAR is not improving football. It's making the spectator experience significantly worse, and we're still seeing incorrect decisions.

However, an incorrect decision by a shit ref in the heat of the moment is understandable. Mistakes by VAR - mistakes that they time to chew over; mistakes that we and Rangers have had appeals thrown out over - just seem so much more egregious.

Get it in the fucking sea.

Nothing is 100% accurate M8, for me the more the refs use it shirley the refs will get more consistent,yet the figures are showing they are getting worse.
The good thing so far is the off-side decisions are correct so that is a positive.

[54_and_counting]

Strangely the IRP was different from the ones who checked the round of fixtures previous to this one

Even that in a sense is fucking daft as its a different 4 persons opinions on decisions in football

It should be the same 4 people each time to keep a form of consistency in their views about VAR

[54_and_counting]

4 minutes ago, willywastecoat said:

Nothing is 100% accurate M8, for me the more the refs use it shirley the refs will get more consistent,yet the figures are showing they are getting worse.
The good thing so far is the off-side decisions are correct so that is a positive.

As i said above, its a completely different panel to the previous review of VAR, so completely different opinions from before

Which is fucking mental 

[Coventry Saint]

4 minutes ago, willywastecoat said:

Nothing is 100% accurate M8, for me the more the refs use it shirley the refs will get more consistent,yet the figures are showing they are getting worse.

I'm agreeing that that nothing is totally accurate: my argument is that the gains made do not justify the losses to the game in terms of immediacy of celebrations, etc. I think the word is pyrrhic.

And you then say it should be getting better but is actually getting worse so

[willywastecoat]

7 minutes ago, 54_and_counting said:

As i said above, its a completely different panel to the previous review of VAR, so completely different opinions from before

Which is fucking mental 

I agree M8 but it's not rocket science,whether it's 4 different guys you would like to think they have a simular knowledge of knowing the game.
The subjective nature of decisions will always create debate in the gray areas of the rules but you would like to think the big decisions in games become consistent.

6 minutes ago, Coventry Saint said:

I'm agreeing that that nothing is totally accurate: my argument is that the gains made do not justify the losses to the game in terms of immediacy of celebrations, etc. I think the word is pyrrhic.

And you then say it should be getting better but is actually getting worse so

I agree it's took the emotion out the game but in some ways that's a good thing, also like you said an incompetent ref will not get away with being consistently incompetent.

[craigkillie]

4 hours ago, AJF said:

Interesting to see that the amount of errors made by VAR is increasing. Kind of pisses all over those in favour of it that say it will get better with time.

Also seems to make a bit of a mockery of our appeals system. One of the decisions that have been highlighted as being wrong was a red card shown to Sterling against Aberdeen. We actually appealed that and the appeal was thrown out. Now it’s being said that was incorrect.

Shambles.

There are four different decision makers here who are coming up with different interpretations of the incident:
 

• On-field referee - Qualified and experienced referee. Has the "feel" of the game but only gets to see it once and may miss incidents or misinterpret them. Can sometimes get a second chance to view it at the screen, but only if the VAR intervenes. Could be influenced by crowd.
• VAR - Qualified and experienced referee. Gets to watch multiple angles of the incident but may not have the feel of the game.
• Appeal panel - Ex-players, managers etc. Don't think it includes any who is actually qualified as a referee. Could be influenced by the media clamour around an incident. Decisions not typically viewed in context of the game.
• IRP - Ex-players, managers etc. "Guided" by someone with experience of the laws, but who knows what that means. Could be influenced by media clamour around an incident. Decisions definitely viewed in context of the game since it could be a couple of months later.

If all of these groups disagree with each other, is a decision really "wrong"?

[willywastecoat]

8 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

If all of these groups disagree with each other, is a decision really "wrong"?

Are you saying refs never make mistakes?
Personally the agreeing or disagreeing of decisions becomes irrelevant M8 because the decision gets made but not always with the on-field ref when he is getting influenced from a wee guy in a room,the same way the 4 guys are deciding on decisions that were made.
The conclusion is the decision was wrong,the very fact it's in place should improve the consistency as the refs and the VAR team should get better the more they use it,plus form a level of consistency and a level of acceptancy.
 

[AJF]

1 hour ago, craigkillie said:

There are four different decision makers here who are coming up with different interpretations of the incident:
 

• On-field referee - Qualified and experienced referee. Has the "feel" of the game but only gets to see it once and may miss incidents or misinterpret them. Can sometimes get a second chance to view it at the screen, but only if the VAR intervenes. Could be influenced by crowd.
• VAR - Qualified and experienced referee. Gets to watch multiple angles of the incident but may not have the feel of the game.
• Appeal panel - Ex-players, managers etc. Don't think it includes any who is actually qualified as a referee. Could be influenced by the media clamour around an incident. Decisions not typically viewed in context of the game.
• IRP - Ex-players, managers etc. "Guided" by someone with experience of the laws, but who knows what that means. Could be influenced by media clamour around an incident. Decisions definitely viewed in context of the game since it could be a couple of months later.

If all of these groups disagree with each other, is a decision really "wrong"?

Aye, I tried to caveat that in my response to say it’s subjective and the opinion of this IRP group. I think the subjective nature of football will always have a variance of opinions. I was simply using the findings here as an example of the fact that VAR will never get stuff right all the time and it’ll still be debatable regardless of who’s opinion you are getting.

[craigkillie]

1 hour ago, willywastecoat said:

Are you saying refs never make mistakes?
Personally the agreeing or disagreeing of decisions becomes irrelevant M8 because the decision gets made but not always with the on-field ref when he is getting influenced from a wee guy in a room,the same way the 4 guys are deciding on decisions that were made.
The conclusion is the decision was wrong,the very fact it's in place should improve the consistency as the refs and the VAR team should get better the more they use it,plus form a level of consistency and a level of acceptancy.
 

I'm not saying they never make mistakes, but I'm saying that most decisions being discussed are subjective and the findings of this panel aren't some magic "truth".