VAR in Scottish Football

[Hoose Rice]

Just now, VincentGuerin said:

The correct outcome is Hearts winning. Beyond that, not interested.

For example, I'm delighted that there was no VAR to overturn Oor Craig Thomson giving the penalty in the 2012 Cup Final Massacre. As without that, Hibs' ten men would probably have gone on to win 6-2.

Get VAR to f**k.

Behave.  Hearts wouldn't have scored two, down to ten men in the first minute when Black should have walked  

[VincentGuerin]

2 minutes ago, Hoose Rice said:

Behave.  Hearts wouldn't have scored two, down to ten men in the first minute when Black should have walked  

Firm but fair.

And anyway, elbowing Leigh Griffiths is not an offence.

[Lofarl]

There’s the VAR that we got in the Russia World Cup and the VAR that the English league gets.

If it’s done sensibly then fine.

[Dons_1988]

10 minutes ago, Hoose Rice said:

No bother.  If it gets the correct outcome it's what matters.  

Not really 

[RawB93]

I don't really think VAR adds any more excitement than ref's getting decisions wrong already does.

[Busta Nut]

VAR is a bag of shite. Everyone who isn't  couch dweller knows that.

[Zamora Fan]

I just cannot be arsed with games being delayed and all the spontaneity being taken out of goals and play etc so Willie Collum can draw lines to determine if a thumb is on or offside. And this is supposed to be an example of it working well, but it’s just so depressingly arbitrary to me.

All this stuff makes me think football has been completely taken over by a blend of: 1) the weird obsessive football Twitter types who would strangle their cats in order to win a football game they’d never dream of attending and 2) the corporate suits who want the perfect product for TV and marketing, who genuinely mean it when they say “no one wants to see scenes like this!” when a couple of players engage in a light brawl. E.g the Lovejoy-style commentary from Darren Fletcher at the end of the Atletico game earlier. Cba

[Hoose Rice]

That's why we need VAR chaps. 

[craigkillie]

Even that dreadful handball rule is a direct result of VAR. It only came in because we are now hyperanalysing every action that leads to a goal, and someone decided that the easiest thing was that even accidental handball should lead to a goal being ruled out.

[HibsFan]

On 14/04/2022 at 01:25, Zamora Fan said:

I just cannot be arsed with games being delayed and all the spontaneity being taken out of goals and play etc so Willie Collum can draw lines to determine if a thumb is on or offside. And this is supposed to be an example of it working well, but it’s just so depressingly arbitrary to me.

 

19 hours ago, Hoose Rice said:

That's why we need VAR chaps. 

Assuming you're meaning this screenshot, why on earth would that be a plus for VAR?

What do you think the offside rule was invented to do? To be interpreted to such microscopic levels that it takes drawn-on lines to figure it out?

No, it was invented to stop blatant cheating, such as if the boy in white was so far in front of the defender that he was off screen. That would be ludicrous and clearly give them a huge advantage / ruin football as a spectacle because, without the offside rule, every attacker would just go and stand up top.

As Zamora Fan correctly points out, this is being done to satisfy the done-to-death overanalysing of close decisions which started with Sky taking over football coverage. Ooh, a player's knee is mildly in front of the last defender! How game altering! Who gives a f**k? A few absolute geeks on Twitter who wouldn't be able to tell you the name or number of a single block inside Anfield, Old Trafford etc.

The fundamental and unchangeable problem with VAR can be laid out clearly by comparing it to VAR.

Goalline technology:

• The ball crossing over the line is a clear and objective fact
• The time it takes for the verdict to be delivered is a matter of two or three seconds, it shows up on the referee's watch and they signal for the crowd
• This is therefore no different to when we all looked at the assistant who would either shrug or wave their flag about, the viewing experience is in tact
• A legitimate goal being scored and not given because the assistant referee couldn't see it is therefore not necessary when the technology exists
• The freakish Aston Villa - Sheffield United game apart, goalline technology has had almost zero teething issues since its introduction

VAR:

• Every red card decision is down to the interpretation of a human, just as is the case at the moment
• All that changes in that regard is that the referee is given slowed down camera angles which often don't actually prove all that much
• Similarly, offsides are open to much more human interpretation than 'did the ball cross the line or not', today's Luton - Forest game showed this
• Overturning a decision saps the enthusiasm for celebrating a goal or cheering an opposition red card, it could always be overturned
• The process of a decision being checked can take several minutes, whilst this has improved from its earliest days, it's still too long
• It does not even get every decision right, see the penalty Everton should have had against Man City a few weeks back as an example
• Even if you wave a magic wand and change all of the above, I still would not want it in, because it fundamentally changes the viewing experience

The sport of football actually managed perfectly fine for 150 years without the stuff, and would've continued to if the virgins demanding for its introduction had been ignored, as they should be in all walks of life.

[Dons_1988]

21 minutes ago, HibsFan said:

 

Assuming you're meaning this screenshot, why on earth would that be a plus for VAR?

What do you think the offside rule was invented to do? To be interpreted to such microscopic levels that it takes drawn-on lines to figure it out?

No, it was invented to stop blatant cheating, such as if the boy in white was so far in front of the defender that he was off screen. That would be ludicrous and clearly give them a huge advantage / ruin football as a spectacle because, without the offside rule, every attacker would just go and stand up top.

As Zamora Fan correctly points out, this is being done to satisfy the done-to-death overanalysing of close decisions which started with Sky taking over football coverage. Ooh, a player's knee is mildly in front of the last defender! How game altering! Who gives a f**k? A few absolute geeks on Twitter who wouldn't be able to tell you the name or number of a single block inside Anfield, Old Trafford etc.

The fundamental and unchangeable problem with VAR can be laid out clearly by comparing it to VAR.

Goalline technology:

• The ball crossing over the line is a clear and objective fact
• The time it takes for the verdict to be delivered is a matter of two or three seconds, it shows up on the referee's watch and they signal for the crowd
• This is therefore no different to when we all looked at the assistant who would either shrug or wave their flag about, the viewing experience is in tact
• A legitimate goal being scored and not given because the assistant referee couldn't see it is therefore not necessary when the technology exists
• The freakish Aston Villa - Sheffield United game apart, goalline technology has had almost zero teething issues since its introduction

VAR:

• Every red card decision is down to the interpretation of a human, just as is the case at the moment
• All that changes in that regard is that the referee is given slowed down camera angles which often don't actually prove all that much
• Similarly, offsides are open to much more human interpretation than 'did the ball cross the line or not', today's Luton - Forest game showed this
• Overturning a decision saps the enthusiasm for celebrating a goal or cheering an opposition red card, it could always be overturned
• The process of a decision being checked can take several minutes, whilst this has improved from its earliest days, it's still too long
• It does not even get every decision right, see the penalty Everton should have had against Man City a few weeks back as an example
• Even if you wave a magic wand and change all of the above, I still would not want it in, because it fundamentally changes the viewing experience

The sport of football actually managed perfectly fine for 150 years without the stuff, and would've continued to if the virgins demanding for its introduction had been ignored, as they should be in all walks of life.

In his defence, I think that post may have been timed with rangers getting their 2nd goal chopped off last night. It’s still rubbish though. 

[AJF]

Aye, mentioned it on the Rangers Euro thread, but get VAR so far to f**k. Not because the goal got ruled out, but because I suspected the ball had hit Barisic's hand I had a very subdued celebration knowing a review was coming. Even if it had gone on to be given, my celebration and enjoyment of the moment wouldn't have been the same.

[Hoose Rice]

3 hours ago, Dons_1988 said:

In his defence, I think that post may have been timed with rangers getting their 2nd goal chopped off last night. It’s still rubbish though. 

Indeed.  Or any other dubious decision the crowd may influence in matches involving the OF. 

[Hoose Rice]

1 hour ago, AJF said:

Aye, mentioned it on the Rangers Euro thread, but get VAR so far to f**k. Not because the goal got ruled out, but because I suspected the ball had hit Barisic's hand I had a very subdued celebration knowing a review was coming. Even if it had gone on to be given, my celebration and enjoyment of the moment wouldn't have been the same.

I'm sure you said the same in Dortmund, twice. 

[Hoose Rice]

3 hours ago, HibsFan said:

 

Assuming you're meaning this screenshot, why on earth would that be a plus for VAR?

What do you think the offside rule was invented to do? To be interpreted to such microscopic levels that it takes drawn-on lines to figure it out?

No, it was invented to stop blatant cheating, such as if the boy in white was so far in front of the defender that he was off screen. That would be ludicrous and clearly give them a huge advantage / ruin football as a spectacle because, without the offside rule, every attacker would just go and stand up top.

As Zamora Fan correctly points out, this is being done to satisfy the done-to-death overanalysing of close decisions which started with Sky taking over football coverage. Ooh, a player's knee is mildly in front of the last defender! How game altering! Who gives a f**k? A few absolute geeks on Twitter who wouldn't be able to tell you the name or number of a single block inside Anfield, Old Trafford etc.

The fundamental and unchangeable problem with VAR can be laid out clearly by comparing it to VAR.

Goalline technology:

• The ball crossing over the line is a clear and objective fact
• The time it takes for the verdict to be delivered is a matter of two or three seconds, it shows up on the referee's watch and they signal for the crowd
• This is therefore no different to when we all looked at the assistant who would either shrug or wave their flag about, the viewing experience is in tact
• A legitimate goal being scored and not given because the assistant referee couldn't see it is therefore not necessary when the technology exists
• The freakish Aston Villa - Sheffield United game apart, goalline technology has had almost zero teething issues since its introduction

VAR:

• Every red card decision is down to the interpretation of a human, just as is the case at the moment
• All that changes in that regard is that the referee is given slowed down camera angles which often don't actually prove all that much
• Similarly, offsides are open to much more human interpretation than 'did the ball cross the line or not', today's Luton - Forest game showed this
• Overturning a decision saps the enthusiasm for celebrating a goal or cheering an opposition red card, it could always be overturned
• The process of a decision being checked can take several minutes, whilst this has improved from its earliest days, it's still too long
• It does not even get every decision right, see the penalty Everton should have had against Man City a few weeks back as an example
• Even if you wave a magic wand and change all of the above, I still would not want it in, because it fundamentally changes the viewing experience

The sport of football actually managed perfectly fine for 150 years without the stuff, and would've continued to if the virgins demanding for its introduction had been ignored, as they should be in all walks of life.

I want the amount of dodgy, uncontested decisions Celtic and Rangers get in their favour every single week to cease.   If a year or two after VAR is introduced there is still the same shit happening then I hope the clubs then decide against it.  But unless it happens we will never know. 

Livi aren't in the top 6 right now because of two mental decisions against them v St johnstone also which awarded 3 points which effects Dundee too.   

Edited April 15, 2022 by Hoose Rice

[bennett]

6 minutes ago, Hoose Rice said:

I want the amount of dodgy, uncontested decisions Celtic and Rangers get in their favour every single week to cease.   If a year or two after VAR is introduced there is still the same shit happening then I hope the clubs then decide against it.  But unless it happens we will never know. 

Livi aren't in the top 6 right now because of two mental decisions against them v St johnstone also which awarded 3 points which effects Dundee too.   

We never ever get dodgy decisions going against us.

[Thenorthernlight]

VAR in Scotland is pointless. 

It’ll be the same inept/cheating (you decide) h*n referees overseeing it.

 

[DA Baracus]

18 minutes ago, Hoose Rice said:

I want the amount of dodgy, uncontested decisions Celtic and Rangers get in their favour every single week to cease.   If a year or two after VAR is introduced there is still the same shit happening then I hope the clubs then decide against it.  But unless it happens we will never know. 

Livi aren't in the top 6 right now because of two mental decisions against them v St johnstone also which awarded 3 points which effects Dundee too.   

Livingston aren't in the top 6 because they weren't good enough to be so over the season. 

Also, a penalty is not a guaranteed goal. Even had it been awarded and was scored, would the game just have ended right there and then? 

Edited April 15, 2022 by DA Baracus

[LIVIFOREVER]

4 minutes ago, DA Baracus said:

Livingston aren't in the top 6 because they weren't good enough to be so over the season. 

Also, a penalty is not a guaranteed goal. Even had it been awarded and was scored, would the game just have ended right there and then? 

Yep, yet we would've still scraped in if those pen decisions had went the way they should've.

[DA Baracus]

Just now, LIVIFOREVER said:

Yep, yet we would've still scraped in if those pen decisions had went the way they should've.

Zero guarantee of that, unless you think the games would have instantly ended, i.e. the ref blowing the final whistle, if the penalties were scored (and that's assuming they were scored, of which there is no guarantee either).