comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is Dead (U5901)
posted 52 minutes ago
Lots of people, including me are questioning whether to renew our seasoncards if VAR continues to spoil our enjoyment of live football.
As it stands, you daren't celebrate a goal anymore in case it's disallowed a few minutes later and if a goal is scrubbed you have no idea why until you listen to the car radio on the way home.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why does that stop you celebrating a goal? It doesn't seem to have stopped fans in rugby celebrating a try. If the goal was legitimate then you get to celebrate it twice. If it was not legitimate then you shouldn't have had ot to celebrate and the opposition can celebrate it being removed. More celebrations in every instance.
Also, there have been many occasions that I have left a ground not knowing why a goal was disallowed, or a penalty was given. This isn't new, or an issue caused by VAR. In actuality, any VAR referrals that overturn a decision are shown on the screens in the stadium (except at OT and anfield where it is related by tannoy). So the fans have a better idea ow than they would have in the past.
I imagine you want cancel your season ticket, and that if you did it would be happily snapped up by the next person on the waiting list. The fact is that the fans in the ground make up 5% of the viewers of a particular match, and only 5-20% of a clubs turnover. They are also extremely unlikely to end their support, or give up their season ticket, and it is very difficult for clubs to increase the size of this base without investing hundreds of millions into stadium development.
Boris I agree with the hesitancy to celebrate. I think refs or the VAR should be miked up and explain the decision as well as show it on screen. Yes it takes time but I'd rather know at the ground than wait for the update in car radio going home.
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is Dead (U5901)
posted 1 hour, 33 minutes ago
Of course match going fans are more important.
-------------
What a load of pish......the maybe half a million from season tickets makes match going fans more important
Any how - my issue with var is the picking and chosen when and how it is used. Also why don't we clear up one of the issues that Welsh is talking about. We could easily eradicate time wasting and go to a rugbyesque timing system. That levels up one playing field - everyone does play the same amount of time. Secondly we need more transparency of what the ref is doing - again we should be looking at Rugby I feel. But also maybe more transparent reports after - and questions asked on how or why some things are missed or why a particular decision is given as at the moment very little makes sense. How do you miss Dave getting taken out at Norwich, why is a handball by an attacker a disallowed goal but one by a defender is a penalty. Why is it used for offside but not penalties? Like get some consistency!
Why do people insist on comparing football to other sports, with different rules and a different dynamic when it comes to VAR?
comment by Bov (U6696)
posted 15 minutes ago
Boris I agree with the hesitancy to celebrate. I think refs or the VAR should be miked up and explain the decision as well as show it on screen. Yes it takes time but I'd rather know at the ground than wait for the update in car radio going home.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Even though you’re getting the footage now it wouldn’t be hard for them to add the infringement/ what their looking at. Just feels like the people paying getting off their ar5es and paying the money haven’t been thought of at all. United and Liverpool don’t even have big screens to show the footage, pizz poor for their lot although I find it hard to sympathise with either of their lot!
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is Dead (U5901)
posted 7 minutes ago
Why do people insist on comparing football to other sports, with different rules and a different dynamic when it comes to VAR?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because they are examples that are comparable. In sport y0u celebrate a score. A try in rugby is similar to a goal in football, but perhaps slightly more common. The process of VAR is the same. Team scores, potential review, confirmation or disallowing.
comment by Simon West (U1830)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is Dead (U5901)
posted 1 hour, 33 minutes ago
Of course match going fans are more important.
-------------
What a load of pish......the maybe half a million from season tickets makes match going fans more important
Any how - my issue with var is the picking and chosen when and how it is used. Also why don't we clear up one of the issues that Welsh is talking about. We could easily eradicate time wasting and go to a rugbyesque timing system. That levels up one playing field - everyone does play the same amount of time. Secondly we need more transparency of what the ref is doing - again we should be looking at Rugby I feel. But also maybe more transparent reports after - and questions asked on how or why some things are missed or why a particular decision is given as at the moment very little makes sense. How do you miss Dave getting taken out at Norwich, why is a handball by an attacker a disallowed goal but one by a defender is a penalty. Why is it used for offside but not penalties? Like get some consistency!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree with pretty much all of this. The downside is that they tried giving the ref a mic a few years back and they had to stop due to all the swearing directed at the ref by the players whenever a decision was made. This appears to be an issue that the authorities are not interested in dealing with.
Cricket - 3 x 2 hour sessions during a Test Match, everything on the big screen.
Tennis - Not even a team sport, no time limits, decision delivered in seconds.
Rugby - The score changes about every 5-7 minutes, spectators can hear the decision being made.
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is Dead (U5901)
posted 14 minutes ago
Cricket - 3 x 2 hour sessions during a Test Match, everything on the big screen.
Tennis - Not even a team sport, no time limits, decision delivered in seconds.
Rugby - The score changes about every 5-7 minutes, spectators can hear the decision being made.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The 6 nations tends to average about 2-2.5 tries per game. Last season in the PL there was an average of 3 goals a game. Doesn't seem much different.
The 6 nations tends to average about 2-2.5 tries per game.
Penalties, drop goals, there's more than one way to score in rugby.
It would also be better if each club had an observer in the VAR room who could report back on how a decision is made.
Unlikely as the FA, UEFA, and FIFA prefer everything shrouded in secrecy.
comment by Simon West (U1830)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is Dead (U5901)
posted 1 hour, 33 minutes ago
Of course match going fans are more important.
-------------
What a load of pish......the maybe half a million from season tickets makes match going fans more important
---------------------------------------------------------
Arsenal's matchday revenue is £3m a game, over £60m a season.
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is Dead (U5901)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by Simon West (U1830)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is Dead (U5901)
posted 1 hour, 33 minutes ago
Of course match going fans are more important.
-------------
What a load of pish......the maybe half a million from season tickets makes match going fans more important
---------------------------------------------------------
Arsenal's matchday revenue is £3m a game, over £60m a season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok yeh your right and my maths was way off.... but that's what less than 10% of Arsenal yearly income?
It’s not well communicated
It’s not transparent
And it’s taking away from a match day experience
Scoring a goal is an instant dopamine hit as soon as the back of the net ripples. Sometimes they are ruled out, but quite rarely in the old system. I’m not into this, delay your hit for a minute carp, going from zero to 100% elation in a split second is what football is about.
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is Dead (U5901)
posted 7 hours, 49 minutes ago
The 6 nations tends to average about 2-2.5 tries per game.
Penalties, drop goals, there's more than one way to score in rugby.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes and none of those illicit the same response as a try. Also they are not going to be checked by the TMO. So the relevant part of the comparison is tries to goals. These occur with a very similar frequency and are the primary method of scoring in their respective sport. They are also in scope to be delayed by a television check.
In rugby, when a try is scored, the fans still celebrate. This is despite it now being well established that it might be chalked off of there was on infringement. If it is confirmed the fans cheer again. If it is chalked off, the opposition cheer.
“This is despite it now being well established that it might be chalked off of there was on infringement. If it is confirmed the fans cheer again. If it is chalked off, the opposition cheer.”
Yes and it’s cr4p
The comparison with the 6 Nations is absurd to begin with.
International sport with the same competitors every year, no relegation, spread over a short window.
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is Dead (U5901)
posted 22 minutes ago
The comparison with the 6 Nations is absurd to begin with.
International sport with the same competitors every year, no relegation, spread over a short window.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
None of that has any impact in the discussion whatsoever. The topic of celebrating when there is a risk of a score being disallowed has a direct parallel with rugby. This provides evidence that directly contradicts your claim that you cannot celebrate a goal. If you were right then rugby fans would never celebrate a try (which occur at approx the same rate as goals) bit they clearly do.
Just trying to shut the discussion down by calling it absurd is what happens when you can't refute the points made.
comment by gratedbean (U4885)
posted 37 minutes ago
“This is despite it now being well established that it might be chalked off of there was on infringement. If it is confirmed the fans cheer again. If it is chalked off, the opposition cheer.”
Yes and it’s cr4p
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok.
Cheering once - good.
Cheering twice- crap.
Solid argument.
Ignoring Welshpool, you must admit that there are many match going fans who don't like it. And they miss the spontaneity of celebrating after a goal if it goes to VAR; There are some solid arguments for VAR but I don't understand why you can't see the point of what fans are saying.
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 7 minutes ago
Ignoring Welshpool, you must admit that there are many match going fans who don't like it. And they miss the spontaneity of celebrating after a goal if it goes to VAR; There are some solid arguments for VAR but I don't understand why you can't see the point of what fans are saying.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can dislike something for any reason you want. However, if you want to convince people that it is a valid criticism that should be addressed then you need an actual argument supported by evidence. I don't particularly like cricket but I dont go around telling cricket fans that it should be completely changed to satisfy me.
The potential for a goal bring disallowed didn't seem to stop the City fans from celebrating the late winner against spurs. When it was disallowed, the spurs fans celebrated just as much. So who isn't celebrating? Small pockets of fans maybe but the majority of fans are still celebrating.
Do you think spurs fans are unhappy about VAR reviews from their last 2 games against city?
It’s interesting how opinion on VAR has shifted since it has been introduced. Before VAR, majority opinion was that it was absolutely necessary mostly because managers and clubs had become very adept at using single decisions that had gone against their team to deflect from a poor performance or result.
Now that VAR has been introduced, there have been increasingly frequent dissenting voices about it. Fact is there are probably more subjective calls in football that most other sports - so it is difficult to come to a consensus on a decision. Even after a group of pundits have watched a decision multiple time in slow motion, from 5 different angles, they often disagree on incidents. Add to this that some decisions such as offside and handball were never intended to be enforced as literally as VAR is trying to do and you have a system that just doesn’t feel right.
Well I think you wanted football changed to suit your opinion with the introduction of VAR.
So hy not cricket?
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 12 minutes ago
Well I think you wanted football changed to suit your opinion with the introduction of VAR.
So hy not cricket?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I like the introduction of VAR. I wasn't bemoaning the that it absolutely had to he introduced or I would stop watching. So slight difference.
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 10 hours, 3 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is Dead (U5901)
posted 22 minutes ago
The comparison with the 6 Nations is absurd to begin with.
International sport with the same competitors every year, no relegation, spread over a short window.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
None of that has any impact in the discussion whatsoever. The topic of celebrating when there is a risk of a score being disallowed has a direct parallel with rugby. This provides evidence that directly contradicts your claim that you cannot celebrate a goal. If you were right then rugby fans would never celebrate a try (which occur at approx the same rate as goals) bit they clearly do.
Just trying to shut the discussion down by calling it absurd is what happens when you can't refute the points made.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Utter tripe, the 6 nations is done and dusted in less than 2 months.
The football season lasts for 10 months and unlike international sport, the vast majority of fans are more connected to their football club if they go to most games than they could ever be to an international team that plays about 10 times a year and is probably based in a city they live nowhere near.
Sign in if you want to comment
In typical fashion the FA/PL have fudged
Page 4 of 5
posted on 26/8/19
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is Dead (U5901)
posted 52 minutes ago
Lots of people, including me are questioning whether to renew our seasoncards if VAR continues to spoil our enjoyment of live football.
As it stands, you daren't celebrate a goal anymore in case it's disallowed a few minutes later and if a goal is scrubbed you have no idea why until you listen to the car radio on the way home.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why does that stop you celebrating a goal? It doesn't seem to have stopped fans in rugby celebrating a try. If the goal was legitimate then you get to celebrate it twice. If it was not legitimate then you shouldn't have had ot to celebrate and the opposition can celebrate it being removed. More celebrations in every instance.
Also, there have been many occasions that I have left a ground not knowing why a goal was disallowed, or a penalty was given. This isn't new, or an issue caused by VAR. In actuality, any VAR referrals that overturn a decision are shown on the screens in the stadium (except at OT and anfield where it is related by tannoy). So the fans have a better idea ow than they would have in the past.
I imagine you want cancel your season ticket, and that if you did it would be happily snapped up by the next person on the waiting list. The fact is that the fans in the ground make up 5% of the viewers of a particular match, and only 5-20% of a clubs turnover. They are also extremely unlikely to end their support, or give up their season ticket, and it is very difficult for clubs to increase the size of this base without investing hundreds of millions into stadium development.
posted on 26/8/19
Boris I agree with the hesitancy to celebrate. I think refs or the VAR should be miked up and explain the decision as well as show it on screen. Yes it takes time but I'd rather know at the ground than wait for the update in car radio going home.
posted on 26/8/19
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is Dead (U5901)
posted 1 hour, 33 minutes ago
Of course match going fans are more important.
-------------
What a load of pish......the maybe half a million from season tickets makes match going fans more important
Any how - my issue with var is the picking and chosen when and how it is used. Also why don't we clear up one of the issues that Welsh is talking about. We could easily eradicate time wasting and go to a rugbyesque timing system. That levels up one playing field - everyone does play the same amount of time. Secondly we need more transparency of what the ref is doing - again we should be looking at Rugby I feel. But also maybe more transparent reports after - and questions asked on how or why some things are missed or why a particular decision is given as at the moment very little makes sense. How do you miss Dave getting taken out at Norwich, why is a handball by an attacker a disallowed goal but one by a defender is a penalty. Why is it used for offside but not penalties? Like get some consistency!
posted on 26/8/19
Why do people insist on comparing football to other sports, with different rules and a different dynamic when it comes to VAR?
posted on 26/8/19
comment by Bov (U6696)
posted 15 minutes ago
Boris I agree with the hesitancy to celebrate. I think refs or the VAR should be miked up and explain the decision as well as show it on screen. Yes it takes time but I'd rather know at the ground than wait for the update in car radio going home.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Even though you’re getting the footage now it wouldn’t be hard for them to add the infringement/ what their looking at. Just feels like the people paying getting off their ar5es and paying the money haven’t been thought of at all. United and Liverpool don’t even have big screens to show the footage, pizz poor for their lot although I find it hard to sympathise with either of their lot!
posted on 26/8/19
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is Dead (U5901)
posted 7 minutes ago
Why do people insist on comparing football to other sports, with different rules and a different dynamic when it comes to VAR?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because they are examples that are comparable. In sport y0u celebrate a score. A try in rugby is similar to a goal in football, but perhaps slightly more common. The process of VAR is the same. Team scores, potential review, confirmation or disallowing.
posted on 26/8/19
comment by Simon West (U1830)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is Dead (U5901)
posted 1 hour, 33 minutes ago
Of course match going fans are more important.
-------------
What a load of pish......the maybe half a million from season tickets makes match going fans more important
Any how - my issue with var is the picking and chosen when and how it is used. Also why don't we clear up one of the issues that Welsh is talking about. We could easily eradicate time wasting and go to a rugbyesque timing system. That levels up one playing field - everyone does play the same amount of time. Secondly we need more transparency of what the ref is doing - again we should be looking at Rugby I feel. But also maybe more transparent reports after - and questions asked on how or why some things are missed or why a particular decision is given as at the moment very little makes sense. How do you miss Dave getting taken out at Norwich, why is a handball by an attacker a disallowed goal but one by a defender is a penalty. Why is it used for offside but not penalties? Like get some consistency!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree with pretty much all of this. The downside is that they tried giving the ref a mic a few years back and they had to stop due to all the swearing directed at the ref by the players whenever a decision was made. This appears to be an issue that the authorities are not interested in dealing with.
posted on 26/8/19
Cricket - 3 x 2 hour sessions during a Test Match, everything on the big screen.
Tennis - Not even a team sport, no time limits, decision delivered in seconds.
Rugby - The score changes about every 5-7 minutes, spectators can hear the decision being made.
posted on 26/8/19
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is Dead (U5901)
posted 14 minutes ago
Cricket - 3 x 2 hour sessions during a Test Match, everything on the big screen.
Tennis - Not even a team sport, no time limits, decision delivered in seconds.
Rugby - The score changes about every 5-7 minutes, spectators can hear the decision being made.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The 6 nations tends to average about 2-2.5 tries per game. Last season in the PL there was an average of 3 goals a game. Doesn't seem much different.
posted on 26/8/19
The 6 nations tends to average about 2-2.5 tries per game.
Penalties, drop goals, there's more than one way to score in rugby.
posted on 26/8/19
It would also be better if each club had an observer in the VAR room who could report back on how a decision is made.
Unlikely as the FA, UEFA, and FIFA prefer everything shrouded in secrecy.
posted on 26/8/19
comment by Simon West (U1830)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is Dead (U5901)
posted 1 hour, 33 minutes ago
Of course match going fans are more important.
-------------
What a load of pish......the maybe half a million from season tickets makes match going fans more important
---------------------------------------------------------
Arsenal's matchday revenue is £3m a game, over £60m a season.
posted on 27/8/19
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is Dead (U5901)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by Simon West (U1830)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is Dead (U5901)
posted 1 hour, 33 minutes ago
Of course match going fans are more important.
-------------
What a load of pish......the maybe half a million from season tickets makes match going fans more important
---------------------------------------------------------
Arsenal's matchday revenue is £3m a game, over £60m a season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok yeh your right and my maths was way off.... but that's what less than 10% of Arsenal yearly income?
posted on 27/8/19
It’s not well communicated
It’s not transparent
And it’s taking away from a match day experience
Scoring a goal is an instant dopamine hit as soon as the back of the net ripples. Sometimes they are ruled out, but quite rarely in the old system. I’m not into this, delay your hit for a minute carp, going from zero to 100% elation in a split second is what football is about.
posted on 27/8/19
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is Dead (U5901)
posted 7 hours, 49 minutes ago
The 6 nations tends to average about 2-2.5 tries per game.
Penalties, drop goals, there's more than one way to score in rugby.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes and none of those illicit the same response as a try. Also they are not going to be checked by the TMO. So the relevant part of the comparison is tries to goals. These occur with a very similar frequency and are the primary method of scoring in their respective sport. They are also in scope to be delayed by a television check.
In rugby, when a try is scored, the fans still celebrate. This is despite it now being well established that it might be chalked off of there was on infringement. If it is confirmed the fans cheer again. If it is chalked off, the opposition cheer.
posted on 27/8/19
“This is despite it now being well established that it might be chalked off of there was on infringement. If it is confirmed the fans cheer again. If it is chalked off, the opposition cheer.”
Yes and it’s cr4p
posted on 27/8/19
The comparison with the 6 Nations is absurd to begin with.
International sport with the same competitors every year, no relegation, spread over a short window.
posted on 27/8/19
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is Dead (U5901)
posted 22 minutes ago
The comparison with the 6 Nations is absurd to begin with.
International sport with the same competitors every year, no relegation, spread over a short window.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
None of that has any impact in the discussion whatsoever. The topic of celebrating when there is a risk of a score being disallowed has a direct parallel with rugby. This provides evidence that directly contradicts your claim that you cannot celebrate a goal. If you were right then rugby fans would never celebrate a try (which occur at approx the same rate as goals) bit they clearly do.
Just trying to shut the discussion down by calling it absurd is what happens when you can't refute the points made.
posted on 27/8/19
comment by gratedbean (U4885)
posted 37 minutes ago
“This is despite it now being well established that it might be chalked off of there was on infringement. If it is confirmed the fans cheer again. If it is chalked off, the opposition cheer.”
Yes and it’s cr4p
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok.
Cheering once - good.
Cheering twice- crap.
Solid argument.
posted on 27/8/19
Ignoring Welshpool, you must admit that there are many match going fans who don't like it. And they miss the spontaneity of celebrating after a goal if it goes to VAR; There are some solid arguments for VAR but I don't understand why you can't see the point of what fans are saying.
posted on 27/8/19
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 7 minutes ago
Ignoring Welshpool, you must admit that there are many match going fans who don't like it. And they miss the spontaneity of celebrating after a goal if it goes to VAR; There are some solid arguments for VAR but I don't understand why you can't see the point of what fans are saying.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can dislike something for any reason you want. However, if you want to convince people that it is a valid criticism that should be addressed then you need an actual argument supported by evidence. I don't particularly like cricket but I dont go around telling cricket fans that it should be completely changed to satisfy me.
The potential for a goal bring disallowed didn't seem to stop the City fans from celebrating the late winner against spurs. When it was disallowed, the spurs fans celebrated just as much. So who isn't celebrating? Small pockets of fans maybe but the majority of fans are still celebrating.
Do you think spurs fans are unhappy about VAR reviews from their last 2 games against city?
posted on 27/8/19
It’s interesting how opinion on VAR has shifted since it has been introduced. Before VAR, majority opinion was that it was absolutely necessary mostly because managers and clubs had become very adept at using single decisions that had gone against their team to deflect from a poor performance or result.
Now that VAR has been introduced, there have been increasingly frequent dissenting voices about it. Fact is there are probably more subjective calls in football that most other sports - so it is difficult to come to a consensus on a decision. Even after a group of pundits have watched a decision multiple time in slow motion, from 5 different angles, they often disagree on incidents. Add to this that some decisions such as offside and handball were never intended to be enforced as literally as VAR is trying to do and you have a system that just doesn’t feel right.
posted on 27/8/19
Well I think you wanted football changed to suit your opinion with the introduction of VAR.
So hy not cricket?
posted on 27/8/19
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 12 minutes ago
Well I think you wanted football changed to suit your opinion with the introduction of VAR.
So hy not cricket?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I like the introduction of VAR. I wasn't bemoaning the that it absolutely had to he introduced or I would stop watching. So slight difference.
posted on 27/8/19
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 10 hours, 3 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is Dead (U5901)
posted 22 minutes ago
The comparison with the 6 Nations is absurd to begin with.
International sport with the same competitors every year, no relegation, spread over a short window.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
None of that has any impact in the discussion whatsoever. The topic of celebrating when there is a risk of a score being disallowed has a direct parallel with rugby. This provides evidence that directly contradicts your claim that you cannot celebrate a goal. If you were right then rugby fans would never celebrate a try (which occur at approx the same rate as goals) bit they clearly do.
Just trying to shut the discussion down by calling it absurd is what happens when you can't refute the points made.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Utter tripe, the 6 nations is done and dusted in less than 2 months.
The football season lasts for 10 months and unlike international sport, the vast majority of fans are more connected to their football club if they go to most games than they could ever be to an international team that plays about 10 times a year and is probably based in a city they live nowhere near.
Page 4 of 5