Premier League clubs to vote on scrapping VAR

Ruins the game for the fans, who at the end of the day pay, the player's wages. If it cannot be run more efficiently by officials VAR needs scrapping.

I don't know how I feel about it being scrapped.

On the one hand, there's nothing wrong with VAR, it's a fantastic idea, in theory. On the other hand, in practice, the people operating it need to reset and go again.

I'd like to see the following:

1. Ex-professional footballers to referee football matches
2. And/or, ex-professional footballers to operate VAR
3. VAR decision-making made audible during games for all to hear (I'm sure rugby does this)
4. Chief VAR official, to give a quick interview after the match finishes (like managers/players do)

Fans seem to universally despise it. Maybe fans will realise that they should just pay up and shut up.

Yep. Clubs dont give a fcuk about the fans or what they want, ours included.

Most fans dont want it. The clubs will know where their bread is buttered and fcuk the fans and ensure it stays. Then said clubs will spend all of next season bitching about it , crying and whining about it. I hate this game most of the time now and all the bs that comes with it. No idea why i bother watching it.

My 8 year loves it. He called me this morning and asked if he could get more panini stickers after school. Said he wants to get his favourite player. I said youve already got him son, Jota. He says no dad hes your favourite. My favourite is Trent and ive not got him yet ... ok son 5 more packs tonight 🤣🤣

The problem VAR has is that at the moment it just highlights incompetency. Before it was used when referees made mistakes we said 'oh they only had one look at it' and whilst we were frustrated as F**k at bad decisions it was easier to move on.

Now we've got referees looking at things again with multiple angles and still making big mistakes. Howard Webb will respond and say decisions are '8 or 9% more accurate' but let's not forget to get to those figures he's counting things like the Doku challenge on Mac Allister as not being an error. The reality is that VAR has not improved things much at all - especially as referees on the pitch are now scared to make decisions so whilst it may look like the VAR has 'overturned' them, they may have responded differently if it was just them making the call.

Taking away VAR improves the supporter experience - we can celebrate goals instantly and situations are not shrouded in secrecy. Unfortunately though it will not get to the bottom of the problem which is that referee standards in this country have dropped massively and that the PGMOL are not fit for purpose.

I don't think we'll be alone.

Listening to 5Live on the way home last night and the football journalist on there didn't think it would pass the threshold on a vote.

Most of the clubs do want to keep it - they just want it to be better

What assurances could they possibly anticipate that it'll get better? Considering you need an assistant ref sat behind the bleeding thing. It's been 5 years, no signs of improvement. How many more times do clubs need to be screwed over before they get the message?

What assurances could they possibly anticipate that it'll get better? Considering you need an assistant ref sat behind the bleeding thing. It's been 5 years, no signs of improvement. How many more times do clubs need to be screwed over before they get the message?

It's getting worse, if anything....

I don't know how I feel about it being scrapped.

On the one hand, there's nothing wrong with VAR, it's a fantastic idea, in theory. On the other hand, in practice, the people operating it need to reset and go again.

I'd like to see the following:

1. Ex-professional footballers to referee football matches
2. And/or, ex-professional footballers to operate VAR
3. VAR decision-making made audible during games for all to hear (I'm sure rugby does this)
4. Chief VAR official, to give a quick interview after the match finishes (like managers/players do)

As you say the introduction of VAR was well intentioned, and like most innovations it's true value (or otherwise) could only be established by putting it into practice. For me, and according to polls, most fans, think it has failed the test.
Looking at your proposals I can see a minefield of issues.
1. Ex-players are loaded and don't need the money....but if they do want to make even more, they can get it much easier via the media. Second point, ex players would have definite bias....and why would they open themselves up the abuse they would no doubt generate?
2. See above answer.
3.Hearing it would make no difference to the judgement, You would hear a good call made, or you would hear a bad call made...Same result.
4.First of all it's impossible for a single person to have watched all the games, and second, even if he watched just the key incidents and formed an opinion what would be the purpose or benefit?..Where does he give this opinion?...and to who?...The game is finished and any mistake found is immaterial and can't affect the result.

Most of the clubs do want to keep it - they just want it to be better

It's likely the top ranked clubs will want to keep it more than the lower ranked. Referee's give (probably subconsciously) advantageous calls to bigger clubs than to small clubs...there's loads of examples of it. Also, the clubs prefer the slight increase in accuracy over fan experience.
As for wanting it to get better, with better tech there is a chance of a clearer more accurate outcome with offside; all other calls will still be subject to subjectivity, and therefore can be no better or worse.

1. Ex-players are loaded and don't need the money....but if they do want to make even more, they can get it much easier via the media. Second point, ex players would have definite bias....and why would they open themselves up the abuse they would no doubt generate?

Use ex-professionals from the lower leagues. As for abuse and bias, that's going to happen whether you're a referee from Wolverhampton, an ex-player from Doncaster Rovers, or an alien from another planet. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't try it. It can be dealt with.

2. See above answer.

The thing is, no matter, who, there will be bias. So get someone who knows how to play the game at a high level, i.e. professionally and deal with the bias if it becomes a thing. Sometimes you just have to trust that someone will be professional and do the job they are being paid for.

3.Hearing it would make no difference to the judgement, You would hear a good call made, or you would hear a bad call made...Same result.

Having your decision-making for all to review, means you will be more conscious about getting things right. Part of the problem as I see it, is currently, you have faceless officials making decisions left right and centre, and they can do so without any fear of being suspended, or dropped down a league or two.     

4.First of all it's impossible for a single person to have watched all the games, and second, even if he watched just the key incidents and formed an opinion what would be the purpose or benefit?..Where does he give this opinion?...and to who?...The game is finished and any mistake found is immaterial and can't affect the result.

You only need one VAR chief at each game where VAR is being used. They give their opinion pitch-side, or in front of an advertising screen, or even in a studio if you like. The point is that someone (the chief) is going to have to explain why certain decisions were made, and if I was the chief having to face the reporters, I'd be making absolutely sure those I'm watching over, will be doing their job correctly.

Mistakes will happen, no matter what, but someone has to explain the reasons for that. Right now the officials are making some bad decisions and the only ones marking their homework, is the officials.

TL;DR: It needs monitoring. Right now, there's nothing.

Seriously how many times have you seen a clear offside at a glance yet it takes minutes to confirm.  Not fit for purpose we have been sold a dud

They get them MORE wrong with VAR every game....

When it comes to offsides, it's more than clear that the touchline officials get them more wrong.

It's almost impossible for the lone touchline official on one side of the field to maintain the same horizontal line as the deepest defender while concurrently judging when the ball left the foot of the passer dozens of meters behind the frontline. Wrong angles and lag team are the issues these official deal with dozens of times per match and as VAR proves every match, the officials get many wrong.

The reality is, to officiate a game more accurately without VAR requires many more officials...and even then.....

And don't get me started how two touchline officials are deemed sufficient to cover 346m of perimeter.
It defies logic how one touchline official can be expected to accurately assess out of bounds on a 105m touch line and a 68m goal line when he is prevented from crossing the center line and doesn't possess x-ray vision to see through 22 players parked in the penalty area in order to assess if the ball crossed the goal line on the other side of the non-transparent net structure.

I could go into a lengthy dissertation on the "rules interpretation" of football, emphasizing the word "foot", yet focusing on allowed "handplay" by officials....ie.....grab bing/clutching clothing/arms/shoulders. The rules read one way but the game is officiated as one giant gray area interpretation instead and the action & scoring suffer because of this.
You want better on-field officiating, enforce the rules as written and require officials to judge more black & white instead of grey...... or rewrite the rules

Anyway, zero chance VAR gets voted out
With gambling so mainstream now, no way the powers in charge are leaving big decisions to one official on an island.
Big Football must present as much transparency as possible.

It's all becoming clear now - the FA appointed VAR controllers/viewers/general officialdom who contrive to regain complete control of games by making outrageous judgements of game-changing incidents captured on camera hoping to make a nonsense of the camera does not lie ethic.

The premise is given substance by the ridiculous judgements that the world and his wife witness every week in the Premiership,

People defending var ... bizarre.

All the big on field howlers this season ... arsenal handball , city chest high studs, united keeper punching the wolves player in the face ... i could be here all day, all the on field howlers have not been overturned by var. So get rid of it. Last night a clear pen on gordon not given ... var looks at it ... sees the clear foul down the back of the calf everyone sees ... and wont give it. So WHAT IS THE F*CKING POINT? As ive said for alongtime ... its another avenue to corruption. The var just gives what it wants to happen. Next week if it suits what they want they give the opposite decision for the same offence.

Remember the rodri handball at goodison in the last minute that cost us the title ... the 2 manchester boys taylor and kavanagh one in the middle one on var ... one didnt give it on the pitch and one didnt overturn it via var ...

Its not fit for fcuking purpose. Get rid of it. Goaline technology and automated offside and get on with the rest.

Var has ruined football. The f*cking bellends that run the game constantly f*cking about with the rules of the game have also ruined it.

Who understands the rules anymore? Who enjoys a goal to the full anymore ? Nobody, because theyve made sure you cannot.

The game is a mess. It was fine before var and it will be much better off without it. Football is a circus now ... of corruption and incompetence. Even the team winning the league every season is corrupt to the core.

Use ex-professionals from the lower leagues. As for abuse and bias, that's going to happen whether you're a referee from Wolverhampton, an ex-player from Doncaster Rovers, or an alien from another planet. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't try it. It can be dealt with.

The thing is, no matter, who, there will be bias. So get someone who knows how to play the game at a high level, i.e. professionally and deal with the bias if it becomes a thing. Sometimes you just have to trust that someone will be professional and do the job they are being paid for.
Having your decision-making for all to review, means you will be more conscious about getting things right. Part of the problem as I see it, is currently, you have faceless officials making decisions left right and centre, and they can do so without any fear of being suspended, or dropped down a league or two.     

You only need one VAR chief at each game where VAR is being used. They give their opinion pitch-side, or in front of an advertising screen, or even in a studio if you like. The point is that someone (the chief) is going to have to explain why certain decisions were made, and if I was the chief having to face the reporters, I'd be making absolutely sure those I'm watching over, will be doing their job correctly.

Mistakes will happen, no matter what, but someone has to explain the reasons for that. Right now the officials are making some bad decisions and the only ones marking their homework, is the officials.

TL;DR: It needs monitoring. Right now, there's nothing.

You're correct, all ex-players (at any level) would be subject to bias......because all human beings are subject to bias ....(Aliens I'm not 100% sure about).
There's no evidence that ex-players are better referees in any sport...are tennis umpires ex-players? Plus we already have someone we trust to make judgements professionally....he's  called a referee.
There's no evidence that having your judgement "listened" to would influence how it was arrived at. Also, it's not easy to ever agree what constitutes an error...example Liverpool fans think Odegaard handled the ball at Anfield, Arsenal fans think he didn't....There is no way ever of knowing that he did, or didn't handle the ball deliberately, that's why a ref has to guess...it was an error to us, but not to the officials or Arsenal fans.
As for your last point....as I said even if it was possible to have a VAR chief? at every game (Who would pay them?) It wouldn't, and couldn't affect the result post match...and therefore...pointless. As you correctly summed it up....Mistakes will happen, no matter what.

I genuinely couldn't tell you the handball rule anymore, and I've been a football fan for almost half a century.

If it ain't broke, comes to mind.

People defending var ... bizarre.

All the big on field howlers this season ... arsenal handball , city chest high studs, united keeper punching the wolves player in the face ... i could be here all day, all the on field howlers have not been overturned by var. So get rid of it. Last night a clear pen on gordon not given ... var looks at it ... sees the clear foul down the back of the calf everyone sees ... and wont give it. So WHAT IS THE F*CKING POINT? As ive said for alongtime ... its another avenue to corruption. The var just gives what it wants to happen. Next week if it suits what they want they give the opposite decision for the same offence.

Remember the rodri handball at goodison in the last minute that cost us the title ... the 2 manchester boys taylor and kavanagh one in the middle one on var ... one didnt give it on the pitch and one didnt overturn it via var ...

Its not fit for fcuking purpose. Get rid of it. Goaline technology and automated offside and get on with the rest.

Var has ruined football. The f*cking bellends that run the game constantly f*cking about with the rules of the game have also ruined it.

Who understands the rules anymore? Who enjoys a goal to the full anymore ? Nobody, because theyve made sure you cannot.

The game is a mess. It was fine before var and it will be much better off without it. Football is a circus now ... of corruption and incompetence. Even the team winning the league every season is corrupt to the core.

I'm not sure anyone is defending VAR per se more than can see it's more the people operating it than the actual systems themselves.

For me really need to go back to basics, simplify a lot of the rules and then allow VAR to assist and more importantly overule the referee when needed.

I genuinely couldn't tell you the handball rule anymore, and I've been a football fan for almost half a century.

If it ain't broke, comes to mind.

And that is what's at the core of the issue...What constitutes an error? No wonder it's almost impossible to agree on, we don't even have clear unambiguous parameters of the rules.

Football is a mess, and the more they fcuk about with it the messier it gets. Dump VAR and have one ref, two linesmen, and just accept that they make mistakes now and again...It's what the vast majority of fans want.

Have a good day fella

I'm not sure anyone is defending VAR per se more than can see it's more the people operating it than the actual systems themselves.

For me really need to go back to basics, simplify a lot of the rules and then allow VAR to assist and more importantly overule the referee when needed.

VAR is a system that works in conjunction with humans, humans have always and will always make mistakes. There can't be a VAR system without human interaction, and so it will always be subject to error.
When some say it's just the people using it...that's true, they are the "People" who make the call (sometimes correctly). But this reminds me of the "Guns are not bad, it's just the people who use them" argument...Again it's true, a gun, even a loaded gun is just a heap of metal and no danger at all....until a human being picks it up. In this country, we decided years ago that to minimise gun violence, we would ban the sale of them to the public. We couldn't take the gamble of hoping, or trusting that the people using them wouldn't kill anyone...the person is the one who makes the error, (Did I read somewhere that most gun deaths are caused by accident?)...but you can't shoot someone without a gun, and you can't make a bad VAR call....without VAR.

VAR is a system that works in conjunction with humans, humans have always and will always make mistakes. There can't be a VAR system without human interaction, and so it will always be subject to error.
When some say it's just the people using it...that's true, they are the "People" who make the call (sometimes correctly). But this reminds me of the "Guns are not bad, it's just the people who use them" argument...Again it's true, a gun, even a loaded gun is just a heap of metal and no danger at all....until a human being picks it up. In this country, we decided years ago that to minimise gun violence, we would ban the sale of them to the public. We couldn't take the gamble of hoping, or trusting that the people using them wouldn't kill anyone...the person is the one who makes the error, (Did I read somewhere that most gun deaths are caused by accident?)...but you can't shoot someone without a gun, and you can't make a bad VAR call....without VAR.

Fair point mate and why I think along with VAR there needs to be a decision made to simplify some of the rules.

Did I hear last week offside mate be changed so that it's only offside if the attacker is clear in front of the last man? Things like that help limit the human error and judgement side of things.

Most of the clubs do want to keep it - they just want it to be better

Think we can all agree on that Pj. Maybe if we get sack of all the Premier league refs and get the Europeans in we would be in a better place. I don’t think for a second it will be voted out. I’d hazard a guess of maybe 5/6 clubs wanting out.

What do you lot think?

There are some procedural issues but doesn't matter how they tweak it, blatant 'mistakes' will happen over and over again. The 'Doku lunge' for example was hardly looked at. Even the Villa game. Their equaliser looked very close to being hand ball but it was hardly reviewed.

It will change slightly, and they'll claim for the better, but I highly doubt it.

Get it to fck, if the so called experts can't get right after looking at a screen for 5 minutes what's the point. I hated it when it came in and I hate it even more now, especially what it's cost us this season. There have always been contentious decisions in the game, sometimes we don't like it. Now we have guys acting like maths teachers drawing stupid lines and as I said they still can't decide. As a sidenote if it's kept when will the first woman appear on the scene, it's only a matter of time.