As far as your take on VAR goes, all I can say is "Preach, brother. Preach." I have been saying to all who will listen (and those who won't) at Los Angeles Spurs since its introduction: VAR does nothing good. God did not create a perfect world. Football referees are not perfect, VAR isn't perfect either. I, for one, would much rather live in the imperfect world of no VAR than the imperfect world of VAR.
VAR was never needed in football, but we, the fans, the players and coaches, all demanded it, and got what we deserved. Really, all it does at best is right from wrong, but what was ever wrong with wrong? The referees decision being final used to be enough, before technology and pundits started proving them wrong, we had a simple game, the rough with the smooth, those decisions that would 'even themselves out' over the course of the year. All that VAR does is finicky pick at the intrinsics which results in long drawn out process and dragging a 90 minute game out for another 10 or 20 minutes. The problem is, people like it... But I still watch a lot of football outside the Premier League, and I must admit I much prefer watching football where technology doesn't dictate who wins or not! Great article.
‘Sport is fascinating because of its imperfections’ is the most glib, vacuous argument ever made. It’s manifestly untrue. As the number of imperfections in performance grows, fewer people watch.
VAR is fine. The corrupt gang of officials running it are not.
I'm not sure VAR itself is the issue Martin, but more the way PGMOL uses it. Any incident that requires 2 minutes or more to review doesn't meet the 'clear and obvious' criteria in my view. If you can't make a decision within 30 seconds then the on-field call should stand. The problem with offside is more to do with the ridiculous tinkering with the interpretation of the law, moving it some distance from the key principle of the attacker gaining an unfair advantage. A toe being 'offside' does not represent an unfair advantage. They should gauge a retrospective offside review on the question of whether a competent official should have been easily able to spot it, and has made a clear error in not doing so.
100% agree it was originally sold to eliminate the clanger (lampard vs Germany : Mendes vs ManU) - current implementation for subjective decisions (inc pens) won't ever work. Trying to VAR offsides means you have to solve for the most marginal of calls. Overall a serious downgrade of the experience of watching a match (tv and in stadium) - call me a Luddite but I prefer my football without VAR
As far as your take on VAR goes, all I can say is "Preach, brother. Preach." I have been saying to all who will listen (and those who won't) at Los Angeles Spurs since its introduction: VAR does nothing good. God did not create a perfect world. Football referees are not perfect, VAR isn't perfect either. I, for one, would much rather live in the imperfect world of no VAR than the imperfect world of VAR.
VAR was never needed in football, but we, the fans, the players and coaches, all demanded it, and got what we deserved. Really, all it does at best is right from wrong, but what was ever wrong with wrong? The referees decision being final used to be enough, before technology and pundits started proving them wrong, we had a simple game, the rough with the smooth, those decisions that would 'even themselves out' over the course of the year. All that VAR does is finicky pick at the intrinsics which results in long drawn out process and dragging a 90 minute game out for another 10 or 20 minutes. The problem is, people like it... But I still watch a lot of football outside the Premier League, and I must admit I much prefer watching football where technology doesn't dictate who wins or not! Great article.
‘Sport is fascinating because of its imperfections’ is the most glib, vacuous argument ever made. It’s manifestly untrue. As the number of imperfections in performance grows, fewer people watch.
VAR is fine. The corrupt gang of officials running it are not.
I'm not sure VAR itself is the issue Martin, but more the way PGMOL uses it. Any incident that requires 2 minutes or more to review doesn't meet the 'clear and obvious' criteria in my view. If you can't make a decision within 30 seconds then the on-field call should stand. The problem with offside is more to do with the ridiculous tinkering with the interpretation of the law, moving it some distance from the key principle of the attacker gaining an unfair advantage. A toe being 'offside' does not represent an unfair advantage. They should gauge a retrospective offside review on the question of whether a competent official should have been easily able to spot it, and has made a clear error in not doing so.
100% agree it was originally sold to eliminate the clanger (lampard vs Germany : Mendes vs ManU) - current implementation for subjective decisions (inc pens) won't ever work. Trying to VAR offsides means you have to solve for the most marginal of calls. Overall a serious downgrade of the experience of watching a match (tv and in stadium) - call me a Luddite but I prefer my football without VAR
Excellent! You articulated my bewilderment perfectly. One interesting impact is that the lack of VAR has become a USP for the EFL too.