- 31,229
- Edinburgh
- GTP_Mars
頑張れ、日本！🎌
-
Brazil doing a rather good impression of Scotland here...
-
Brazil doing a rather good impression of Scotland here...
Last edited:
Certainly Germany aren't.
It's because it takes too ****ing long.
VAR is human too; the guy in the box has to make the decision. And while cheating refs has happened, it's so rare that even the appearance of it is foundation-shaking and actual cases in the current era so few you can count them on mittens.
It's interesting to me how people outside the US (and some in the US) complain about ruining the flow of the game due to things like hydration breaks or VARS, but don't say anything about the constant flopping and fake injuries. Some dude rolling around crying for several minutes, only to pop up and continue playing, ruins the game more than stopping to ensure a call is correct. The flopping contributes nothing to the game either, other than someone bitching they deserve a free kick because someone touched their shoe. At least VARS makes sure the call is right, or at the very least, the call has a greater chance of being right. I'm never going to complain about stoppage in any sport if it means a greater chance the call is correct. Sports should take the human element out of it completely since the technology is there, but that will never fly. At least soccer isn't nearly as bad as football because football is insane with how terrible the officiating is and how subjective calls are. So much so that I'm convinced the NFL is rigged.
They would, if that was what the conversation was about. As it wasn't, and the question was about why people don't like VAR rather than why VAR is better/worse than simulation, there's no need to say anything about anything that isn't VAR.
I think that there's a very specific reason why they don't, which is essentially that displaying any timer is a suggestion that it's an official clock. There is only one official clock: the referee's.
You said the reason VAR is disliked is that it disrupts the flow of the game. There are more events in soccer that are way more disruptive to the flow of the game than VAR, mainly flopping and fake injuries. Online discussions about VAR with other enthusiasts seem to be split depending on the country you're in. While not universal, Europeans more often than not complain that it disrupts the flow of the game, as do hydration breaks. However, the moment someone brings up the flopping, they're dismissed as dumb Americans who don't understand football because flopping is a tactic used to either regain possession or get a free kick. I agree, it's all disruption to the flow of the game, but at least VAR has a point. Is VAR 100% accurate? No, but it's going to be more accurate? Yes. Fans should want every possible tool implemented to ensure the fairest level of play and call for more technology to be implemented to reduce human error. Pretty much every sport could have fully automated officiating that is more accurate than any human, but between the ref/ump/whatever unions and traditionalists complaining, it won't happen.
Among other things.
And I dislike those things too, but I did not specifically mention them because that wasn't part of the question. If they had been, I would, and where they previously have been, I have.
... and unnecessary victimhood.
It's a conversation; people have the ability to move beyond the initial point as the discussion develops. You brought up the flow of the game, I'm talking about events that I think ruin the flow of the game far more than VAR does.
Not really. Go to pretty much any online discussion board, and it'll be mostly European fans criticizing American fans. A lot of enthusiasts hate that Americans call it soccer (never mind that it's a British word) or that we don't understand the game's nuances or that we're just casual fans. Gatekeeping in soccer is crazy, and it's almost like Europe and South America hate that the US and Canada are actually interested in soccer and performing decently well. I don't really care if a Euro football snob hates that I call it soccer or support things that aren't traditionally part of the game, I'm not a victim of it. It's just amusing to see how it all plays out. It's the same as how so many Europeans thought this World Cup was going to be a disaster because the US was co-hosting it, but pretty much everything I've seen from fans who've come over here says it was fantastic and that America was nothing like how it's portrayed by the media or online.
If a system can be developed for baseball that shows if a ball is even a fraction of an inch outside of the strike zone, then there's no reason that same sort of accuracy couldn't be put into soccer. Between sensors, cameras, and AI analysis, that level of accuracy could be pretty close, or at least much closer than one human could do from ground level. This isn't just a soccer problem, though; it's a sports problem. Officiating shouldn't be subjective; something is either against the rule or it's not. If the rule is ambiguous, then that rule should be changed to be clear-cut. That's what is driving me further and further away from the NFL, it's completely subjective.
I didn't say it was 100% accurate, but having more eyes on something increases the likelihood of getting the call right. Obviously, mistakes can and do happen, but as long as humans control it that's always a possibility.
See, this is where it doesn't make any sense to me. The flow in soccer is so broken to begin with (which is why I brought up the flopping as an example to support my position), I don't really see how stopping the game to ensure a greater likelihood of a correct call detracts from the game. Racing is a bit different; you can't stop the race, but you can investigate every incident and enforce penalties later on. You can't really do that with a sport on a field. You can't let the game continue and then go back after 10 minutes to say the other team needs a free kick. But in racing, you can certainly enforce a penalty after the fact and take away a position, add time, or make them serve a stop-and-go in the pits.
Baseball, and tennis too - another sport that uses artificial systems to check whether a ball is in or out - are both sports that naturally have a lot of pauses in the game. American football too, and i guess cricket. But football is meant to flow and anything that stops that is generally disliked. Not because 'it used to be better back in the day' but just because it makes for a purer spectacle for the viewers.
I disagree with this; soccer has a ton of stoppages. With the flopping, arguing/pleading with the ref, deliberately putting the ball out of bounds, and taking forever to set up set pieces. Yes, it's not as bad as the NFL, because football is the absolute worst at dragging out a game, but I've yet to see a soccer game with a continuous flow. I admittedly don't watch the Premier League, though, because I don't find it remotely interesting. Maybe it's different.
Sure, but you're not responding to anything I've actually said.
This is your very first sentence responding directly to a quote of my post. Is that a response to me? It's formatted as if it is, because it's immediately preceded by my post which very firmly suggests you're saying I'm complaining about VAR but don't say anything about simulation - which I assure you cannot be more wrong, and you don't have to look hard at all to determine that. If it's not, then it doesn't belong there.
Yes really. This did not form any part of the discussion in this thread until you brought it up. Sure you can "go to pretty much any online discussion board", except... this one. Again, this was formatted as a response to me. Have I done this? No. So... this should not be a reply to me.
So, back to "how much hate the VAR gets".
It has been. I think tennis was first with Cyclops, introduced in 1980 in the professional sport, but it was replaced by Hawkeye in the 2000s.
In virtually any sport I can think of in which humans are the athletes, there is no 100% objective rulebook, nor can there ever be.
There's a dude usually dressed in black who knows all the rules and who's been tested on them for years before they get anywhere close to officiating an international match, and sometimes they'll whip a yellow card out early on to put everyone on notice they won't stand for the shenanigans to stop them from happening, while other times they'll keep it in their pocket until Tweedledumb and Tweedlerapist have kicked lumps out of each other for the sixth time to let it flow for entertainment value rather than putting everyone on eggshells.IFAB
The fact that there's rarely more than a couple of minutes' injury time per half (added for stoppages due to injury, but also at the referee's fiat for anything else they wish, including time-wasting) and the ball is in the field of play (not outside and waiting to be thrown [thrown-in] or kicked [corner] in, or dead and waiting to be kicked by a goalkeeper [goal kick] or outfield player [free kick, of which indirect and penalty kicks are distinct subtypes]) for 55% or more of any given 90-minute match somewhat contradicts that.
