17 Jan 2018 08:33:03
A general football post rather than a Liverpool one but I was pleased to see VAR used last night to positively effect the outcome of a game.

For those who aren't aware Iheanacho had a goal incorrectly ruled out for offside in Leicester's FA Cup replay against Fleetwood Town. The goal was awarded 67 seconds after the ball hit the back of the net.

That time still has to come down but it's early days and I have little doubt it will. I absolutely think getting these key decisions right is far more important than a short delay in the game.

1.) 17 Jan 2018
17 Jan 2018 10:03:02
As long as they add the time on at the end of each half. In the Caribo Cup game there were 3 referrals totalling over 2 and a half minutes (I think) and 3 substitutions (supposedly 30 seconds each) plus goal and other stoppages. Nowhere near that time was added on at the end of the game. So, we are being short-changed for the exhorbitant amount of money we pay.

What next? Confectionery companies will be reducing the size of chocolate bars and still charging the same, hoping we don’t notice.

2.) 17 Jan 2018
17 Jan 2018 10:12:29
Spot on, Putney. For years, I argued the very same thing BUT what the detractors of video would tell me disingenuously, was that the game would be slowed down BUT they had no problem with a player rolling on the ground, feigning injuries in a bid to waste time.

Also, they would say well, it all evens out over a season. Absolutely nonsense. If a goal is a goal, a penalty or and offside, all in my favor clearly then sorry, I want my goal, penalty and offside call NOW and I'll figure the rest out later in the season. I am for VAR as well and I hope it works cos clearly the refs need a BUNCH of help esp. with the dreadful decisions they are making in the moment.

3.) 17 Jan 2018
17 Jan 2018 10:27:08
Would you rather waste 60 seconds to more consistently get the right decision, or waste a week of your life listening to radio and TV pundits banging on about how the decision was wrong.

I'm pleased about this. Maybe we can actually start to spend more time talking about the football, and less time talking about bad decisions!

How anyone can moan about something which makes the game fairer, is beyond me. 60 seconds? Try watching American football. You get 60 seconds of actual play every 90 minutes of real time. Not vice versa!

4.) 17 Jan 2018
17 Jan 2018 10:45:23
I watch a lot of Rugby Union and the VAR is not the answer to all controversial questions. I think it can be a great aid to getting to the right decisions but slow motion often puts a different perspective on incidents, especially collisons, that does not necessarily help with a resolution. Deliberate knock ons, perhaps equivalent to hand ball, is a particularly trick area.

5.) 17 Jan 2018
17 Jan 2018 10:46:44
I think there's going to be problems with it down the line. For me, linesmen will have to stop giving any offside decisions for it to work properly, because if the flag goes up and the referee blows the whistle the chance is then gone. If VAR proves that to be the wrong decision, the attacking team won't get that chance again.

Also, how often to defenders stop once they see the flag go up? It won't always be a true reflection of what would have happened in that sequence of play.

It will clearly work in a lot of circumstances, but I think there is going to be few fall outs over it.

6.) 17 Jan 2018
17 Jan 2018 11:02:18
Liverducks, first of all the system is in its teething stages, it will only get better. Second of all there may be some downsides but whatever they end up being (and a lot of people who are against it are stretching their imaginations to poke holes in it) the net benefit to the game will be positive.

As MK says if we can get to a stage where we stop talking about decisions and focus on the play then that will be a brilliant thing.

7.) 17 Jan 2018
17 Jan 2018 11:08:33
That is just tough luck for me, Liverducks. If you were so far from goal that play is stopped by the time you get a shot away, then for me that's just the luck of the draw. We don't want all controversy removed.

Equally, if any player stops when they see the flag, that's their problem. Even 5 year old kids are told "play to the whistle". Until the ref stops the game, every player should assume the ball is live.

You can't expect VAR to get pulled out for every decision, to the point where it is including offsides on the half way line!

It is there as a helpful tool that can be used on a few occasions each games to get things spot on. Goals, Red cards, and penalties is plenty enough for me.

Offsides, throw-ins, fouls etc. Should be left well alone unless they are directly linked to a goal, red card, or penalty!

8.) 17 Jan 2018
17 Jan 2018 11:11:30
It’s come under major scrutiny in the A-league in Australia. Especially it’s use for yellow/ red cards as it’s pure conjecture. Also it’s not play on when the flags raised and let’s say the striker is one on one with the keeper, if you want to get the right call let the play finish and possible goal and then check the offside. They will happily call back an offside goal if the flags stay down but not for the flag raised. I just think it’s messy and you will know what I mean when it’s introduced to the premier league.

9.) 17 Jan 2018
17 Jan 2018 15:50:17
I agree to a certain extent MK, and I'm not against VAR at all, can just see a few problems with it. I think initially it will be more of a tool to rule out goals rather than give them (although the opposite is true last night) .

{Ed025's Note - it takes too long for me ducks, if they can speed it up then yes but it spoils the game when we are hanging around for a decision mate..

10.) 17 Jan 2018
17 Jan 2018 16:34:13
if time is a stumbling block dare I suggest stopping the clock alla American football every time the ball is dead, yet still punish time wasting (it ruins the flow of the game) .