Jump to content

VAR Poll


W6er
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, W6er said:

So far, then:

4 For: @munoz , @Cookie Monster , @StanleySaint & @WeeBud

2 Against: @W6er & @portmahomack saint

 

I'd agree with that. But isn't that a major reason component of home advantage? The game has existed for years, and being annoyed or delighted by a refereeing decision is part of the game. 

Then the advantage will always be exaggerated in favour of the “big” teams or you could go the whole hog and ban away fans to give you even more home advantage……not for me, a correct decision (as often as possible) should be exactly that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


37 minutes ago, WeeBud said:

Down South they are centrally located at Stockley Park…….there is no doubt (in my mind at least) that referees are influenced by large crowds wanting every decision in their favour, VAR will only work properly (in my opinion)if the operators are remote from the stadiums.

I voted for. 

Yes and even more so up here at our two giant clubs who scream in unison every time someone goes down in the box..  but there's other influences up here, referees are not required to say who they support unlike in England so that they're not involved in making decisions on teams they support... the same would involve the var team sitting in the Lodge 

Var is fine in England and large countries and big tournaments with the whole world watching... would only help with stone wall decisions the refs has totally missed and that affects both teams....  can here the new song already [Who's the Mason in the Booth]

A lot of these decisions on var are debatable,  and even the pundits on TV and viewers at home have different opinions on them. for instance with relegation on the line would you give a penalty against us on a 50/50 

That question is not for Fartaway or Elvis  :rolleyes:  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, W6er said:

So far, then:

4 For: @munoz , @Cookie Monster , @StanleySaint & @WeeBud

2 Against: @W6er & @portmahomack saint

 

I'd agree with that. But isn't that a major component of home advantage? The game has existed for years, and being annoyed or delighted by a refereeing decision is part of the game. 

If this forum is representative of SMISA members as a whole, then you'll win the poll.

I voted against 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, TediousTom said:

Is it just me or does anyone else not care a jot about the opinions of Smisa and its members?

 

PS If you want to improve the matchday experience do away with the queues at the pie stall.  Start selling pies at a reasonable price as well you robbing bastards.

 

 

Wait a minute, there are too many people queuing for pies and you think Pie Sports should lower the prices? I take it you are not familiar with the most elementary economic concepts of supply and demand?

Also SMISA own the club, thanks to the generosity of its members, so at least show a little respect! :)

 

So far, then:

4 For: @munoz , @Cookie Monster , @StanleySaint & @WeeBud

3 Against: @W6er , @portmahomack saint & @HSS

Edited by W6er
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Get VAR so far to fcuk!

This sort of technology is what you would expect Cricket, Rugby and Tennis Tory voting Brexiteers to want in their lives.

Sad thing is it will be voted in. If the English do it we have to follow. 

Another nail in the coffin of the game I grew up loving.

Modern fitba is Pish.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, SuperSaints1877 said:

Get VAR so far to fcuk!

This sort of technology is what you would expect Cricket, Rugby and Tennis Tory voting Brexiteers to want in their lives.

Sad thing is it will be voted in. If the English do it we have to follow. 

Another nail in the coffin of the game I grew up loving.

Modern fitba is Pish.

 

 

Calm down dear. :lol:

You come across as a whole lot older than 27. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly if we hadn't been asked I wouldn't have ventured an opinion, it is what it is and it will either get the decisions right or it will fall flat on its arse, would still vote to give it a go. Also in response to a previous poster, who gives a toss what the Tedious Todger's opinion is. (Cue rant about the 'wank wall').

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, W6er said:

Wait a minute, there are too many people queuing for pies and you think Pie Sports should lower the prices? I take it you are not familiar with the most elementary economic concepts of supply and demand?

Also SMISA own the club, thanks to the generosity of its members, so at least show a little respect! :)

 

So far, then:

4 For: @munoz , @Cookie Monster , @StanleySaint & @WeeBud

3 Against: @W6er , @portmahomack saint & @HSS

Oh dear, you have attempted to tackle a subject without proper thought or consideration of the point.  Such behaviour is likely to bring nothing but derision on this interweb thingy.

The pie queue is almost artistic in it's stupidity.  The way the youngster takes your order, walks across the floor to the back of the pie stall only to forget your order and return and repeat the original question.  Only then to walk again to the back of the stall where another staff member is asked for part of your order (the pie).  The pie is handed to the youngster who AGAIN walks the floor to hand you meaty pastry.  The same youngster AGAIN walks to the back of the stall where they relay the order of bovril to ANOTHER staff member who appears to be the "pourer in chief".  The "pourer in chief" pours your weak but hot bovine based hot  suspension to the same youngster who AGAIN walks the floor toward the customer and finally hands over the order.  Then of course payment is taken at a massive premium whereby the urine is taken from the ardent supporter of our club.  A process that could and should be overhauled to provide a far better level of service to the poor consumer.  

As you have NOT considered ANY of the above in your reply to me that you (for some reason) felt compelled to make I must disregard your post as ill-thought out and unworthy of further discussion.  I also wonder to myself why people (such as yourself) bother when the effort to make a decent, well constructed point is somewhat beyond them.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, TediousTom said:

Oh dear, you have attempted to tackle a subject without proper thought or consideration of the point.  Such behaviour is likely to bring nothing but derision on this interweb thingy.

The pie queue is almost artistic in it's stupidity.  The way the youngster takes your order, walks across the floor to the back of the pie stall only to forget your order and return and repeat the original question.  Only then to walk again to the back of the stall where another staff member is asked for part of your order (the pie).  The pie is handed to the youngster who AGAIN walks the floor to hand you meaty pastry.  The same youngster AGAIN walks to the back of the stall where they relay the order of bovril to ANOTHER staff member who appears to be the "pourer in chief".  The "pourer in chief" pours your weak but hot bovine based hot  suspension to the same youngster who AGAIN walks the floor toward the customer and finally hands over the order.  Then of course payment is taken at a massive premium whereby the urine is taken from the ardent supporter of our club.  A process that could and should be overhauled to provide a far better level of service to the poor consumer.  

As you have NOT considered ANY of the above in your reply to me that you (for some reason) felt compelled to make I must disregard your post as ill-thought out and unworthy of further discussion.  I also wonder to myself why people (such as yourself) bother when the effort to make a decent, well constructed point is somewhat beyond them.

 

 

 

 

We've clearly had different experiences. I also think you must attend a stall with TARDIS attributes, as walking to the back of the stall is literally about four steps and would take four seconds. :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, TediousTom said:

Oh dear, you have attempted to tackle a subject without proper thought or consideration of the point.  Such behaviour is likely to bring nothing but derision on this interweb thingy.

The pie queue is almost artistic in it's stupidity.  The way the youngster takes your order, walks across the floor to the back of the pie stall only to forget your order and return and repeat the original question.  Only then to walk again to the back of the stall where another staff member is asked for part of your order (the pie).  The pie is handed to the youngster who AGAIN walks the floor to hand you meaty pastry.  The same youngster AGAIN walks to the back of the stall where they relay the order of bovril to ANOTHER staff member who appears to be the "pourer in chief".  The "pourer in chief" pours your weak but hot bovine based hot  suspension to the same youngster who AGAIN walks the floor toward the customer and finally hands over the order.  Then of course payment is taken at a massive premium whereby the urine is taken from the ardent supporter of our club.  A process that could and should be overhauled to provide a far better level of service to the poor consumer.  

As you have NOT considered ANY of the above in your reply to me that you (for some reason) felt compelled to make I must disregard your post as ill-thought out and unworthy of further discussion.  I also wonder to myself why people (such as yourself) bother when the effort to make a decent, well constructed point is somewhat beyond them.

 

 

 

 

Well said Tom... you have just took the words out my mouth  

P.S Staying on the subject..

Great to see Megan and Harry sticking to their word and staying out of the public eye and leading a normal life and not missing being in the spotlight 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, portmahomack saint said:

Well said Tom... you have just took the words out my mouth  

P.S Staying on the subject..

Great to see Megan and Harry sticking to their word and staying out of the public eye and leading a normal life and not missing being in the spotlight 

 

Think I've been hacked I never wrote that 

 

GIF by Tomi Ferraro, Sportz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/14/2022 at 6:21 PM, faraway saint said:

No it doesn't, a common misconception. 

The Premier League says that the average time for a full VAR review with an overturned decision is approximately 84 seconds. With regard to checks, there is an average delay of 22 seconds across an entire game.

The correct decision wins for me every time, feck all this pish "talking point" garbage.

 

It’s a red herring, regarding the time for checking. It only takes into account the actual time of review, not from when the incident happens, it considers this still time played. 
 

if VAR takes 30 seconds to check a decision but the VAR check doesn’t start until 30 seconds, a minute or longer after the incident. (For example one of Rangers recent European penalties for a handball VAR didn’t start checking for almost a minute, then the ref went for a look). The actual time lost to the game is from the very moment the handball happened, NOT when they started checking VAR. That isn’t what statistical analysis has looked at.

VAR absolutely slows down the game (some games hugely). It is the worst introduction to football, certainly in my lifetime & has killed much of what makes it the best sport in the world, the free flowing nature. 
 

Failed experiment that should have been binned years ago. 
 

In saying all that however, sadly it seems like it’s here to stay & there isn’t much that can be done. If it’s voted through, so be it but it has been a terrible introduction to football which often only moves controversy at the expense of free flowing football. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

It’s a red herring, regarding the time for checking. It only takes into account the actual time of review, not from when the incident happens, it considers this still time played. 
 

if VAR takes 30 seconds to check a decision but the VAR check doesn’t start until 30 seconds, a minute or longer after the incident. (For example one of Rangers recent European penalties for a handball VAR didn’t start checking for almost a minute, then the ref went for a look). The actual time lost to the game is from the very moment the handball happened, NOT when they started checking VAR. That isn’t what statistical analysis has looked at.

VAR absolutely slows down the game (some games hugely). It is the worst introduction to football, certainly in my lifetime & has killed much of what makes it the best sport in the world, the free flowing nature. 
 

Failed experiment that should have been binned years ago. 
 

In saying all that however, sadly it seems like it’s here to stay & there isn’t much that can be done. If it’s voted through, so be it but it has been a terrible introduction to football which often only moves controversy at the expense of free flowing football. 

Reading this thread, I’m quite surprised that some people think this will get us more, fairer decisions. Bias officiating hurts us the most against the bigot brothers when it comes to 50:50s & other decisions that could go either way. VAR doesn’t check these. 
 

VAR is still hugely subjective, it will not impact one inch, the favour showing to Celtic & Rangers. If anything, I think it will give more opportunity to analyse incidents in the box to give them more. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, bazil85 said:

It’s a red herring, regarding the time for checking. It only takes into account the actual time of review, not from when the incident happens, it considers this still time played. 
 

if VAR takes 30 seconds to check a decision but the VAR check doesn’t start until 30 seconds, a minute or longer after the incident. (For example one of Rangers recent European penalties for a handball VAR didn’t start checking for almost a minute, then the ref went for a look). The actual time lost to the game is from the very moment the handball happened, NOT when they started checking VAR. That isn’t what statistical analysis has looked at.

VAR absolutely slows down the game (some games hugely). It is the worst introduction to football, certainly in my lifetime & has killed much of what makes it the best sport in the world, the free flowing nature. 
 

Failed experiment that should have been binned years ago. 
 

In saying all that however, sadly it seems like it’s here to stay & there isn’t much that can be done. If it’s voted through, so be it but it has been a terrible introduction to football which often only moves controversy at the expense of free flowing football. 

So, you know better than the facts? :lol:

Your post is utter drivel, made up shite and a skewed view, using extreme examples to try to prove a point, which you do on every subject. 

I slaughtered you on this some time ago, your opinion is fine, but try to keep it factual, I know that'll be a problem for you. :byebye

I notice you place no value on the "correct" decision being made? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, faraway saint said:

So, you know better than the facts? :lol:

Your post is utter drivel, made up shite and a skewed view, using extreme examples to try to prove a point, which you do on every subject. 

I slaughtered you on this some time ago, your opinion is fine, but try to keep it factual, I know that'll be a problem for you. :byebye

I notice you place no value on the "correct" decision being made? 

It is FACT, the timings are not from moment of incident. The timings are done on the time taken for a VAR check. If you don’t believe me, look into the data yourself. 
 

Once again a thread where you have attacked, belittled & steamrolled over pretty much everyone with views that differ from yours. The biggest troll on the site by far. 
 

The hypocrisy in what you’ve posted here is off the chart. You’re welcome to support VAR, I have no issues with people having that view, I just don’t share it. 
 

You haven’t ‘slaughtered’ anything I have said. You contradict yourself by clearly highlighting it’s ‘opinion’ driven. 
 

I’ve given my reasons for not supporting VAR, you’ve given yours for why you do. That’s it, get over it. 
 

I also, don’t believe VAR gets decisions right all the time, football can be very subjective. It often moves controversy at the expense of slowing down the game. Again opinion, you don’t have to share it but you haven’t the capacity to change it (clearly) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



It is FACT, the timings are not from moment of incident. The timings are done on the time taken for a VAR check. If you don’t believe me, look into the data yourself.


The counter argument for that is. When play stops now how many times do you see players running to the Ref and the game getting delayed because of that.

Has that been calculated into the factual figures or does that not count as a fact as its not pro your argument regarding time wasted?
Link to comment
Share on other sites






The counter argument for that is. When play stops now how many times do you see players running to the Ref and the game getting delayed because of that.

Has that been calculated into the factual figures or does that not count as a fact as its not pro your argument regarding time wasted?
You obviously don't know the correct definition of "fact", you silly boy.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Cookie Monster said:


 

 


The counter argument for that is. When play stops now how many times do you see players running to the Ref and the game getting delayed because of that.

Has that been calculated into the factual figures or does that not count as a fact as its not pro your argument regarding time wasted?

 

I feel it’s a bit of whataboutery tbh. Separate issue to VAR completely but also very much a fair concern in modern football which I share. 
 

I hate time wasting & gamesmanship in modern day football. I personally would support a stop the clock style for when the ball goes out of play.
 

One of the ways it could curb the issue. Another less major change could be clamping down on bookable offences for time wasting. Make the window far shorter. 

Edited by bazil85
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, faraway saint said:

Another baseless claim that you throw in to deflect from your floundering posts. 

Simpleton personified. 🤡

No deflection, my point has been completely consistent. I don’t support VAR for the reasons given, others do for their own reasons.

It’s also absolutely not baseless that you have antagonised & lashed out on this thread like you do on practically all others.
 

You’re an angry, nasty wee troll on this forum. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...