West Ham Online

Interesting:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/ar ... grx8ml7m0o

They are looking at almost everything, hence why you always hear the commentator say 'it's been checked and cleared' at even the most trivial 'incident'. It's absolutely bonkers and don't see why the top brass who oversee this can't see how ridiculous it has become and do something about it. 

Funny enough, if there is one positive in going down it will be no VAR.

I didn't notice that.
Why didn't the commentators say anything, and why did VAR take so long to see it?

SurfaceAgentX2Zero wrote: ↑13 Jan 2026, 21:32

El Scorchio" wrote: ↑13 Jan 2026, 17:58

SurfaceAgentX2Zero wrote: ↑13 Jan 2026, 17:18

Yes, you can. You write a margin for error into the law (a toe length, if you want) and then enforce it rigorously without exception. No arguments because there's already a clearly defined margin of error.

There will be occasions when you're right up against the margin of error and it'll be a millimetre decision regardless. All you're doing is changing the problem slightly rather than solving it. If the margin is 5com, you'll still get occasions where it's 4.99cm or 5.01cm. Wherever you have to draw any line or border, not matter how thick, there will always be occasions when you're on it or over it.

 

No sorry, you're wrong. If the margin of error is a clearly stated 'x', there is no credibility at all in complaining, 'oh, yes he WAS offside but only by 'x' minus a tiny bit'. The complainer would be laughed at. Even now, the gripes against 'toes-length' offsides are no longer taken seriously.

 

It wasn't even close to fractional. Everyone was so busy focusing on whether he was level with or behind the defender that they had ignored the fact that the keeper was ahead of them both. It couldn't have been clearer to me

It's fooking dreadful the way it's used here, as opposed to the way it's used in Europe when you only hear from VAR when it is actually a clear and and obvious mistake, the way it's supposed to be used.
It's ruined the game here as after a goal half the time they're taking ages checking & looking for something, even then the decision is subjective.

You couldn't tell whether Haaland was offside or not at the point of Semenya's contact with the ball, it was that fractional, looked inside to me on the TV frozen replays.
Then because they've sent the ref to look at it after taking ages with crowd booing, he has to make a quick decision despite them taking 4 minutes, obviously he's not going to go against VAR in that situation with Newcastle at home too.

Total farce as not used as it's supposed to be.
It's like they need to do something and get involved every game just to justify it, not even conclusive or objective half the time so still as many bad decisions get through but the game is delayed and the spontaneous joy of celebrating a goal has been taken away.
Pretty sure most fans hate it. Needs to be coordinated mass protests, but of course there won't be as the new SKY generation of fans are wet blankets.

, wrote: ↑14 Jan 2026, 10:01  Watched the game last night and the var officials robbed City of a 3-0 result. Furthermore the officials  demonstrated, as usual, that they are the problem not the technology.

Far Cough UKunt" wrote: ↑14 Jan 2026, 09:14

onsideman wrote: ↑14 Jan 2026, 08:55 Yeah, they did score from it

It was so far out that it went behind Moyes who was in his technical area

They still dont have touchline cameras so theoretically could happen again... if the lino is a cսnt 

Isn't that why they have erm, "linesmen"?

360 "Because football shares NO similarities with any other sport on earth"

Of course it does, but again, it is the most watched sport in the world. Why take on ideas from other less watched sports? Shouldn't it be the other way round?

Before Sky football came along, football was looked at as a spectator sport and the amount of time the ball was in play during 90 minutes was looked at, I remember a couple of programmes at the time about it, and one of the conclusions (from a spectators point of view), was that the dead time around throw-ins was one area that could be improved on, if at all possible.

The solution to that would not be to add on even more dead time (and a LOT more of it) through something like VAR.

It was SKY who pushed and pushed no end for something like VAR to be introduced, forgetting that their role was to broadcast football to the public, not DEMAND changes to the game. 

They got their way eventually and an Americanised idea was introduced.

And now we are where we are, with most supporters not wanting it (which a lot didn't to begin with), and now most clubs no longer wanting it.

who'd have thunk it.....

 

 Watched the game last night and the var officials robbed City of a 3-0 result. Furthermore the officials  demonstrated, as usual, that they are the problem not the technology.

If AI is as potent as many are claiming, then surely it's mature enough to be fed the laws & rules of the game and pipe up when it thinks/knows that the ref has made a bad call. Blindingly fast feedback.

The media won't hear of such a thing though as it takes away the opportunity for "a word from our sponsor while VAR is reviewing the situation". Doesn't happen today, but it's clearly on the cards for the future.

onsideman wrote: ↑14 Jan 2026, 08:55 Yeah, they did score from it

It was so far out that it went behind Moyes who was in his technical area

They still dont have touchline cameras so theoretically could happen again... if the lino is a cսnt 

Yeah, they did score from it

It was so far out that it went behind Moyes who was in his technical area

They still dont have touchline cameras so theoretically could happen again... if the lino is a cսnt 

Does anyone remember the Man U game when Pogba kicked the ball upfield which went out by some distance but because it had a curve on it, it came back in? The linos flag stayed down of course and I think they scored from it?

So we all agree there is no corruption in the Premier League 

Fauxstralian wrote: ↑13 Jan 2026, 21:29 Surface
Wind your neck in you dismal cսnt
Tedious beyond belief 

El Scorchio" wrote: ↑13 Jan 2026, 17:58

SurfaceAgentX2Zero wrote: ↑13 Jan 2026, 17:18

El Scorchio" wrote: ↑13 Jan 2026, 16:35

That change to offside doesn't help- it just changes where you measure from. There will still be loads of occasions where there's a tiny space and it's centimetres or even millimetres. You could introduce a margin of error, but it's still not going to change the face there's a defined line and defined body parts have to be behind it.

Yes, you can. You write a margin for error into the law (a toe length, if you want) and then enforce it rigorously without exception. No arguments because there's already a clearly defined margin of error.

There will be occasions when you're right up against the margin of error and it'll be a millimetre decision regardless. All you're doing is changing the problem slightly rather than solving it. If the margin is 5com, you'll still get occasions where it's 4.99cm or 5.01cm. Wherever you have to draw any line or border, not matter how thick, there will always be occasions when you're on it or over it.

 

Fauxstralian wrote: ↑13 Jan 2026, 21:27 VAR taking about 10mins to come up with a wrong decision 
Haaland not interfering 

Surface
Wind your neck in you dismal cսnt
Tedious beyond belief 

VAR taking about 10mins to come up with a wrong decision 
Haaland not interfering 

Fauxstralian wrote: ↑13 Jan 2026, 17:36 That’s not really an advantage is it ?
You want to give an advantage to people trying to score
I do anyway 

El Scorchio" wrote: ↑13 Jan 2026, 17:58

SurfaceAgentX2Zero wrote: ↑13 Jan 2026, 17:18

El Scorchio" wrote: ↑13 Jan 2026, 16:35

That change to offside doesn't help- it just changes where you measure from. There will still be loads of occasions where there's a tiny space and it's centimetres or even millimetres. You could introduce a margin of error, but it's still not going to change the face there's a defined line and defined body parts have to be behind it.

Yes, you can. You write a margin for error into the law (a toe length, if you want) and then enforce it rigorously without exception. No arguments because there's already a clearly defined margin of error.

There will be occasions when you're right up against the margin of error and it'll be a millimetre decision regardless. All you're doing is changing the problem slightly rather than solving it. If the margin is 5com, you'll still get occasions where it's 4.99cm or 5.01cm. Wherever you have to draw any line or border, not matter how thick, there will always be occasions when you're on it or over it.

TENNIS

WHU(Exeter) wrote: ↑13 Jan 2026, 20:32 Here we go with the “in other sports” stuff again.

That are watched LESS than football.

Why don’t the players wear swimming caps on their heads. They do it in water polo.

 

Here we go with the “in other sports” stuff again.

That are watched LESS than football.

Why don’t the players wear swimming caps on their heads. They do it in water polo.

How the fuck is the Brighton handball and the Forest 'offside' not on there? Both were criminal decisions that cost us five fucking points.