VAR Discussion Thread - 2023/24 | PL clubs to vote on whether to scrap VAR (pg413)

Would you want VAR scrapped?

  • Total voters
    293
  • Poll closed .
Considering the number of " incidents " which were there for consideration by the officials who were in charge of the game, from the non-sending off of Havertz to the several factors involved in the Newcastle " goal ", I would have to say that in my opinion, there is little point in having VAR or indeed officials who will not correctly punish seriously bad /possible serious injury inflicting injuries, or correct examine the incidents under review.

Imo Attwell being the referee under such scrutiny, is a stand-out example of such terrible inconsistency and poor refereeing standards.

Not sure who was on VAR duties but again little confidence on their part either.

A true shitshow of an overall performance by the officals.
 
this is what i dont understand, when it goes for arteta, klopp, tent peg etc then its thats what var is for, you have to respect the refs decisions etc etc, when it goes against them the world is ending and its not good enough, var did their level best to disallow that goal yest , they checked THREE count em THREE different reasons to disallow the goal and it gets given, just be honest its not a disgrace, its people not agreeing with refs which has been the same ever since football had refs.

The difference is this, the istree clubs have become so entitled and so used to getting everything in their favour that when correct decisions are made against them they act like the world is unfair and they are hard done to, well know you arent hard done to, you have just stepped on to a somewhat level playing field and are having to deal with the kind of crap that the rest of us have to had to deal with for decades.
 
I can’t understand how cricket and Rugby Union can do it so well, but football can’t. I think it is the rules that cause the confusion, in rugby and cricket there is no ’clear and obvious error’ rule, so some of these dodgy decisions are down to the ref not being in a position to get a clear view. In rugby the rules state that if the ball is in play but part of the player is out of play, it goes into touch. In cricket it is all about whether the bowler is legitimately within the bowling crease, pitching in line, hitting the stumps, bat involved etc. Unless we have cameras all around the pitch every five metres VAR will never be accurate, and by the way the current handball rules are simply pathetic. Handball in an unnatural position, when it happens to hit your hand from an opponent when you are jumping is just plain stupid and a rule probably made up by suits who never played football. Rant over
 
Gray said:
Well your feet could be onside, but your head offside.

Using your foot position theory the player could head a goal and not be offside?

Can you imagine the uproar that would cause?
Click to expand...
Not if that was the rules. Free your mind and think it through.
 
Why was none of the VAR decisions shown in the ground yesterday ? Sit at home and see what’s happening or sit in the stadium and be kept in the dark !
 
ErlingHaaland said:
Why was none of the VAR decisions shown in the ground yesterday ? Sit at home and see what’s happening or sit in the stadium and be kept in the dark !
Click to expand...
This situation is just bloody disgraceful. Whilst waiting for the rubric to appear on the screen - Checking possible offside - I thought we should be fuckin' well seeing in slow motion what happened, and not just being told basically that the check is over and yer can all fuckin' well sit down now. Football is light years behind other sports, but that's what yer get when fuckin' dinosaurs are in charge of the asylum.
 
Gray said:
Well your feet could be onside, but your head offside.

Using your foot position theory the player could head a goal and not be offside?

Can you imagine the uproar that would cause?
Click to expand...
But what advantage are you getting from your head being “offside”? The only benefit to being in an offside position is so that you can get to the ball quicker, hence it doesn’t really make sense to call your shoulder or your head offside. I know that’s not what the law says but the law’s an ass on this
 
inchy14 said:
Think the phrase ‘back to you’ means you’re behind the ball lol.
Click to expand...
It would be back to you because you’ve run back to get it.

The direction of the pass is irrelevant to an offside. The position of the ball in relation to the player is the relevant aspect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top