gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
I reckon that could be dealt with via assistant referees making that call. As an override.
Technology will be able to deal with it sooner or later anyway, imo.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
World Cup VAR
- Thread starter stonerblue
- Start date
Technology will be able to deal with it sooner or later anyway, imo.
It was still debateable with the France penalty that went to var. I mean the ref has still got to look at it and if it's a bent ref the agenda still goes on;-)I agree we would,if it continues like this in the world cup it is going to look well dodgy if we don't get it here and in the CL,there is way too much money in the game to rely on humans especially our useless lot
But this goes back to the whole issue of what those against VAR are saying. I have said all along that VAR can only be used for offside and where an incident takes place ie was the foul inside or out of the box. The dipper game is a perfect example. The incidents that cost us were the offsides two away and one at home for which they could use VAR because there is no subjectivity it is black and white. The Sterling penalty claim was subjective and not a stone wall pen so VAR is a complete waste of space in that situation. If you consider today' games two of the three pens given could easily be argued that VAR got it wrong and it also got it wrong by not giving Argentina what for me was a 100 oef cent pen ! Yes there will be the odd one that is clear and obvious like the Peru one but bloody hell the ref should gave got that right in the first place. 80 per cent of pens and those not gjven are not clear and obvious and we are just swapping refs making mistakes for machines and ruining games with horrendous delays.
That was my thoughts at first but change my mind! if there are 2 decisions in the box both pens but not been given one they look at the others they do and give it its improved the decision making.
PannickAtTheDisco
Well-Known Member
Argentina one earlier (which I didn't think was a pen) was one where play was allowed to restart and that was that.
I just think if you're going to correct key decisions correct them. Don't introduce loopholes and get outs where things don't get properly looked at.
In that Peru pen play was stopped maybe 10 seconds after it happened. If the ball had gone out and quickly restarted and then the review happened I don't see why that's such a bad thing.
hopefully they'll come out and say it was an error in the Argie game and it will be ironed out, by and large it's been positive though.
NorCalBlue
Well-Known Member
Bernard from "Westworld" would be able to see the difference.Probably but I don’t see how it could cope with players not interfering for example, they’d look offside to AI but technically they wouldn’t be.
NorCalBlue
Well-Known Member
I still think VAR makes it harder for a bent ref to be bent. He can still give close calls any way he likes, but he wouldn't be able to claim that he didn't see something really obvious.It was still debateable with the France penalty that went to var. I mean the ref has still got to look at it and if it's a bent ref the agenda still goes on;-)
kaz7
Well-Known Member
Not as easy to hide when it's pointed out for everyone to see,there is a reason the rags and dippers voted against itIt was still debateable with the France penalty that went to var. I mean the ref has still got to look at it and if it's a bent ref the agenda still goes on;-)
inchy14
Well-Known Member
Bernard from "Westworld" would be able to see the difference.
Yes but he’d be shaking like a shitting dog half the time and looking for his dead kid.
Bigga
Well-Known Member
Good decision, but if the ball had gone out and Denmark took it quickly (as they would) it would have been play on right?
Mmm, no. Dead ball play is at the ref's discretion. He allows it or doesn't.
No one gets to 'play on' if he's in the middle of decision making.
Mmm, no. Dead ball play is at the ref's discretion. He allows it or doesn't.
No one gets to 'play on' if he's in the middle of decision making.
This is a problem. As we saw in the Argentina game this happened and all of a sudden VAR is redundant.
You can guarantee the side "possibly" fouling in the penalty area is going to be trying to get play restarted as quickly as possible. I just don't see what that rule adds to VAR and the game.
If it's going to work these loopholes have got to be removed. We've already seen how loopholes in retrospective punishment pretty much give the authorities an "out" to make any decision they want.