Exactly. And once again, I will add, that hiding behind the “we don’t want to slow the game down by reviewing at pitch side monitor” is just utter bullshit and code for them wanting to still be able to control the results. Personally I have no issue with the game having a few minutes added on due to the ref checking stuff pitchside, chances are it happens no more than a couple of times a game, big deal.
Gray and Keys got binned off for making sexist comments, not for being outspoken
Why is nobody asking what is the bigger waste of time....
1) VAR takes 2 minutes to ALWAYS agree with the referee, even when he has got it wrong.
2) VAR takes 5 minutes and reaches the correct decision.
Burnside near nambour mate.. What about you?I agree that there's huge inconsistencies with the scrutiny of the decisions. However I'm guessing their argument is that offside and handball is less subjective than penalties hence the greater scrutiny on those decisions.
Whereabouts are you on the Coast?
It shouldn’t even take that long in most cases. The Silva one is so blatantly clear and obvious, one replay confirmed it was a foul within about 10-15 seconds of the original incident. VAR should be telling the referee the defender stood on Silva’s foot and a penalty should have been awarded, that could and should have been the process completed within 30 seconds and the play stopped immediately, even if that’s before the ball went out of play.Why is nobody asking what is the bigger waste of time....
1) VAR takes 2 minutes to ALWAYS agree with the referee, even when he has got it wrong.
2) VAR takes 5 minutes and reaches the correct decision.
another question should be why isn't the time taken by VAR added on in added on time like I said early I watched the Schalke 7-0 nil and I am guessing with VAR used at least 8 (off side goal) they was only about 3 mins added on in the first half and NO added minutes in the second half !!! yet I only saw a 80 minute football match or less.....if City had been needing a goal to win those missing 10 minutes really count.
Doesn’t make keys and gray right, it does make spit the dog wrong, in fact it was an unbelievable decisionYet the same company refused to sack Carragher for spitting in a young girls face.
My point about the monitor was that if pigmol don’t want to be seen to be re-refereeing the game and overruling the ref then how difficult would it have been to say to Marriner that they think he should go and check the monitor. He then doesn’t lose face because he’s just getting to see what he may have missed due to poor view or speed of game etc, he comes back and gives the decision. IF he had then come back and not given the penalty we’d know it was due to game being bent, simple.It shouldn’t even take that long in most cases. The Silva one is so blatantly clear and obvious, one replay confirmed it was a foul within about 10-15 seconds of the original incident. VAR should be telling the referee the defender stood on Silva’s foot and a penalty should have been awarded, that could and should have been the process completed within 30 seconds and the play stopped immediately, even if that’s before the ball went out of play.
Of course some decisions will take longer but the vast majority should be done and dusted within 20-30 seconds.
Exactly. And once again, I will add, that hiding behind the “we don’t want to slow the game down by reviewing at pitch side monitor” is just utter bullshit and code for them wanting to still be able to control the results. Personally I have no issue with the game having a few minutes added on due to the ref checking stuff pitchside, chances are it happens no more than a couple of times a game, big deal.