As i have said many times, the answer is, now and will always be transparency, when the decision is so obvious as it was last night, then the var quite simply has to come out and say why he gave the decision that he did and the only response he can say is that he didnt see contact and if he didnt see contact with the aid of multiple slow motion replays from multiple different angles then he quite simply is not fit for purpose and she should be stood down for the next 2 rounds of matches.As Phil previously said ….
‘How much better can you expect one to be? I mean, these are professional referees with years of training. Being able to call a correct decision with the benefit of multiple slo mo replays shouldn’t be that fucking hard ‘
Genuinely don’t know the answer.
Hope to get officials that get every single easy decision correct 100% of the time. I don’t have faith that will happen.
Take away VAR and the decision making is even more farcical.
As i have said many times, the answer is, now and will always be transparency, when the decision is so obvious as it was last night, then the var quite simply has to come out and say why he gave the decision that he did and the only response he can say is that he didnt see contact and if he didnt see contact with the aid of multiple slow motion replays from multiple different angles then he quite simply is not fit for purpose and she should be stood down for the next 2 rounds of matches.
I get that every call is subjective, i am just talking about obvious ones where literally everyone has seen that their is contact and is not contact, they should have to be explained and the fact that they arent is farcical, the fact that the ref missed it in the first place is a whole other discussion.
like i said in my answer IF that is the answer they are giving with multiple different angles and slow motion replays especially after giving the penalty at the other end then they are not applying the laws of the game correctly which in effect is their job, they are then admitting to not doing their job and should then be stood down, this is not so much about var than about refs applying the laws evenly and fairly and stopping this bullshit of you dont get those at that anfield.Not against it - but what if the answer is 'we went along with the on-field decision as we didn't deem there was enough contact to knock the player over'' - something along them lines.
would that honestly make you happier ? No one would accept some basic answer like that, just creates more outrage.
like i said in my answer IF that is the answer they are giving with multiple different angles and slow motion replays especially after giving the penalty at the other end then they are not applying the laws of the game correctly which in effect is their job, they are then admitting to not doing their job and should then be stood down, this is not so much about var than about refs applying the laws evenly and fairly and stopping this bullshit of you dont get those at that anfield.
If you give the one for liverpool, you HAVE to give the ones for chelsea no?
Most sensible thing you’ve said on this threadgood idea, threaten VAR officials with jail time if they get obvious ones wrong.
Being sacked is a bit extreme but being banned for six games with no pay would at the very least get rid of bias whether conscious or not.I agree, I think in the vast majority of cases, VAR get's it right, way more often then a ref with no help.
but there will always be cases like the one above where you can point to one decision being given and not the other - all for sacking officials who get easy ones wrong but i feel there would be sackings on a every week basis.