The offside for me should be clear and obvious to the naked eye that’s what you call a advantage not a toe,knee,or elbow.maybe all players should be bald cos the way it’s going a strand of hair for a headed goal will be penalised soon.
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.
VAR Discussion Thread - 2023/24 | PL clubs to vote on whether to scrap VAR (pg413)
- Thread starter MAG
- Start date
Bluemanc100
Well-Known Member
I’d be amazed if they scrap it.. It’s currently been weaponised and used as a tool to influence games
The problem is that you’ll never get agreement on what is clear and obvious. They’ll spend just as much time as they do now arriving at a decision but instead of the issue being whether it’s a toe nail involved they’ll be arguing about whether it meets the criteria for clear and obviousThe offside for me should be clear and obvious to the naked eye that’s what you call a advantage not a toe,knee,or elbow.maybe all players should be bald cos the way it’s going a strand of hair for a headed goal will be penalised soon.
Gordyola
Well-Known Member
Goal Line technology has been in place for 10 years has nothing to do with VAR it’s an automated system that creates a 3D image almost instantly and the ref is notified by a wrist mounted device he will normally point at to show that the ball has crossed the lineWould it though? The ref and Linesman “missed the goal”. I thought goal line technology was used to determine whether the ball had crossed the line when the referee wasn’t sure.
Gordyola
Well-Known Member
Lino’s gave the decision for over a hundred years and the majority of time they were spot on and as was said previously the naked eye is better than a five minute delay whilst they decide which frame to use and measure with flawed technology if a player’s toe nail is offsideThe problem is that you’ll never get agreement on what is clear and obvious. They’ll spend just as much time as they do now arriving at a decision but instead of the issue being whether it’s a toe nail involved they’ll be arguing about whether it meets the criteria for clear and obvious
flook
Well-Known Member
have you forgotten the outrage and cries of corruption when they got it wrong though?Lino’s gave the decision for over a hundred years and the majority of time they were spot on and as was said previously the naked eye is better than a five minute delay whilst they decide which frame to use and measure with flawed technology if a player’s toe nail is offside
Pingu the Penguin
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 7,791
What do you call it when they watch a video and still get it wrong? Ask a scouser!have you forgotten the outrage and cries of corruption when they got it wrong though?
The Light Was Yellow Sir
Well-Known Member
Although only ‘after the winter break’, for some reason.It's not being used for offsides next season anyway. Champions League-style semi-automated offsides being used instead.
Yet another example of PGMOL exceptionalism…
BlueMoonRisin’
Well-Known Member
It's a good job VAR wasn't being used when Phil Thompson played because he'd have been offside every game with his conk.The offside for me should be clear and obvious to the naked eye that’s what you call a advantage not a toe,knee,or elbow.maybe all players should be bald cos the way it’s going a strand of hair for a headed goal will be penalised soon.