VAR Discussion Thread | 2024/25

Good news.

The Premier League are set to introduce semi-automated offside technology in less than two weeks' time.

The technology will come into play on Saturday, April 12 and be introduced in the weekend's round of top flight fixtures.
 
Xhavenjoe said:
Why don't they wait until the start of next season?
Click to expand...
Because VAR has changed the game so much that rule changes just seem to happen all the time now. Sometimes an emergency fix, sometimes just an improvement. Play Utd at home and its different rules when you play them at theirs.
 
The Tarkowski situation in the LiVARpool Everton match really highlights the extent in which VAR has harmed not only the sport itself but also the way that media pundits interpret situations and create phony outrage based on their own flawed thinking as a result of the VAR experiment.

The amount of outrage by the media over this is off the wall. And their outrage, almost in unanimously, is that VAR didn't reverse the on field decision of a yellow card and turn it into a straight red to send him off.

And in their over the top outrage over this, the term "modern football" keeps finding its way into their argument as they act oblivious as to why VAR didn't turn it into a red, barely mentioning that he "got to the ball" before the impact almost as an afterthought.

Here's one of many examples of the reaction to this situation :



The cognitive dissonance going on here as they feign outrage and misinterpret this situation is really bad. Mike Dean needs to take a vacation. The one guy tried to point out that he got to the ball but it largely fell on deaf ears.

This whole "modern football" narrative by the way is a direct result of VAR's existence, in that in a pre-VAR world no one would have batted an eye over the yellow card which was given. Now obviously, the boot to the man's calf was extremely dangerous to the player receiving such a blow, and the concern over the player receiving such an impact is certainly warranted. But that aside, as many pundits, while voicing their outrage over not sending the man off, have pointed out, in the good ol days that's probably not even considered a foul, let alone a card, considering that he not only "got" to the ball first, but managed to wind up and clear the ball which would cause the foot to be moving at a very high velocity. The LiVARpool defender got there late, and paid dearly for that.

But there was absolutely zero intent from Tarkowski to foul the man. He simply cleared the ball and on his follow through connected to the calf of the defender who was late getting there. To even call this a dangerous challenge would be a stretch. It was a clearance kick for goodness sake!

Tarkowski has every right to kick that ball as hard as he could, his follow through was perfectly normal. It wasn't a "high tackle" or anything like the things in which straight reds are supposedly given in "modern football". But here we go with the mainstream pundits going nuts over this, first in their interpretation of what happened, and then in criticizing VAR. And I'm as anti-VAR as it is, but it's no mystery why the VAR didn't upgrade the yellow to the red. Lost on all these media people, the fact that he was clearing the ball out and did nothing to warrant being sent off. Even a yellow is harsh on a perfectly good clearance that just so happen to result in a burtal impact to the calk of the defender. That was purely incidental, worrying as it was, and now we're hearing pundits calling for VAR to announce that they got this wrong, that he should have been sent off etc. And now there's speculation that this could result in PGMOL for the millionth time since VAR's been introduced making this sort of thing a red in the future.

All the outrage associated with this situation is how it's being completely misinterpreted as warranting a red card due to so-called "modern football" standards is all of a result of the affect that VAR has had on the sport. If that's a red card, then football is DONE. I repeat DONE. If players can't clear out balls at full strength for worry that the follow through is going to hit an oncoming defender in a bad way, you might as well start wrapping players legs in bubble wrap.

In conclusion, this was definitely not a red, and arguably not even a yellow. Yellow only due to the impact that occurred, not due to the intent Tarkowski, not due to him making a dangerous challenge, it was a clearance kick for goodness sake, and certainly not due to a clearance kick follow through being a foul in the technical sense.

The sport is so lost in over reaction and being conditioned to be outraged due to VAR's existence and this situation only reinforces how farcical football is these days under the VAR induced lunacy.
 
Xhavenjoe said:
Why don't they wait until the start of next season?
Click to expand...
Precisely.

Changing the rules mid competition should not be allowed as some decisions before the change in rules will likely have had a different outcome post change. Basically, not a fair and level playing field across the whole season.
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
The Tarkowski situation in the LiVARpool Everton match really highlights the extent in which VAR has harmed not only the sport itself but also the way that media pundits interpret situations and create phony outrage based on their own flawed thinking as a result of the VAR experiment.

The amount of outrage by the media over this is off the wall. And their outrage, almost in unanimously, is that VAR didn't reverse the on field decision of a yellow card and turn it into a straight red to send him off.

And in their over the top outrage over this, the term "modern football" keeps finding its way into their argument as they act oblivious as to why VAR didn't turn it into a red, barely mentioning that he "got to the ball" before the impact almost as an afterthought.

Here's one of many examples of the reaction to this situation :



The cognitive dissonance going on here as they feign outrage and misinterpret this situation is really bad. Mike Dean needs to take a vacation. The one guy tried to point out that he got to the ball but it largely fell on deaf ears.

This whole "modern football" narrative by the way is a direct result of VAR's existence, in that in a pre-VAR world no one would have batted an eye over the yellow card which was given. Now obviously, the boot to the man's calf was extremely dangerous to the player receiving such a blow, and the concern over the player receiving such an impact is certainly warranted. But that aside, as many pundits, while voicing their outrage over not sending the man off, have pointed out, in the good ol days that's probably not even considered a foul, let alone a card, considering that he not only "got" to the ball first, but managed to wind up and clear the ball which would cause the foot to be moving at a very high velocity. The LiVARpool defender got there late, and paid dearly for that.

But there was absolutely zero intent from Tarkowski to foul the man. He simply cleared the ball and on his follow through connected to the calf of the defender who was late getting there. To even call this a dangerous challenge would be a stretch. It was a clearance kick for goodness sake!

Tarkowski has every right to kick that ball as hard as he could, his follow through was perfectly normal. It wasn't a "high tackle" or anything like the things in which straight reds are supposedly given in "modern football". But here we go with the mainstream pundits going nuts over this, first in their interpretation of what happened, and then in criticizing VAR. And I'm as anti-VAR as it is, but it's no mystery why the VAR didn't upgrade the yellow to the red. Lost on all these media people, the fact that he was clearing the ball out and did nothing to warrant being sent off. Even a yellow is harsh on a perfectly good clearance that just so happen to result in a burtal impact to the calk of the defender. That was purely incidental, worrying as it was, and now we're hearing pundits calling for VAR to announce that they got this wrong, that he should have been sent off etc. And now there's speculation that this could result in PGMOL for the millionth time since VAR's been introduced making this sort of thing a red in the future.

All the outrage associated with this situation is how it's being completely misinterpreted as warranting a red card due to so-called "modern football" standards is all of a result of the affect that VAR has had on the sport. If that's a red card, then football is DONE. I repeat DONE. If players can't clear out balls at full strength for worry that the follow through is going to hit an oncoming defender in a bad way, you might as well start wrapping players legs in bubble wrap.

In conclusion, this was definitely not a red, and arguably not even a yellow. Yellow only due to the impact that occurred, not due to the intent Tarkowski, not due to him making a dangerous challenge, it was a clearance kick for goodness sake, and certainly not due to a clearance kick follow through being a foul in the technical sense.

The sport is so lost in over reaction and being conditioned to be outraged due to VAR's existence and this situation only reinforces how farcical football is these days under the VAR induced lunacy.
Click to expand...

And it should be noted that MacAlister continued for the remainder of the game. According to the ESPN line-ups of the game which didn't show him being substituted.
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
The Tarkowski situation in the LiVARpool Everton match really highlights the extent in which VAR has harmed not only the sport itself but also the way that media pundits interpret situations and create phony outrage based on their own flawed thinking as a result of the VAR experiment.

The amount of outrage by the media over this is off the wall. And their outrage, almost in unanimously, is that VAR didn't reverse the on field decision of a yellow card and turn it into a straight red to send him off.

And in their over the top outrage over this, the term "modern football" keeps finding its way into their argument as they act oblivious as to why VAR didn't turn it into a red, barely mentioning that he "got to the ball" before the impact almost as an afterthought.

Here's one of many examples of the reaction to this situation :



The cognitive dissonance going on here as they feign outrage and misinterpret this situation is really bad. Mike Dean needs to take a vacation. The one guy tried to point out that he got to the ball but it largely fell on deaf ears.

This whole "modern football" narrative by the way is a direct result of VAR's existence, in that in a pre-VAR world no one would have batted an eye over the yellow card which was given. Now obviously, the boot to the man's calf was extremely dangerous to the player receiving such a blow, and the concern over the player receiving such an impact is certainly warranted. But that aside, as many pundits, while voicing their outrage over not sending the man off, have pointed out, in the good ol days that's probably not even considered a foul, let alone a card, considering that he not only "got" to the ball first, but managed to wind up and clear the ball which would cause the foot to be moving at a very high velocity. The LiVARpool defender got there late, and paid dearly for that.

But there was absolutely zero intent from Tarkowski to foul the man. He simply cleared the ball and on his follow through connected to the calf of the defender who was late getting there. To even call this a dangerous challenge would be a stretch. It was a clearance kick for goodness sake!

Tarkowski has every right to kick that ball as hard as he could, his follow through was perfectly normal. It wasn't a "high tackle" or anything like the things in which straight reds are supposedly given in "modern football". But here we go with the mainstream pundits going nuts over this, first in their interpretation of what happened, and then in criticizing VAR. And I'm as anti-VAR as it is, but it's no mystery why the VAR didn't upgrade the yellow to the red. Lost on all these media people, the fact that he was clearing the ball out and did nothing to warrant being sent off. Even a yellow is harsh on a perfectly good clearance that just so happen to result in a burtal impact to the calk of the defender. That was purely incidental, worrying as it was, and now we're hearing pundits calling for VAR to announce that they got this wrong, that he should have been sent off etc. And now there's speculation that this could result in PGMOL for the millionth time since VAR's been introduced making this sort of thing a red in the future.

All the outrage associated with this situation is how it's being completely misinterpreted as warranting a red card due to so-called "modern football" standards is all of a result of the affect that VAR has had on the sport. If that's a red card, then football is DONE. I repeat DONE. If players can't clear out balls at full strength for worry that the follow through is going to hit an oncoming defender in a bad way, you might as well start wrapping players legs in bubble wrap.

In conclusion, this was definitely not a red, and arguably not even a yellow. Yellow only due to the impact that occurred, not due to the intent Tarkowski, not due to him making a dangerous challenge, it was a clearance kick for goodness sake, and certainly not due to a clearance kick follow through being a foul in the technical sense.

The sport is so lost in over reaction and being conditioned to be outraged due to VAR's existence and this situation only reinforces how farcical football is these days under the VAR induced lunacy.
Click to expand...


The over reaction is caused by social media and games being played nearly every day, before this may have been debated on MOTD for a couple mins or forgotten altogether - now we have endless channels, refs in a studio, twitter sharing clips on every incident - it’s not the fault of Var which you admit was right not to get involved - it’s the constant outrage that’s being amplified all over the place all the time. With or without VAR this is a problem in ‘modern football’ it was happening just prior Var with the rise of social media.
 
BlueHammer85 said:
The over reaction is caused by social media and games being played nearly every day, before this may have been debated on MOTD for a couple mins or forgotten altogether - now we have endless channels, refs in a studio, twitter sharing clips on every incident - it’s not the fault of Var which you admit was right not to get involved - it’s the constant outrage that’s being amplified all over the place all the time. With or without VAR this is a problem in ‘modern football’ it was happening just prior Var with the rise of social media.
Click to expand...
VAR is "modern football". At no point before VAR was introduced did football change drastically in a discernible way that caused pundits to differentiate between the game they know (or knew) to a different game where fouls aren't what they were anymore.

You keep harping on the social media aspect, as if we should just ignore all the controversy we're seeing on the pitch, and from the way in which the media pundits (on television, not on social media) react to such controversies, controversies like this that did not exist before VAR, before football all of a sudden became so-called "modern football".

And if VAR didn't usher in "modern football", as you seem to believe, that "modern football" started before VAR, then when exactly did "modern football" start? What changed so drastically before VAR was introduced in your mind that caused football to supposedly evolve into so-called "modern football"? And I'm well aware that plenty of things changed before VAR that you could point to. HDTVs, even social media, of course the sport continuously evolved over time in various and subtle ways, however the big "she-bang" that caused everyone to refer to football now as 'modern football" (more than anything else by a wide margin) was clearly the introduction of VAR and all the drastic changes that came along with it.

You can harp on about social media all you want, but it's becoming clear that you're using social media generally as a blanket excuse to cover for the very apparent problems that VAR itself is causing. And how the sports media pundits have reacted to something like this is very clearly due to what VAR has done, rather than social media. Don't get me wrong, when VAR causes disruptions and jaw dropping controversies, social media reacts and there's way more outrage than there was pre-social media, but that's merely a symptom of the problem rather than the cause of the problem, the culprit being very clearly VAR.

In this particular scenario I really haven't paid any attention to the "social media" response, and I doubt it's as unified in how the common fan would interpret this situation as some other examples of VAR controversies in recent years. I'd imagine there's a healthy split between fans on if this should have ben a red card, as opposed to many other VAR controversies when fans are unanimous in agreement in condemning VAR when they come to a wrong decision following a review. But of course much of the social media reaction to this situation or any situation these days is largely a reaction to how the match day commentators react to it in real-time, and then in the days following how the media pundits (on television, Sky Sports, BBC, ESPN, etc) react it to. In this scenario, as maybe opposed to some other VAR controversies in recent years, it is the sports media pundits reaction that has the potential to be very influential on how social media reacts.

So what I would say to you Hammer, is put aside the social media reaction for a moment, and consider how the pundits have reacted it to, in their echo chamber, and the phony outrage that they have generated on their own and in how we both agree that they have in concert, in group think with one another, in their echo chamber have misinterpreted the situation fundamentally and are generating phony outrage, when in this case VAR was correct in not upgrading the yellow to a red, but how all the times in the past that VAR has messed up has caused them to react in such a way. And this is not a matter of opinion or interpretation, it is in their own arguments when they are calling for him to be red carded. In that MIke Dean clip that I posted, the one guy said as much that he didn't blame the ref for calling a yellow, only his outrage was caused by the fact that VAR exists and in his mind (wrongly I might add) that because we have VAR, because we could see the impact in such detail, that in his mind (again wrongly) that warrants a red card simply because VAR exists. This is the fatal flaw of VAR, in that it's creating controversy here solely because VAR exists and because everyone, but the pundits in particular have become so fixated on certain situations. And this phenomena, as in this specific reaction to this specific situation, their reaction to it has nothing to do with social media. It's the pundit reaction and interpretation that often is the catalyst for the social media reaction.
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
VAR is "modern football". At no point before VAR was introduced did football change drastically in a discernible way that caused pundits to differentiate between the game they know (or knew) to a different game where fouls aren't what they were anymore.

You keep harping on the social media aspect, as if we should just ignore all the controversy we're seeing on the pitch, and from the way in which the media pundits (on television, not on social media) react to such controversies, controversies like this that did not exist before VAR, before football all of a sudden became so-called "modern football".

And if VAR didn't usher in "modern football", as you seem to believe, that "modern football" started before VAR, then when exactly did "modern football" start? What changed so drastically before VAR was introduced in your mind that caused football to supposedly evolve into so-called "modern football"? And I'm well aware that plenty of things changed before VAR that you could point to. HDTVs, even social media, of course the sport continuously evolved over time in various and subtle ways, however the big "she-bang" that caused everyone to refer to football now as 'modern football" (more than anything else by a wide margin) was clearly the introduction of VAR and all the drastic changes that came along with it.

You can harp on about social media all you want, but it's becoming clear that you're using social media generally as a blanket excuse to cover for the very apparent problems that VAR itself is causing. And how the sports media pundits have reacted to something like this is very clearly due to what VAR has done, rather than social media. Don't get me wrong, when VAR causes disruptions and jaw dropping controversies, social media reacts and there's way more outrage than there was pre-social media, but that's merely a symptom of the problem rather than the cause of the problem, the culprit being very clearly VAR.

In this particular scenario I really haven't paid any attention to the "social media" response, and I doubt it's as unified in how the common fan would interpret this situation as some other examples of VAR controversies in recent years. I'd imagine there's a healthy split between fans on if this should have ben a red card, as opposed to many other VAR controversies when fans are unanimous in agreement in condemning VAR when they come to a wrong decision following a review. But of course much of the social media reaction to this situation or any situation these days is largely a reaction to how the match day commentators react to it in real-time, and then in the days following how the media pundits (on television, Sky Sports, BBC, ESPN, etc) react it to. In this scenario, as maybe opposed to some other VAR controversies in recent years, it is the sports media pundits reaction that has the potential to be very influential on how social media reacts.

So what I would say to you Hammer, is put aside the social media reaction for a moment, and consider how the pundits have reacted it to, in their echo chamber, and the phony outrage that they have generated on their own and in how we both agree that they have in concert, in group think with one another, in their echo chamber have misinterpreted the situation fundamentally and are generally phony outrage, when in this case VAR was correct in not upgrading the yellow to a red, but how all the times in the past that VAR has messed up has caused them to react in such a way. And this is not a matter of opinion or interpretation, it is in their own arguments when they are calling for him to be red carded. In that MIke Dean clip that I posted, the one guy said as much that he didn't blame the ref for calling a yellow, only his outrage was caused by the fact that VAR exists and in his mind (wrongly I might add) that because we have VAR, because we could see the impact in such detail, that in his mind (again wrongly) that warrants a red card simply because VAR exists. This is the fatal flaw of VAR, in that it's creating controversy here solely because VAR exists and because everyone, but the pundits in particular have become so fixated on certain situations. And this phenomena, as in this specific reaction to this specific situation, their reaction to it has nothing to do with social media. It's the pundit reaction and interpretation that often is the catalyst for the social media reaction.
Click to expand...

You’re ranting about VAR on this particular incident when 1) it never got involved and 2) you agree it shouldn’t get involved - so the other basis of your argument is the outrage from pundits - are you not forgetting incidences of whether it should be a red or not was always debated, at length in the MOTD studio - we just have more ways to see more pundits to have an opinion.
My basis for my argument is that’s it now not debated in a few mins on MOTD, it’s debated on Sky Sports panelist’s, a former Ref in the studio, on Twitter, on Facebook, on Bluemoon, on practically everyone’s iPhone that they’re glued to 24/7 , every red card controversy is being showed to us from every angle at all times and we are seeing endless clips of it, now with also fixtures all over the place, Monday night games live, midweek games live, Friday night, soccer Saturday - this is modern football.
VAR is simply a tool for Referees to get a second look or get a ref to get involved if he’s missed something, more accuracy if a player is offside , if a ball has crossed the line - on the whole it works.
Problem is there will always be controversial decisions- fans are tribal and disingenuous and will argue white is black, black is white all day long.
Vast majority of games there’s no major controversy but if there is one out of a whole weekend’s fixture list then this is highlighted to the 9th degree, endlessly debated, how var has killed the game bla bla bla - end of day some just love moaning and now they have endless platforms to do this. It's not a modern football problem, it's a modern fan problem. This thread is proof.
 
Last edited:
BlueHammer85 said:
The over reaction is caused by social media and games being played nearly every day, before this may have been debated on MOTD for a couple mins or forgotten altogether - now we have endless channels, refs in a studio, twitter sharing clips on every incident - it’s not the fault of Var which you admit was right not to get involved - it’s the constant outrage that’s being amplified all over the place all the time. With or without VAR this is a problem in ‘modern football’ it was happening just prior Var with the rise of social media.
Click to expand...
Sly are culpable in this regard. Both Neville and Spitty are shit stirrers when it comes ti certain players or teams committing fouls, but will happily gloss over far worse when it suits.
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
The Tarkowski situation in the LiVARpool Everton match really highlights the extent in which VAR has harmed not only the sport itself but also the way that media pundits interpret situations and create phony outrage based on their own flawed thinking as a result of the VAR experiment.

The amount of outrage by the media over this is off the wall. And their outrage, almost in unanimously, is that VAR didn't reverse the on field decision of a yellow card and turn it into a straight red to send him off.

And in their over the top outrage over this, the term "modern football" keeps finding its way into their argument as they act oblivious as to why VAR didn't turn it into a red, barely mentioning that he "got to the ball" before the impact almost as an afterthought.

Here's one of many examples of the reaction to this situation :



The cognitive dissonance going on here as they feign outrage and misinterpret this situation is really bad. Mike Dean needs to take a vacation. The one guy tried to point out that he got to the ball but it largely fell on deaf ears.

This whole "modern football" narrative by the way is a direct result of VAR's existence, in that in a pre-VAR world no one would have batted an eye over the yellow card which was given. Now obviously, the boot to the man's calf was extremely dangerous to the player receiving such a blow, and the concern over the player receiving such an impact is certainly warranted. But that aside, as many pundits, while voicing their outrage over not sending the man off, have pointed out, in the good ol days that's probably not even considered a foul, let alone a card, considering that he not only "got" to the ball first, but managed to wind up and clear the ball which would cause the foot to be moving at a very high velocity. The LiVARpool defender got there late, and paid dearly for that.

But there was absolutely zero intent from Tarkowski to foul the man. He simply cleared the ball and on his follow through connected to the calf of the defender who was late getting there. To even call this a dangerous challenge would be a stretch. It was a clearance kick for goodness sake!

Tarkowski has every right to kick that ball as hard as he could, his follow through was perfectly normal. It wasn't a "high tackle" or anything like the things in which straight reds are supposedly given in "modern football". But here we go with the mainstream pundits going nuts over this, first in their interpretation of what happened, and then in criticizing VAR. And I'm as anti-VAR as it is, but it's no mystery why the VAR didn't upgrade the yellow to the red. Lost on all these media people, the fact that he was clearing the ball out and did nothing to warrant being sent off. Even a yellow is harsh on a perfectly good clearance that just so happen to result in a burtal impact to the calk of the defender. That was purely incidental, worrying as it was, and now we're hearing pundits calling for VAR to announce that they got this wrong, that he should have been sent off etc. And now there's speculation that this could result in PGMOL for the millionth time since VAR's been introduced making this sort of thing a red in the future.

All the outrage associated with this situation is how it's being completely misinterpreted as warranting a red card due to so-called "modern football" standards is all of a result of the affect that VAR has had on the sport. If that's a red card, then football is DONE. I repeat DONE. If players can't clear out balls at full strength for worry that the follow through is going to hit an oncoming defender in a bad way, you might as well start wrapping players legs in bubble wrap.

In conclusion, this was definitely not a red, and arguably not even a yellow. Yellow only due to the impact that occurred, not due to the intent Tarkowski, not due to him making a dangerous challenge, it was a clearance kick for goodness sake, and certainly not due to a clearance kick follow through being a foul in the technical sense.

The sport is so lost in over reaction and being conditioned to be outraged due to VAR's existence and this situation only reinforces how farcical football is these days under the VAR induced lunacy.
Click to expand...

Look, it was a bad challenge and worthy of a red card but fuck me it’s almost on a fucking loop on ssn. They’ve asked all and sundry for their opinion on it and forensically examined it. Just because it’s the fucking dippers! It’ll be in PM’s questions in the commons tomorrow.
 
plattlanebenches said:
Look, it was a bad challenge and worthy of a red card but fuck me it’s almost on a fucking loop on ssn. They’ve asked all and sundry for their opinion on it and forensically examined it. Just because it’s the fucking dippers! It’ll be in PM’s questions in the commons tomorrow.
Click to expand...

I can see the argument either side and can see why VAR left it to the ref.

what i like to challenge is.. what if he missed the ball and made that challenge and the ref didn't send him off - how can we just pretend we don't have a system whereby a ref could have some tech help to make sure that would be a Red. It would be ludicrous not to use VAR in these instances.
 
plattlanebenches said:
Look, it was a bad challenge and worthy of a red card but fuck me it’s almost on a fucking loop on ssn. They’ve asked all and sundry for their opinion on it and forensically examined it. Just because it’s the fucking dippers! It’ll be in PM’s questions in the commons tomorrow.
Click to expand...

Trump will have an opinion.
It was fucking dreadful tackle, to be fair. I don't care who it was against…
 
The authorities are basically free to claim the tech "wasn't working" at a vital point during games due to the system not being truly independently audited.

The PiGMOL current method of transparency is basically 'Trust me, bro', and that simply isn't good enough in a multi-$Billon industry.
 
Trevor Morley's Tache said:
The authorities are basically free to claim the tech "wasn't working" at a vital point during games due to the system not being truly independently audited.

The PiGMOL current method of transparency is basically 'Trust me, bro', and that simply isn't good enough in a multi-$Billon industry.
Click to expand...
The critical fault with var is that the pitch referees are employed and controlled by the same entity as the VAR referees so neither wants to be seen calling the other one out.

If I may dare to be conspiratorial (because fuck me, you get pelters on here for that), one may suspect this is deliberate for the obvious reasons.

The two entities need to be split up.
 
Mr Grumpy said:
The critical fault with var is that the pitch referees are employed and controlled by the same entity as the VAR referees so neither wants to be seen calling the other one out.

If I may dare to be conspiratorial (because fuck me, you get pelters on here for that), one may suspect this is deliberate for the obvious reasons.

The two entities need to be split up.
Click to expand...

I think there's something in what you say. It doesn't need to be seen as a “conspiracy” though. I think it's just instinctive corporate solidarity at work, it happens in a lot of professions when an “outsider” is seen to be looking on.
 
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