VAR Discussion Thread

Gordyola said:
I said they would be used to break momentum

As respect to time wasting new regulations on getting the ball back in play are being introduced for next season, similar to the GK holding on to the ball for a maximum time

"Footballers complaining about most decisions"
Not many of those instances is where an intervention would be used, surely it would be limited to what VAR looks at now?

So, how would suggest it would work?
Take the game at Leeds as an example where would you suggest that both teams would have used them?

You think that there would be 4 interventions used up before the game ends? The consequentially delay element would be significant.
Click to expand...
I haven’t seen a full roll out of the plan, but my comments are based on an assumption that VAR only looks at something when the team asks it to. Not an assumption that the teams get two appeals in addition to everything else that VAR already looks at, which would be worse than what we have now.

So, in my assumption, if a player goes down in the box and it’s waived away, the attacking team could ask for a VAR review. Alternatively if the penalty was given, the team defending could ask for a review.
 
Xhavenjoe said:
I thought I heard Neville say during the arsenal match that he was looking at the " foul" on Sanchez for the Timber goal on the VAR tv screen. I may have misheard him but he was able to say that the goal was going to stand long before it was announced
Click to expand...
Even i knew that goal was going to stand and I wasn't anywhere near a VAR monitor.

Sanchez was like a pissed up seal at the sea life centre.
 
plattlanebenches said:
Won’t make any difference to the current rule. They’ll take 5 mins zooming in and out to see any daylight. All a load of bollocks.
Click to expand...
I could stomach that though. If that is Haaland in Yellow there and they are looking for "daylight" i could accept that in the current law he is 99 per cent offside. He is gaining a lot of advantage in that clip.

The current law as it stands are looking for players being 1 per cent offside or a toenail. That's what's pissing me off. A striker being a stud offside isn't really gaining an advantage over the defender IMO.
 
Brightwell’s left peg said:
Exactly this. It simply moves the line we all argue over further forward. We’ll still be arguing whether there was daylight at the point of the pass.

I hate it with every fibre of my being.

Only sensible idea I’ve seen (moving in the right direction) is to limit to 2 VAR interventions per team. I presume if you request an intervention and are proven correct, you’d get to keep (similar to Cricket)
Click to expand...
last 10 mminutes of games will be chaos. managers will save them up then launch ball challange comes into play
 
2 Absolute howlers from Var last night and yet no posts on here about them.
This is how bad Var is, nobody is suprised and no one can be bothered mentioning the fuck ups.

Stop all these new rules they are bringing in and just scrap Var, it is not fit for purpose.
 
Who knew inconsequential contact was a thing before tonight? Both the keeper taking him out and the follow through missing the ball inconsequential
 
Stonewall penalty for Brighton not given tonight for grabbing in the area, same ref who gave a soft as shit one for the rags at the weekend.

Arsenal got away with 2 at the weekend and 1 tonight too while we have to get shot to get a decision. Strange.
 
We all knew it was coming....... as soon as official drinks breaks were to be allowed in the world cup, we said it would be turned into 4 quarters for ad breaks.
How long before we break for an advert during a Var review ?
And the best bit ? If we are still on an ad break when the decision is made, the fans in the stadium will have to wait.

It will happen, the only decision is when.
 
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