He's not arguing in favour of VAR. He is arguing for argument's sake. He does it on various threads. He enjoys being contrary. He is more interested in his own logic than in football.Well VAR continues to have a long and futile effect on goals being scored. So as it stands, VAR will continue to plague the sport and drive fans mad, making my stance that the system needs to go much easier to articulate than those like yourself trying to argue that VAR should stay. I'd rather be on the side of tradition and normal football than then of trying to argue in support of this sham and detriment to the sport.
no betting money to be made in that
He's not arguing in favour of VAR. He is arguing for argument's sake. He does it on various threads. He enjoys being contrary. He is more interested in his own logic than in football.
This isn’t true. I know this because I know my motives aren’t as you describe.He's not arguing in favour of VAR. He is arguing for argument's sake. He does it on various threads. He enjoys being contrary. He is more interested in his own logic than in football.
Make even more off people who can't afford to lose moreYou mean it wasn’t corrupt before VAR ?
How does that work if in all likelihood the ref missed said incident in the first place and wont even be looking at it…The on-field referee should lead the discussion/VAR, NOT VAR leading the on-field referee.
You are, as always, being deliberately obtuse in order to swerve.
The on-field referee ASKS the VAR, "It looks like a good goal, but have I missed anything?", the VARs then inform him if they have found anything during their routine checks for all goals ie "We're checking for a possible offside (and probably identifies the player who is possibly offside)". On-field referee then leads the discussion which follows and dictates to the VAR which angles he would like to see (if he's going to view it himself) NOT the other way round. Ideally he would like to see as many different angles as possible to get as full a picture as possible, NOT the one VAR has chosen which best shows what THEY think they have seen. Subtle, but important difference! This surely isn't a difficult concept for people to get their head's around, is it? ONE referee, the head of the team, with several lower lever figures whose roles are to HELP him make the decisions he wishes to make, NOT 2/3 referees all putting their oars in and muddying the water.How does that work if in all likelihood the ref missed said incident in the first place and wont even be looking at it…
The on-field referee ASKS the VAR, "It looks like a good goal, but have I missed anything?", the VARs then inform him if they have found anything during their routine checks for all goals ie "We're checking for a possible offside (and probably identifies the player who is possibly offside)". On-field referee then leads the discussion which follows and dictates to the VAR which angles he would like to see (if he's going to view it himself) NOT the other way round. Ideally he would like to see as many different angles as possible to get as full a picture as possible, NOT the one VAR has chosen which best shows what THEY think they have seen. Subtle, but important difference! This surely isn't a difficult concept for people to get their head's around, is it? ONE referee, the head of the team, with several lower lever figures whose roles are to HELP him make the decisions he wishes to make, NOT 2/3 referees all putting their oars in and muddying the water.
100% agree, but in my opinion, the CL‘s referees bar is far too low on handball. Pretty much any handball is given as a foul, but it is totally pendant on where the referee is from.There is something wrong when a West Ham player gets away with a volley ball pass that leads to a goal, but City have one disallowed after the ball brushes the hand of Mahrez two plays before Rodri scores.