If it only gets one in ten right that means it is getting nine out of ten wrong and overturning correct decisions by the referees or failing to correct a mistake of the refs ! Farcical.
I quite like that too.I still like the idea the manager or captain has 1 or 2 appeals in the whole match and the ref reviews on his advice. Probably some flaws in this though.
In rugby and football the official makes a decision and then sends it up to tv (in cricket the player has the referral decision). Only then do they change the decision if there is an obvious decision. Because the tv and match going fans see the same images, there is a lot less chance of a bent decision.No im Not talking about offside s which VAR can be used correctly for as with where fouls take place. I'm talking about subjective penalty decisions which are a matter if opinion and in a very high percentage of those that i have seen VAR has got it wrong ( in my opinion ) which is why it can't work for subjective decisions.
But... that's nonsense in any form you look at it simply cos it's... subjective!!
A game with no VAR where the ref gives or doesn't give a pen is based on their 'subjective' opinion of how that situation arrived, so your point holds no logic!!
VAR, at least, tries to put together the facts, not opinion...
Eh ? There' s nothing subjective about offside or where an incident took place. They are 100 per cent black and white and the only things that VAR should be used for. Everything else is subjective.
Nails it.Sums up my thoughts nicely;
https://www.newscientist.com/articl...ess-video-assisted-refereeing-experiment-now/
Could managers abuse this as a time wasting tactic ?
Other than that I don’t see many downsides
On the Argentinian non penalty, in the studio they said that V.A.R. couldnt be used as play had restarted. So why doesnt the ref, who'd already decided it wasnt, not delay the goal kick. This is the bit that worries me as refs will screw us over in the premier.
Let's take that example to the nth degree...
A manager decides to use it in the 89th minute to hold a draw, proved wrong and his player goes down in the pen, under a real challenge in the 92nd minute of 93, & has the chance to win the game, but the ref's view is obscured and the linos aren't committed; how stupid do you think that manager feels about wasting a challenge and 3 points??
Nails it.
I'm loving the way they've repeatedly misused VAR in this World Cup - showing it up for the utter nonsense it is on the biggest stage.
He’s own fault for trying to time waste
Incorrect.
Especially now the the 'offside' position has changed as to how far a player is ahead of the defender to be called offside. 'Daylight' between the players is now the marker.
So... how much is 'daylight' now? Surely this is as subjective as it gets??
Can't understand how you don't see that?!
At least if that's your only argument, you're inclined to agree with the rest of what I've said!
Im not objecting to VAR. As a rugby league fan, I have embraced it. What happens if like this season, Aguero gets crunch in the box by young. The ball then goes out and the ref gives a goal kick, there is now no way to review it. Why is it so secretive.And that's where the appeal system beats this current nonsense.
The ball was out of play and the incident could have been reviewed as of the appeal.
How can you object if the ref decides to crack on with an incorrect decision??
I did not know the offside laws had changed to this daylight thing that's news to me but in any event offside is offside black and white no subjectivity at all whereas penalties are subjective so not sure what you mean. VAR should not be used for subjective decision is all I am saying and that should be easy to understand.
Im not objecting to VAR. As a rugby league fan, I have embraced it. What happens if like this season, Aguero gets crunch in the box by young. The ball then goes out and the ref gives a goal kick, there is now no way to review it. Why is it so secretive.
Like I have said before in rugby or cricket, if the official makes a mistake against your team, you just think he is incompetent where as in football he is bent/ biased.
No you ar missing the point that it seems that there is are loopholes around var in which a ref can decide the decision by letting the game to be restarted, nullifying var.100% agreed.
None of our City team tend to go in on rash challenges (or it's super rare), but the Red Scum still do.
This upcoming season will be their last year of that 'advantage'.
No you ar missing the point that it seems that there is are loopholes around var in which a ref can decide the decision by letting the game to be restarted, nullifying var.
The point I am making us that all of these so called "correct" decisions made by VAR overturns are just a subjective matter of opinion like yours, whereas in my opinion you are wrong. The Griezman one was never a pen he just fell over and the defender clearly played the ball first with no intention to foul. As many pundits said VAR failed to reverse the Argentina pen when they failed to reverse the decision as Neville said it was never a pen and I agree .Also Argentina should have had a pen and VAR failed to give it, etc,etc. These are just a few incidents and in my opinion this happens all the time with around 80per cent of VAR decisions. The point being that we are replacing a subjective decision by a ref with a subjective decision by machines and adding totally unnecessary delays. As for the Sterling one I do not agree that it would have been given. Maybe it would but again it was subjective. VAR is already being shown to be making many mistakes in the opinion of many purely because it is subjective. Therefore it is a complete waste if time for anything other than offsides and where incidents take place.
Clattenburg has explained why it's a pen according to the law and the spirit of the law.