The BBC Football website are showing a page from the FIFA U20 World Cup in South Korea where there was a controversial decision made by the trialled VARS system. Have a vote on whether you think it served its purpose. The vote is on the BBC webpage: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40202208 You have until 11pm to have a go.
Honestly cant see that as a penalty. Maybe I'm missing something. The ref has a split second to make his decision in real time, and it seems he made a split second decision on the replay too! I want video technology, but not if it's used in this manner* *Unless ofc it was a penalty and my eyes are deceiving me.
He's not. He's shown the findings. He either agrees or doesn't. Don't think as yet that they can overrule him.
Yes, I must admit, it isn't that fantastic. If one was showing an advert for Video Assisted Refereeing I wouldn't be choosing that example. But this is the very stuff that has to be sorted before this technology can go ahead. It works way more of the time than it doesn't, that I do know. But I think, in this case, it undid a perfectly OK decision. Consistency and interpretation of the rules needs hardening up, or this sort of thing could undermine VARs.
Video technology will help prevent obvious bad decisions, but will not end controversy as many decisions are just based on opinion....and that will continue with the use of video evidence. In fact it may just increase arguments...as anyone who has watched close catches in cricket will tell you. In these situations, you might as well go with the eye of an experienced ref. However, you can't have one without the other, so expect a few easy decisions to be made decisively, more that could be really decided by the toss of a coin, and a few that will have you tearing your hair out.