No... I'm saying challenges only. Ref made a decision and the managers team have opportunity to challenge it if they think it's wrong. Ref goes to sideline and views the replays then makes a call. Even at today's terrible timings that's 6 minutes. (It shouldn't be as ref doesn't spend 3 of those debating whether to go across or not).
But then if one team has 4 contentious decisions in one match and the other has only one then it's not really fair still is it and the issue isn't solved.
Yes...that 2 or 3 minutes shouldn't of happened...you can't score on a break if a penalty was awarded correctly in the first place... you can't say we'd rather a team profited from cheating just so game continuity is kept surely? And breaks tend to be a lot less that 2 minutes by their very nature lol
So what sort of time limit would you suggest for that? And I'll try and phrase my question a bit better, if any cards are shown to end those 2/3 minutes and then it's pulled back is that card rescinded?
How so? If they are correct they keep the challenge for all 4? If the other team has just 1 reason to challenge then they have well, one reason to challenge. No system is perfect...but the main gripe seems to be delay of game...as it is there's pressure on refs to review every decision under the sun. The challenge system ...theres only one unless the ref is ****e.. which by the way the challenge system highlights painfully. If a ref gets challenges 4 times in one match and is proven wrong every time he should be demoted.
The yanks put the time back on. I'd say you would probably need a descending clock rather than natural but would that really **** up the Game?
Up to the powers that be lol. Personally? A fouls a foul...cheating so like an off the ball inccidebt you can get one. I would say that the foul would likely stop the game so the review could happen anyway lol
But they might believe they are correct and the ref disagrees, many decisions aren't black and white (which is my biggest gripe btw) so one ref will give a different decision to another. So a team might throw their flag down in the 14th minute for a handball similar to one from the week before which was given. This ref might not give it as his definition of intentional might vary from the previous ref. Therefore that team lose their challenge though they were well within their rights and if they get a couple more dodgy decisions then they won't get reviewed so it hasn't solved the problem has it?
Yeah but if it was a second yellow foul but the game is brought back for the penalty then the second yellow challenge didn't technically happen so would that player stay on the pitch? Not trying to grill ya btw mate lol just curious as you seem to have thought about it and my biggest gripe with VAR is those who just think it will automatically work without considering all of the variables, of which there are **** loads imo.
TBF the only thing I admire about Yank sport is if you pay for 90mins play, you get 90mins play because the clock stops when play stops.
But none of the versions will make it perfect including the status quo of no system at all. This is what I find bizarre with the football community... pundits fans etc...we are a bitchy negative bunch... melodramatic even. "Oh look it doesn't deal with this so let's give up" (not directing that at you personslly...i wouldn't want the system tried tonight as it disrupted the game too much) But finding a balance where there's a chance to rights wrong with as small a delay as possible has to be a good thing. It will never be perfect. I jyst find it strange that during these attempts people like Shearer literally state is rather have the old way after 2 or 3 matches trying it out. It's an all or nothing thing I find daft. Play around with it...find the best mix then settle on that.
Well that was a crock of ****e. Absolute shambles from seconds after Firmino's opening goal until the end. Klopp obviously isn't the perfect manager and will face some deserved criticism, but I still stand behind him. He does, however, have to seriously look at what coaching (or lack of) is happening with our defense. They're not bad players. Moreno was good at Sevilla, VVD obviously is very good, Matip played well over in Germany and Gomez had some great performances for England (particularly against Brazil). Even Lovren, TAA and Robertson have had history of good performances. I'll concede that the keepers are gash. But fundamentally, they're not terrible players so something is badly wrong tactically or on the coaching front. Midfield is abysmal and, imo, is the biggest issue with our squad. It's so poor it's laughable. Hendo's been going downhill since his injuries, Can was always bang average apart from that fluke wonder goal everyone jumped on board with and one or two big physical performances against City, Milner is Milner - average player but works his socks off, never going to win a game for us, Gini is a water carrier, a more physical and less technical version of Allen who ties the team together, the rest aren't even worth talking about. Not good enough. If we go this January window having sold our best midfielder and bringing no one in to replace or add to the midfield positions, we're asking to drop out of the CL spots and we have to stay in there to keep on building - financially and reputation wise. This waiting for plan A player and no one else will do will bite Klopp and the management on the arse. Regarding VAR; I like it, just needs tweaking. Another season and we could have been destroyed not only by West Brom but by the refs as well! I agree with mic'ing the refs up to the stadium speakers (it'll also cut down on players mouthing off and speaking out of turn) to justify decisions. Ref in the centre circle should be making all of the decisions and can call on the 4th official for assistance when necessary for the big calls (red cards, penalties, tight offsides) The principle idea is that teams just play on until a call is made, non of this stop and appeal ****. Offside goals will be called back in seconds (see the next point) and for the others, the game tends to stop anyway. It takes seconds for live TV to show replays so can't be hard to give the 4th official an iPad which shows the same. 4th official can speak in the refs ear and suggest he reviews a decision if necessary, ref doesn't have to oblige. I also agree with having a limited challenge system for anything missed by the ref. I was against this idea at first, but I think having it so that the manager/captain have to appeal certain decisions will result in a bit more honesty from the players. Imagine the manager challenging a penalty decision not given only for it to turn out his player dived. Player gets retrospectively booked, team wastes one of their challenges and the manager looks like a mug. Lastly, stop the damn clock! It's not bloody hard. It's not stealing ideas from rugby or american football, it's just common sense. Put it down to 30mins if you have to, but it's silly letting the clock run for decisions and injuries which is never properly added back on. Throw ins, freekicks, penalties and goal kicks are unnecessary though.
As you can probably tell () I'm not keen on it at all but if it is to come in I would follow these basic set of rules: - Only the officials can initiate a review. - The final decision rests with the official on the pitch. - Only clear errors should be overturned, nothing too subjective. - Refs should be discouraged from using it reguarly. - None of this reviewing every single goal bollocks. - Players asking for a decision to be reviewed should be booked immediately and refs should take a no warning, no tolerance approach to this. - Keep it to basic decisions. Even then I'd still rather not have it as I don't understand how far you can look back to look for a mistake in awarding a goal for example. Could be farcical with offsides too as discussed on here the other day.
Take yank football... once the next snap happens it can't be reviewed... Not perfect when replays show it was a blatant wrong call. But it stops the delay of game if the team is smart enough. Also they still have complaints that certain things can't be reviewed when it clearly lead to a important moment like a touch down. So not perfect but allows a chance to correct things as best as possible. As has been said more opportunity in yanks sports as they are stop start. It's why I like the challenge system as it's most likely to stop that in football. Not perfect but in games where literally a club could lose multi millions on one crap decision in a cup or being relegated it's got to be better than nothing.
Refs should be constantly reviewing and discussing prior decisions with each other, weekly ideally, but at least every month. Almost like how law follows precedent. If a ref gave handball for a ball popping up in the air from 1yard away and he has no time to react, other refs when reviewing that decision should either call it as being an incorrect call, or back him up and all go with that decision. Right now, they all seem to be able to do what they like as long as it's their interpretation of the rules because, as pundits say, that's "part of football" or, "that's what makes football football" (load of ****)
For me when it comes to inconsistencies then it's because too many decisions are down to interpretation. Now it's obviously difficult to eradicate that full stop but where possible I would change laws to make them black and white. Take offside, try and get rid of this interfering with play nonsense. If you're in the 18 yard box, or on the pitch even, then you're interfering in play in some capacity imo.
