VAR

It will cause more harm than good so just sack it off, it's ****e ffs.

 

What's been ****e about it in this tournament?

 

No way man....I can't stand people like Neymar getting away with things..makes me hate the game.

 

Be a lover not a hater spurlock.

 

The back pass was one I was quite resistant to at the time, and it turned out well. And the case for goal line technology in inarguable.


Var is **** though. Adds nothing, solves nothing, just undermines the confidence of the officials. Instead of having three blokes on the pitch/touchline calling it as they see it, and occasionally guessing, now we can cut to some blokes in a studio, also guessing, but from more angles. After which the ref is then still supposed to make his subjective decision, based partly on instinct, partly on experience, partly on guesswork.

 

But it's not being used by the officials. I don't see their confidence being undermined, instead I see them not even bothering to use it. The Swiss game yesterday, the Harry Kane incidents. It highlights they miss things and there's something there to help them and they're not using it. Hence why I think if teams had one review each, ppl might see how positive it can be.

 

Surely a review system is at risk of abuse?

 

It has been used though. It was used to wrongly award Australia a penalty, it was used in the England game following the Harry Kane wrestling incident, and the penalty still wasn't given.

The best refereed games for me have been the ones with decisive refs who haven't used it.

 

Agree about the aussie decision but it's only as good as the official using it. There's some right **** officials in world cup tournaments. Always has been.

Agree to disagree on this, but I honestly believe given time it will do more good than bad.

 

Spot on.

 

Foam at free-kicks

 

The operators

 

I think the problem is that the game gets restarted too quickly for them to review and get the word to the ref in time. Which is why I'd like each team's captain to be allowed 1 review per match.

 

I think they've just tried to do too much too quickly with it. It's suppose to make officiating more consistent but they seem to be checking everything in one game and minimal in another. It's almost like Fifa haven't informed the referees exactly what they should be doing.

 

That remains daft. The issue isn't that players can't judge the distance it is that they deliberately stand nearer to prevent a quick take. The foam effectively condones that.

 

nah foam is great. At least the free kick takers have a chance now. Before the opposition would inch closer all the time and they'd be like 7 or 8 yards away.

At least this way the ref has a marker.

As for condoning not preventing a quick free, this is normally when the opposition is close enough for a direct cross or free where people normally prefer that chance.

It still wouldn't stop people standing in the way anyway as the refs don't really enforce it properly with cards

 

How does it "remain daft" when it still works?

 

Because the change that is needed is to get the defence back 10 yards away quickly rather than to allow time for it to be organised. It is better than doing nothing but not the right solution.
We need sanctions that mean that foul play generally leads to a worse outcome which would then mean there would be no incentive to break them

 

Your last point is exactly right. If the law was actually enforced we wouldn't need the foam...

 

How they going to influence that? I don't do yellow cards, that's a impossible job for the referee to implement.


The foam isn't to get set pieces done quicker btw, it's intention is to get the wall (as near as damn it) ten yards away. Pretty sure you'll already know that but why let facts get in the way of a good old fashion moan