I think VAR has got more correct so far than incorrect, personally. Tonight was a bad ref, not VARs fault. I’m all for it still. There have been so many good calls already (that would have been missed pre-VAR), that I think it’s worth persevering with.
I think we’ll have to agree to disagree. IMO it’s been rushed far too quickly into use on the biggest stage. A lot more revision of how and when it’s used required and far more training for the teams reviewing incidents (clear and obvious, clear and obvious, clear and obvious) and finally with how the ref should use it.
Fair play. I know what you're saying, and I agree to an extent. The system isn't perfect. But I think it's better to get it into the game as soon as possible, because it is bloody necessary, and has been for the last twenty years or so. If there are a few dodgy episodes, well, so be it. It'll just have to be tweaked as we go. The dream for me, is that it will begin being used retrospectively to punish all the cheats and divers. Probably won't ever happen though.
I'm a bit confused reading some of these comments on the match. Iran's Penalty was clearly not a penalty but the rest of the decisions seemed to be correct for portugal's game. Portugals penalty was clearly a penalty and one that wasn't given to start with, Ronaldo was taken out. not sure how thats controversial unless people are trying to say it wasnt in the box? And the yellow card was deserved for a reckless challenge (with the ball even being there) resulting in Ronaldo accidentally elbowing somebody. reckless is a yellow. My biggest frustration is once again with the hand ball rule in the box rather than VAR.
I think the ref got all 3 decisions right!!! In real time!!!! Neither was a penalty and the Ronaldo thing was a nothing. So without VAR he gets all 3 decisions correct. Then he got them wrong after being "told" to review the decisions.
Can you tell me how Portugal l one was wrong? I really don't see what people are claiming makes that not a penalty? It was an mistimed uncontrolled flying shoulder barge with no intent to win the ball and a leg stuck out in front of him for good measure.
Yeah I don't see why people are unsure on the Ronaldo pen, Lawro kept saying he wasn't in control of the ball but I'm pretty sure that doesn't mean you can absolutely clatter into him without giving away a foul I don't think the booking was correct though and felt like the ref felt pressured to just do something cos of var.
I haven’t watched much of the World Cup to date, so have missed out on the VAR controversy. One thought comes to mind. In cricket, when a decision is referred to the third umpire, I believe it is the third umpire who makes the final decision, as to “In or out”. Would it be better for football if they followed the same route, allowing the extra official, who will be under less pressure than the man in the middle, to make the cold, calculated decision required?
What you also get in cricket now is the reluctance of umpires to make some decisions. They refer the blooming obvious to the video ref. At least I thought that VAR would cut out the cheating and GBH on strikers....but it's actually worse this year in the World Cup. It's as if they know that the video refs will be so busy looking out for marginal decisions that they will miss a defender slam dunking another player....Sorry, guys....missed that because I was watching an eyelash touch someone's shoulder.
Now I've calmed down....being only half way up the wall at the moment....it's all been too early for VAR. It's not the technology, but the need for clarification of when it is referred to. It's use should be minimal... such as.offside/onside once a goal has been given (and if a decision can't be reached almost instantly the on-field decision should stand because it is obviously marginal). For penalties....go with the ref's decision unless blatantly wrong....matters of opinion don't count....would you bet your house on it, video ref....if not, move on. Better leave it...I'm on the ceiling again.
Ronaldo had both feet off the ground before he made contact with their player. He had already decided he was going over and then put his thigh into the opponent.
Until they invent a machine that reads minds, no one can ever be certain of a players thoughts. Where is the line between deliberately creating a penalty and going over easily when you have been fouled. On rare occasions it will be completely obvious, but on many occasions it will be 50:50 or 60:40...on those occasions refs just have to use their experience in real time. We know ourselves how many decisions divide a forum or a TV panel.
The question is that can a system that uses multiple camera angles, slo-mo and freeze frame technology come to a better decision than 3 humans using only their eyes and have a split second to make the correct call based on their position on the pitch at the time? (which is not always the perfect view). The answer to that must be yes although it is still subject to human error of course and there will still be debates about it. To my mind it should only be used in real match changing situations to help to get the fairest result. I think the technology is too new to be used in something as big as a World Cup and needs to be tested for several years first.
The Iranian player put his thigh over Ronaldo's waist. That's Ronaldo's center of gravity. its not physically possible to do what you're saying. other than that its actually irrelevant to whether its a foul in this case. Ronaldo had no way of evading him. the law takes into account the foul, not the victim. if the only reason there was contact was because ronaldo left a trailing leg, sure. but thats certainly not the case here. contact was going to happen whether Ronaldo was going down or not. Personally i think Ronaldo was expecting a late lunge that he was preparing to jump but didnt expect the Iranian player to jump into him. but as i said that's irrelevant as to whether its a foul or not. (edit: and watching the video again Ronaldo had is leading leg on the ground)
Hawkeye has changed Tennis and Cricket very much for the better (remember Johnny Mac's rants?..) although it had its' detractors in the early days. All these debates about VAR will be forgotten in a few years IMO.
Can't consider Tennis a fair example as there are no matters of opinion...it is yes or no. And the players are aware that there is a degree of error in the system....those really close decisions about in or out could go either way...but they have agreed to accept it on the basis that it will possibly even out over a game. Nothing like football which is often about opinions....and even about players' thoughts....was it deliberate or not? And cricket is a game with lots of natural pauses between action....so hold ups have no effect...and even add to the interest.
But my general point is that technology is much more likely to determine a close match changing decision than humans out on the pitch who only have one split second chance to decide.
Some people are just naturally conservative and suspicious of change, VAR will improve football eventually and it will take a few years for people to accept it and for it to function properly. As it stands football clubs have been relegated by shocking referee decisions before. *We would probably have won at Wembley last year with VAR
I think there will be occasions where that is true, but there are also occasions when slo-mo gets it wrong. Look at cricket for low catches....the distortion is well known for denying players a catch when the player knows he got it. In that case, video replays introduce a doubt where there wasn't one. I just think this world cup is too soon for this.
