They need to look at rugby and cricket. Each team should have 3 wrong reviews. As soon as any player requests a review it should be granted up to 3 times. If the decision is overturned, they keep their review. The ref does t need to leave the pitch. The var ref can make the decision.
This world cup is becoming a joke with var .we as Spurs fans suffered last season with var ruining our games and it doesn't seem that fifa have learnt any lessons it's now become so consistent to be inconsistent if you know what I mean. All the so called football expert pundits are even arguing amongst theirselves about var decisions. It's made a mockery of the world cup might as well scrap it if we have refs who clearly don't know the rules or have taken bungs .
I'm sad about VAR because I really thought there was an opportunity to even the playing field and stop refs favouring (deliberately or otherwise) the "bigger teams". Unfortunately it turns out that things that were subjective are still subjective, hence in it's current form it isn't the answer. Would be helpful though if the ref didn't have to leave the pitch to review. Think that gives extra pressure to give the decision that the VAR people noticed. The senior ref could be off the field anyway and have the power to overrule the on field ref.
The difference between a player grabbing hold of another player and wrestling him to the ground NOT BEING A PENALTY and another moving back an arm and it hitting another player who is behind him and out of his sight BEING A PENALTY is never ever going to be resolved by watching replays on a TV screen. Balls crossing lines or not, and players being offside are precise measurements that can be resolved by TV replay. VAR should only be used for things that can be measured not things like fouls or penalties which are always going to be subjective. Let's get back to accepting that the referee's subjective judgement in these matters is final simply because we need a decision to allow the game to be played and one of the beauties of football is it's mixture of skill and fortune.
Half-time in the early games and it's goalless between Denmark and France. Peru are currently leading via a Carillo goal, as Australia are yet to receive their customary penalty. Lovely finish. Horrible commentary.
Ally McCoist trolling Clive Tyldsley for ten minutes about Archie Gemmell's goal in 1978 was more entertaining than anything Portugal have served up during this tournament
I look at the talent in the French squad. I look at the talent left out of the French squad. I wonder how on earth they can produce that dross.
Maybe England should go all out to win. Fans would appreciate it, you may not be able to turn it on again after you've turned it off... ... and the chances of facing Colombia in the event of a win are actually about the same as in the event of a loss.
A win keeps the momentum going for the winning mindset. Belgium will still be able to field a decent team, even if they are prepared to ditch winning the group. Similarly there are still players (Sterling etc) who IMHO have not made the grade for being in the KO stage starting XI. Those players should be looking to front up big-time in this game.
You can't select your opponents anyway. Who knows what an "easier" opponent looks like? If England did progress to the latter stages, then which of Germany, Brazil, Spain, Croatia etc is the preferable opponent? It's best to treat every game as a knockout game. Select the best team for the game and play to win it. Winning is a habit.
The balance of the side is much better, though they still look a bit dodgy at the back at times. Discipline could be very important in the second half. Croatia not losing to Iceland could be even more important...
