Nope ... you know my view. VAR if used correctly will get to the correct decision. The "if" is the issue.
How do you want it to be used? It still requires someone to draw lines on a screen with a margin of error.
For offside ... clear daylight between torso otherwise onside ... consistency on handball (needs rule clarity). Also used more like Rugby "... on field decision is ... any reason to change it?" Anything serious that the ref has missed brought to his attention.
Yeah the daylight idea still requires an imperfect line to be drawn on an image that has a margin of error. I would still prefer it as it favours the attacker more. They had a clearer handball rule which was **** and everyone moaned about it.
But it's the same people who have made incorrect decisions, why will technology suddenly make them better officials.
Gonna spend the morning racially abusing Marcus Rashford on twitter first and then try and catch the game at lunchtime. I'll be supporting the team with the whites playing for them
You are never going eradicate errors completely ... but you can minimise them with a mix of the technology, common sense and clearer rules VAR highlighted a nailed on penalty for handball in the Saints game. VAR did it's job in that the 'correct' decision was there to be seen. Unfortunately a complete idiot, for reasons unknown, ignored what the technology was showing him.
This is the problem though, it still comes down to subjective interpretations because there's always going to be a human interpreting the intent. From what I've seen of VAR, it hasn't ironed out the big mistakes that refs make. It's just added another layer of subjectivity.
Clearer rules will help ... and continuous training ... I'd have weekly reviews for all VAR operators going over good use and poor use in the round of games... happens in most other jobs / fields...
