I think tech should be limited to goal line and offside. And players should only be offside if their feet are in an offside position, not a finger or a nose.
It's all about opinions ... I'm for clear torso daylight on offside as it will clearly reduce the number of goals being disallowed for ridiculous miniscule margins ... benefit will go to attackers ...
There's been constant calls of "Now we have VAR we should change this rule to this" So yes, while an exaggeration there's undoubtedly some truth in it. See all the offside suggestions for example - you've literally just suggested a change to the offside rule in a post above! The simple fact is that the rules are nuanced and largely down to opinion, so you're still going to plenty of wrong decisions as proven so far. It's no real different to what we've had before except for slowing the game down and taking the emotion out of it. I can easily accept an official getting it wrong when seeing it once in real time, not so much when they spend two minutes looking at it to still get it wrong. The biggest problem of all though is that it's undoubtedly made the sport far less enjoyable for the majority of paying supporters. Out of interest, how many matches until you think it's upto scratch? We've had over 600 already, so after 1000? 2000? 5000?
Clear torso daylight is still going to come down to a mm decision at some point btw Bin off the lines and apply clear and obvious to offsides. Give the VAR two replays only and if it's not clear that a mistake has been made then stick with the onfield decision. Not ****ing rocket science.
You're going round in circles though Fosse. Those decisions that VAR spends an age looking at again and again are that way because it's subjective. Let's just agree that VAR is **** and move on mate
You'd hope not ... but it's there to make sure ... "on field decision is onside and goal ... any reason not to give it" ... should get answer with the torso parameter within goal celebration time ... sorted
The question isn't whether VAR is currently a bit sh!t because it clearly is. The questions are a) is it worse than we had previously b) is it capable of being improved. I'd argue yes to both. It'll take time and plenty of people will whinge about it in the meantime but let's not kid ourselves that we didn't have that previously. Maybe we just go to a system like tennis/cricket etc whereby the referee decides and then each team has 2-3 VAR appeals. Suddenly having a diver in your team becomes humorous when, after their swan dive and rolling on the floor, they have to turn to their team mates and say "yeah I don't think he touched me" - make them look like the proper c*nts they are. Similarly I'd say there should be a margin for "referees call" in that if an offside is so borderline that it isn't immediately obvious the wrong decision was made then you just stick to the referees decision in the first place. Easy to say though.
This all just adds more and more unnecessary layers and complications imo. I'd rather accept that mistakes will occasionally be made (which they still are even with VAR) for the sake of a free flowing game of football
This ^ It’s merely common sense and would eradicate refereeing howlers as they’re obvious, without making game decisions forensic.
People whinged but then we got on with it, as the vast majority accepted that human beings make mistakes. And at least we could celebrate a goal without having to wait 3 minutes to see if someone's captain's armband was offside. I remember people telling me that VAR would mean we stop talking about decisions as it'd 'remove the doubt'. How laughable is that idea now? I personally think it'll always be ****, we've lost something special and the game will forever be worse for it. There are three simple things you can do to make it less **** though: - 30 second time limit with no exceptions. - Apply clear and obvious to offsides. - The people running VAR should be a completely different entity to those who officiate on the pitch.
