Off Topic IS VIDEO ASSISTANT REFEREE WORKING?

Yes you are right in that respect. They should have an ear-piece installed and the person watching the screen decides having watched it. There is no need for the ref to look himself. The person watching decides yes/no.

 

But if they can't make a descion in 30 seconds, and they dont go by the original call, then what exactly are they going to do?

Tell every one I'm not to sure, and have a drop ball?

 

Well the video footage will provide the answer, they do have eyes. It's not exactly Stevie Wonder and Ray Charles watching the screens.

 

Have you seen some of the decisions made so far
I am not so sure on your comment lol

 

Yes, but if they only have 30 seconds, but still can't make up there minds what should they do?

If it was that easy, there would be no argument over var, there would be no little waddle over by the ref to repeatedly watch the footage, no argument over whether they've got the descions correct, no going to make a brew while 5 minutes are eaten up as they search for the slightest contact in super slow mo.

 

Yeah providing examples of var getting things right doesn't really counter anything I've said. Again, I've never once said it won't get some decisions right but I don't think it's worth all of the other **** that comes with it which you keep ignoring and not commenting on for some reason.

You providing an example of an incident where it was (in your view) a clear mistake doesn't equate there to being no incidents in football which are subjective. I specifically said offsides enter that category when 'interfering with play' comes into it.

It absolutely will not remove the doubt and it won't remove big club bias either. You're basically saying you'll never question a referee decision again.

Do you go to games btw?

 

Oh and @Superfirmino you forgot to answer my question about how you feel if a decision like the one I posted from Aus went against you in a big game.

 

I have seen decisions made thus far. All of them through the use of VAR have provided the right outcome. It's not 'some incidents'. It's all the incidents.

I would love to see examples where VAR got the outcome wrong. Every one of the incidents I've seen where VAR has been used it resulted in the right outcome.

I'll provide more. Lingard vs Holland offside. It to VAR correct outcome because it was offside.

John Stones handball same game. VAR used again, correct decision it wasn't handball.

So if VAR is getting decisions right, what's the issue. I've seen the non use of VAR get decisions wrong. There are too many to mention. So of guess-work gets 40% wrong and VAR gets 90% right, which is better?

 

I am not against it
I was totally balls in in favour
I am starting to drift though
I think it has got quite a few wrong imho
I much prefer to get some of the big calls right cause there were waaaaaay to many wrong.
Think it needs tweaking but will reserve judgement for a bit

 

VAR says offside. No goal.

 

Maybe they didn't spot the keeper...

 

Maybe they thought the defending team were Liverpool

 

Deep...

 

VAR is fine as it is, what needs to change is the off-side rule.
Off-side was invented/created to stop cheating ****s like Alan Clarke from gaining an unfair advantage by "goal hanging". Today we say a striker is off-side because he has reacted quicker than a defender to a potential pass and his big toe is "off-side" (or maybe he just has bigger feet or longer legs). This is not helped when a defender deliberately steps up to try and make an attacker off-side because he knows he can't handle him in a race, it is not an unfair advantage just a better/faster/more alert player getting ahead.

The old "clear daylight rule was better than the present and should be restored if VAR is to be used in determining it.

 

Had that exact discussion out on a pitch with a blackpool fan the other day.
Not saying who was saying what but we actually tried simulating some instances. It quickly became apparent it doesn't work (sadly we had quite a bit of fun), the clear daylight is too subjective. For a start what constitutes ‘clear’ ? You end up exactly where we are now only with a different measurement.
The easiest thing is to get rid or alter the rule so either the attackers or defenders always get the advantage, but after the other night i’ll be fecked if i know what the answer is.

 

Firstly there is nothing wrong with the line of defenders pushing up to create a possible offside. This prevents hoofing. We've seen even the so called better teams like Man United do it, the keeper hoofs, and they win the second ball. Proper defending by stepping up ensures that, that is completely useless.


Actually the two best centre halves last season at preventing the hoof by stepping up were Joe Gomez and Virgil Van Dijk. There is a clear difference between what Leicester used to do in beating the press. They played out from the back and played long diagonals to Vardy.

 

Bollocks, that just means that the defender doesn't have to compete with the attacker, they even do it at free kicks ffs.

 

I think you will find you are mistaken
When a top six team ‘hoofs’ the ball - whomsoever it should be
One refers to it as ‘the fast break’
Lol

 

Or kick it to the fast lads as I like to call it