it is though. if you look at rugby, cricket, tennis. they all use tech they are vastly different sports. we have used Hawkeye for football and its worked perfectly... its evidence a ball os over a line just like in those sports. football is no less a sport with stoppages than any other, the point is that if you fail to.use common sense and give yourself a reasonable margin then you lead to this silly 4min **** every time a decision is needed. var is supposed to be for 4 things. mistaken identity, red cards, penalties, goals. if you apply actual logic and system you can speed the decision s but most importantly force officials.make their call and then say any reason I should of award this goal/pen/red card. make linesman flag offside immediately. not.keep flag down til ball is in net etc. a goal review could be: move back 2 passes.. any offside. no. any fouls by attacking team no. ball over line. yes. goal.the end. penalty. same... but this is subjective so give on field decision then simply review in same way... but only if defending team calls for review. go back 2 passes or whatever. no offside. no foul by attacking player? no ok. is there clear dive in pen? no is there clear contact preventing shot yes ok its a pen. in the end if a ref waves off a pen and you feel.it was one then use your review as attacking team.
all the decisions are covered by technology bar no ball which can be done by just looking at slo mo there really is no subjective element to it imo unlike a foul/no foul decision in football.
i agree, only downside is, if they waste time by var review but then get it added on for extra time, pep will be all over that ****e
The only controversial point in tennis is whether the ball is in or out, Hawkeye sorted that. In football there are far too many subjective variables. If we want a sanitised game we can use technology to do away with all or most of the controversial stuff. Would we ever want that? It's a no from me.
It works in rugby mate. Make a call. How is question asked to 4th official... can I ward try or what... was ball grounded is subjective too. You'd swear football was A) unique.. it's not. B) crowds would riot if given if. Thry don't. C) refs are gods. Thry are not. It won't do away with anything. The goal,line tech worked perfectly. It's more fair.
they are though thats the problem, we see time and time again from every single manager in the game who has had a ****e call from them interviewed and quite rightly pissed off punished by the cowardly fa for comments about what a joke the refs are, yet refs are accountable to ****ing no one and don't need to speak to anyone or even justify their decisions!!
Who wants one team to have momentum? Free flowing, end-to- end games are boring as **** to watch anyway...
You're forgetting one thing, generally speaking rugby players have a respect for each other and the game. Can't say the same about football. I don't like to say it but there are more and more cheats appearing in football. What's the equivalent in rugby to the Neymar roll?
well in the old days when subs only allowed if a player was injured amazing how many suddenly had injuries so what seemed fairly obvious tactical changes were made. Then of course there was bloodgate rugby has been heading rapidly in the direction of football ever since professionalism.
