Rival watch

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Citizen Kane. said:
Increasingly we're seeing officials make their judgement based on outcome instead of input.

Exactly the case when Brennan was sent off in this competition.

This is the problem with VAR and video technology. Anything slowed down in HD from multiple angles will look 100x worse than it actually was.

Context and intent are all that should matter in making a decision, but that is rarely the case. Instead we now have the equivalent of looking at a car crash and saying *because* the bonnet is crumpled, it *must* be the other driver's fault and we *must* ban them. Meanwhile ignoring the black ice all over the road.

I felt the same about that last minute penalty in the Dortmund game. Ref seemed fine with it until the cameras cut to the striker with blood running down his head because he, half the size of the defender, stooped to head the ball at the same time that the defender went to kick it, and the replay showed clearly that the defender made contact with the ball and wasn't looking at the striker. But outcome of blood = assumption of foul play.
Click to expand...
I think the Dortmund one is a bit different as I think it can fall under the reckless category where he’s almost kung fu kicked behind him without looking so is dangerous play even though the Atalanta player does duck his head into it slightly.

How Kelly for juventus is suppose to defy gravity is ridiculous though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Left on the Shelf
Citizen Kane. said:
Increasingly we're seeing officials make their judgement based on outcome instead of input.

Exactly the case when Brennan was sent off in this competition.

This is the problem with VAR and video technology. Anything slowed down in HD from multiple angles will look 100x worse than it actually was.

Context and intent are all that should matter in making a decision, but that is rarely the case. Instead we now have the equivalent of looking at a car crash and saying *because* the bonnet is crumpled, it *must* be the other driver's fault and we *must* ban them. Meanwhile ignoring the black ice all over the road.

I felt the same about that last minute penalty in the Dortmund game. Ref seemed fine with it until the cameras cut to the striker with blood running down his head because he, half the size of the defender, stooped to head the ball at the same time that the defender went to kick it, and the replay showed clearly that the defender made contact with the ball and wasn't looking at the striker. But outcome of blood = assumption of foul play.
Click to expand...
50/50 in agreement...
The general tenet of the argument I'm on board with, but I think the defenders actions, high kicking backwards with no regard for the player behind him definitely warranted sanction. It was a clear foul IMHO and in that case a penalty and yellow card were probably the 'right' outcome.
The confusion comes when that would now generally be classed as dangerous play and would have received a red card.

The main issue I saw with the decision making was that the VAR strangely only set up the overhead view for the ref to watch on the monitor, which was far more damning but didn't show how low the attacking player had dipped his head.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back