The checking of var when a goal is scored has always been my biggest worry. Looking for a reason to rule it out, even with a different passage of play. Now they have proved that not only will they rule out a goal because of a innocuous incident in the centre of the park, but they will also miss clear handballs in the penalty area in the build up. So what good is VAR? I find it hard to justify its purpose.
My fear was that VAR would be overused as I didn't want the game ruined, but using it with a light hand is ok. That way it will correct some errors which is obviously a good thing.....but no system will get everything right for the simple reason that not every decision is clear cut. There will never be a situation where every decision is unarguably correct....that is impossible.
Err.....except for handballs? Surely. Has anyone actually seen it? It was so obvious. VAR was sleeping.
To me it sound pretty daft to say not to use VAR because its not being used enough. It is being used just not for the decision you cherry-picked. When its been used its not changed a correct decision and thats the important part
At least I'm consistent. You little lovers just bang some random; 'It'll be good one day!' Drum. Laughable.
Yes, VAR got it wrong. Hands up, mistake. It happens. No-one, including the PL, is trying to argue it wasn't.
How is complaining about how VAR should have been used and then saying to scrap it the next moment consistent those are opposites. You cant get more inconsistent than that. I've been saying they should only use it for offsides and black and white decisions until it improves from its first iteration. I also complained about the hand ball rule back then too, though theyve made it worse. That's consistency.
They already rejected a bid on the day of the club's expulsion which would have saved Bury, so that wouldn't work anyway.
Exactly.. I think VAR actually makes things worse, at least before you could attribute mistakes to referees's human error. Now, we have a team of referees watching the game for ages, losing the atmosphere, slowing it down, and still being completely wrong
So VAR is bad because it failed to correct two refereeing errors? I would like to see how many incorrect decisions were corrected, how many correct decisions were incorrectly overruled and work out some stats before judging. If VAR makes decisions 10% more accurate, then surely it is a success?
That is sound logic, but the immeasaurble quantity is how much the atmosphere is ruined by the checks. For me, the balance between correct decisions vs. ruining the game isn't worth it atm. I hope you're all right that it will improve with more use though
You're arguing with the wrong guy. I'm totally in favour in VAR. I was just pointing out that it did, in my view, makes two errors yesterday. It can do better. And I've no doubt it will.
