VAR

bum_chinned_crab

bum_chinned_crab

Well-Known Member
Mar 13, 2011
21,807
6,325
113
NULL
I've long being against the introduction of video technology for in-game decisions and just 2 games in and it's already creating a ****storm in Serie A. Even the teams who are benefitting complaining about it.

Yesterday it took SIX minutes for a decision to be given on a penalty and Buffon is moaning that Juve will get 50 penalties in their favour if this carries on, while it wasn't consulted for a key decision in the Roma vs Inter match.

http://app.football-italia.net/?ref...t#article/footballitalia-108851&menu=news-all

http://app.football-italia.net/?ref...t#article/footballitalia-108852&menu=news-all
 
Bum_Chinned_Crabski said:
I've long being against the introduction of video technology for in-game decisions and just 2 games in and it's already creating a ****storm in Serie A. Even the teams who are benefitting complaining about it.

Yesterday it took SIX minutes for a decision to be given on a penalty and Buffon is moaning that Juve will get 50 penalties in their favour if this carries on, while it wasn't consulted for a key decision in the Roma vs Inter match.

http://app.football-italia.net/?ref...t#article/footballitalia-108851&menu=news-all

http://app.football-italia.net/?ref...t#article/footballitalia-108852&menu=news-all
Click to expand...
It's ****
I've always said it would be ****
It's often now proven to be ****
It should be binned

6 minutes to make a decision?! And some on here we're claiming that it wouldn't ruin the flow of the game...I despair
 
  • Like
Reactions: HHH, Sir Cheshire Ben and bum_chinned_crab
Bum_Chinned_Crabski said:
I've long being against the introduction of video technology for in-game decisions and just 2 games in and it's already creating a ****storm in Serie A. Even the teams who are benefitting complaining about it.

Yesterday it took SIX minutes for a decision to be given on a penalty and Buffon is moaning that Juve will get 50 penalties in their favour if this carries on, while it wasn't consulted for a key decision in the Roma vs Inter match.

http://app.football-italia.net/?ref...t#article/footballitalia-108851&menu=news-all

http://app.football-italia.net/?ref...t#article/footballitalia-108852&menu=news-all
Click to expand...

I think I'm more for it than against it.

Both Effcee and the Ladies World Cup used it yesterday and it seemed to work ok. The decisions seemed fairly quick, certainly not six minutes.

Pro's - more accurate decisions. Might stop some cheating twats getting away with murder, or weak refs favouring the bigger teams. Gary Cahill I'm looking at you for your dive between Meyler and Maguire in an attempt for a pen, Mascherano / Martin Atkinson for a free kick from which liverpoo scored, Lee Probert for spectacularly ****ing up when Alex Bruce tackled (not fouled) Cazorla which led to the free kick and first goal for them in the FA Cup Final.

Cons - over reliance on replays. Both rugby games had obvious actions which could be seen in real time and didn't need replays. But the refs seemed to default automatically to the TV.

Doubt it will be rolled out further than goal line decisions as now, FA scared to apply decisions against the bigger teams.
 
Arnold_Lane_HCFC_ said:
I think I'm more for it than against it.

Both Effcee and the Ladies World Cup used it yesterday and it seemed to work ok. The decisions seemed fairly quick, certainly not six minutes.

Pro's - more accurate decisions. Might stop some cheating twats getting away with murder, or weak refs favouring the bigger teams. Gary Cahill I'm looking at you for your dive between Meyler and Maguire in an attempt for a pen, Mascherano / Martin Atkinson for a free kick from which liverpoo scored, Lee Probert for spectacularly ****ing up when Alex Bruce tackled (not fouled) Cazorla which led to the free kick and first goal for them in the FA Cup Final.

Cons - over reliance on replays. Both rugby games had obvious actions which could be seen in real time and didn't need replays. But the refs seemed to default automatically to the TV.

Doubt it will be rolled out further than goal line decisions as now, FA scared to apply decisions against the bigger teams.
Click to expand...

Or Snodgrass or Elmo...
 
When in the rugby semi final a few weeks ago , they watched an incident 12 times before making a decision . I thought it was a farce and said how stupid are rugby rules that a professional needs that many viewings to make a decision , at least in football any ref can watch an incident once or twice and decide if it's a penalty etc, obviously I was wrong then .
 
Arnold_Lane_HCFC_ said:
I think I'm more for it than against it.

Both Effcee and the Ladies World Cup used it yesterday and it seemed to work ok. The decisions seemed fairly quick, certainly not six minutes.

Pro's - more accurate decisions. Might stop some cheating twats getting away with murder, or weak refs favouring the bigger teams. Gary Cahill I'm looking at you for your dive between Meyler and Maguire in an attempt for a pen, Mascherano / Martin Atkinson for a free kick from which liverpoo scored, Lee Probert for spectacularly ****ing up when Alex Bruce tackled (not fouled) Cazorla which led to the free kick and first goal for them in the FA Cup Final.

Cons - over reliance on replays. Both rugby games had obvious actions which could be seen in real time and didn't need replays. But the refs seemed to default automatically to the TV.

Doubt it will be rolled out further than goal line decisions as now, FA scared to apply decisions against the bigger teams.
Click to expand...
I thought they got the video decision on whether there was a knock on before a try wrong in the Women's World Cup yesterday.
So, immediately on seeing the replay, did the commentator, although he didn't mention it post decision announcement

I think goal line technology is great. It's a very black and white decision. Same as whether a ball is in or out at tennis. However videos being looked at by someone else is crap and stops the flow of the game, and often people could still disagree anyway...like I disagree about the one yesterday
 
For it. Just because some implement it incompetently doesn't mean it's bad. Two appeals per half for each team, then there aren't many breaks.
 
I would only use it for goals scored when the player is marginally offside. The ball is dead because it ends up in the net. The linesman doesn't raise the flag but tells the referee he thinks its borderline. If they balls up the chance the game just continues.
 
Obadiah said:
I would only use it for goals scored when the player is marginally offside. The ball is dead because it ends up in the net. The linesman doesn't raise the flag but tells the referee he thinks its borderline. If they balls up the chance the game just continues.
Click to expand...
Actually I'd accept that
...see! I can be swayed!
 
Obadiah said:
I would only use it for goals scored when the player is marginally offside. The ball is dead because it ends up in the net. The linesman doesn't raise the flag but tells the referee he thinks its borderline. If they balls up the chance the game just continues.
Click to expand...
It would need a new signal for the linesman though
I'd go for double armed frantic shrugging !
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cortez91 and Idi Amin
Maybe it'd be better if the VAR was simply allowed to overrule the on pitch ref. That would cut out all the umming and arring.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back