As a defender if you're stupid enough to extend your arm and grab your opponents shoulder you deserve everything you get, they're going to go down like a sack of **** every single time. It was soft though. But a ref made that decision not a machine.
VAR
- Thread starter Vincemac
- Start date
-
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
-
As a defender if you're stupid enough to extend your arm and grab your opponents shoulder you deserve everything you get, they're going to go down like a sack of **** every single time. It was soft though. But a ref made that decision not a machine.
From my memories Shearer was no saint on the pitch - shall we say very professional (still an exceptional goalscorer and cf though) and has no right to criticise ref decisions as he got away with many dodgy incidents.
For ****s sake man var scrutinise every move
Just get on with it
Ok goal line technology is fine but **** the rest
Just get on with it
Ok goal line technology is fine but **** the rest
VAR? Football is designed to be refereed poorly. The 18 yard box alone is bigger than a basketball court, and yet, basketball has three referees. Video review in the NFL is EXCRUCIATING. All those delays will reduce the number of goals scored as tired defenders benefit from must needed rest.
The game had gone mad.....
Man City have just scored a screamer & it’s been disallowed for f*ck all
Silva picks the ball up runs 10-15 yards and smashes it into the top corner from outside the box and it’s ruled off by some gimp of a linesman
Man City have just scored a screamer & it’s been disallowed for f*ck all
Silva picks the ball up runs 10-15 yards and smashes it into the top corner from outside the box and it’s ruled off by some gimp of a linesman
So nowt to do with Var then?The game had gone mad.....
Man City have just scored a screamer & it’s been disallowed for f*ck all
Silva picks the ball up runs 10-15 yards and smashes it into the top corner from outside the box and it’s ruled off by some gimp of a linesman
Ooooohhh, check you out !!!
The point being IF they had VAR available like in yesterdays debacle it would have had a different outcome .
So answer your little question ... YES my point is to do with VAR.
For future reference i’ll make sure I use the words in the original thread to make it easy for you
Anyone who argue's against var hasn't been watching Bolton v Bristol City - 2 clear cut pens and 1 debatable. Var would have cleared them all up
I disagree mate I think getting the big decisions right is something that should be standard and not a matter of opinion. Entire seasons or competitions can depend on a single decision which can often be wrong without VAR.
Using it for every throw in and goal kick would be too time consuming, as far as I'm concerned it's a good addition and they're going about it the right way by only using it for match changing moments.
Using it for every throw in and goal kick would be too time consuming, as far as I'm concerned it's a good addition and they're going about it the right way by only using it for match changing moments.
Using it for every throw in and goal kick would be too time consuming, as far as I'm concerned it's a good addition and they're going about it the right way by only using it for match changing moments.
But it’s still the referee who decides to use var.
But it’s still the referee who decides to use var.
England 1-1 Italy
"It looks like Tarkowski stands on him, but it's during the running process and he is going down anyway," Southgate told BBC Radio 5 live.
"The system can be a success. If we had it in Holland the other night, we would have had a penalty and the opposition would have had a red card in the first two minutes. Here we have suffered from it.
"For me, the two things (about VAR) are whether or not it is 'clear and obvious' and to have a better way of communicating what has happened, and why, for the spectators in the stadium."
Yeah, var is ok only for goaline incidents.
It’s still inconclusive, and the referee has the final say - he decides.
"It looks like Tarkowski stands on him, but it's during the running process and he is going down anyway," Southgate told BBC Radio 5 live.
"The system can be a success. If we had it in Holland the other night, we would have had a penalty and the opposition would have had a red card in the first two minutes. Here we have suffered from it.
"For me, the two things (about VAR) are whether or not it is 'clear and obvious' and to have a better way of communicating what has happened, and why, for the spectators in the stadium."
Yeah, var is ok only for goaline incidents.
It’s still inconclusive, and the referee has the final say - he decides.
The use of video technology for making decisions works well in the two codes of rugby, ice hockey, tennis, cricket etc. But these are sports which are punctuated by breaks and pauses and the use of video assistance doesn't alter the game particularly.
Football is the world's most popular game because of 1. Its simplicity, and 2. Its free-flowing nature. VAR only detracts from these two factors.
Furthermore, contentious decisions are part of the character and folklore of the game (Tofik Bakhramov the 'Russian' linesman, for example) and also add to the appeal of the game of football. VAR takes away those decisions and limits the things that you have to debate down the pub.
There's another thread on here about Lewis Grabban's car and plenty have expressed shock/horror at how much a second tier player earns. Plenty complain about money being king in football. But VAR is only wanted because those with a ridiculous financial stake in the game want to make sure that they won't lose their money due to human error. VAR is another tool of those who are taking the game away from its roots and the normal working class fan and putting it in the hands of irresponsible billionaires (such as OUR friend Ellis) who care only about money.
Football is the world's most popular game because of 1. Its simplicity, and 2. Its free-flowing nature. VAR only detracts from these two factors.
Furthermore, contentious decisions are part of the character and folklore of the game (Tofik Bakhramov the 'Russian' linesman, for example) and also add to the appeal of the game of football. VAR takes away those decisions and limits the things that you have to debate down the pub.
There's another thread on here about Lewis Grabban's car and plenty have expressed shock/horror at how much a second tier player earns. Plenty complain about money being king in football. But VAR is only wanted because those with a ridiculous financial stake in the game want to make sure that they won't lose their money due to human error. VAR is another tool of those who are taking the game away from its roots and the normal working class fan and putting it in the hands of irresponsible billionaires (such as OUR friend Ellis) who care only about money.
I think the number of controversial decisions will be reduced in general but a controversial decision still made after consulting VAR will cause greater outrage. At least the referee can be given the benefit of the doubt when he has to make a decision in real time. If he makes a right bloomer after watching the incident half a dozen times he will be lynched. I would hate to be in the refs shoes when a goal is scored by a team with a partizan crowd, crowd goes mental thinking they have scored a last minute winner against their fiercest rivals, then being urged to watch a replay, then after 2-3 minutes disallowing the goal. Hell on!!! Particularly if his decision is viewed wrong by the majority of people watching at home and in the stadium. And I also believe that if a referee has time to think then he has time to be influenced by his surroundings. A player comes up to him pleading his teams case, has a look at the replay, hmmmmm maybe he's right. Decision could end up depending on which side argued the best. The home crowd getting on his back whilst watching the video.....goal for the home team, despite the decision still looking 50-50. VAR puts a different kind of pressure on a referee, a pressure that I am not particularly sure that I would like to have on my shoulders. Too many grey areas. I mean, pundits can look at slow motion replays in the comfort of a studio for hours after a match and disagree with eachother. Also it would spoil the spectacle for the supporters in the ground. If I was at a Sunderland match and we scored I dont think I would start celebrating until the opposition restarted the game from the centre spot. And by then the moment of ecstacy has died down. Basically in theory its a good idea. In practice in will cause different, possibly greater problems.
Down to humans how and when it's used, the technology does nothing wrong, it doesn't even make the decision,that still comes from the human
Game is and always has been ruined by human beings. Var is alright by me, it's a tool and nothing else/
