You cannot make penalty decisions objective they will always be the subject of opinion. The same as fouls in general. Use it for offsides and 'line' decisions by all means but extending the use as they have done only transfers the 'opinion' elsewhere. If you are to change the rules to be 'objective' then you will have to remove contact completely and destroy the game.The new handball rule is good because it enables objectvely verifiable decisions without altering the game for the worse. They got it right for once. They still need to
- make other rules as objective as possible
- create VAR half as good and fast as the one tennis uses. There are robotics places that could do that for five or ten million, I think.
Pens do look like they'll always be a morass of subjective interpretation, agreed. But the handball rule is a step in the right direction, since it's much clearer whether a ball hits an arm than what the intent or nature of the deflection was. Unfortunately that won't work for defensive handballs, as attackers will and have simply targetted defenders' arms.You cannot make penalty decisions objective they will always be the subject of opinion. The same as fouls in general. Use it for offsides and 'line' decisions by all means but extending the use as they have done only transfers the 'opinion' elsewhere. If you are to change the rules to be 'objective' then you will have to remove contact completely and destroy the game.
They're going to be so pissed off when they sign the Norwegian U18 international Andres ****var in January - as they play on the left wingThe latest....
You must log in or register to see images
How they came to the conclusion the Tielemans tackle was not a red card sums up VAR. All we want is the correct decision applied, the Buffoon on the pitch can`t do it correctly and neither can the Clowns in the studio after watching it back on video.It is fast becoming clear that VAR as it has been introduced in the premier league is a lame duck. Having the decisions on VAR decided by the same group of incompetent match officials that make the rubbish decisions in the first place and who are not prepared to make their colleagues look foolish is plain stupid.
A separate panel of VAR referees need to be appointed either from ex/retired former prem league refs or better still from overseas because the current system is clearly not working.
There isn't enough top flight referees to man the VAR so they use referees aspiring to be promoted to the top flight, probably the most unlikely people in the world to expose a ref for being wrong. Retired refs is the answer, and a mix of foreign and british.How they came to the conclusion the Tielemans tackle was not a red card sums up VAR. All we want is the correct decision applied, the Buffoon on the pitch can`t do it correctly and neither can the Clowns in the studio after watching it back on video.
You know VAR's getting to you when you start sympathising with Liverpool.
Mane's disallowed goal on Saturday for the most marginal offside was ridiculous.
How do they know the exact point at which the ball is played? We never seem to have any scrutiny of the technology in that respect. If the ball was played 0.05 seconds earlier or later, it would make all the difference if you are deeming that a player is offside because he hasn't cut his fingernails recently.
VAR is bringing the game into disrepute. It's sucking the life out of what should be most enjoyable parts of a game.
"Offsides" that penalise the quick thinking forwards; "handballs" that have turned committed defending into an offence; any unintentional or mistimed feather touches of an opponent, however slight, being called as a "foul" and rendering football a virtual non-contact sport.
I generally agree with this but with some suggestions. There are about 10 cameras at each match and it is perfectly possible that the foul is only clear and obvious on one of them. So it does need a bit of time. The rugby system where the ref can talk to the off field officials and view the big screen and make the final decision while explaining it openly seems best to me.I've said this several times but VAR needs a time limit. Basic logic suggests that if you can't decide something after X amount of time, then the incident cannot by definition be "clear and obvious", therefore the on field ref's decision stands. However, completely agree that VAR is trying to make something subjective sound scientific, which clearly it isn't so is undermining the system and the game (eg there is no objective measure of when the ball is played, so where they even place that line for offside is subjective). I also agree that the VAR officials should be a separate team. I would even suggest that the VAR ref is senior to the man on the field - which allows for a place for on field refs to carry on, even after they should retire. Why do VAR refs need the same physical capabilities as the on field ref? They should have a separate set of abilities, and separately qualified.