And that's because it is still in it's early implementations. Do you know that EVs in the USA suffer 10 fires per year? Each one has been covered extensively by the media. If they paid any attention to FFV fires they'd be covering over one hundred per day. The thing is, you'll concentrate on the errors that people make when using VAR, but you won't count up the errors when VAR isn't used. Everything new gets new attention. You may not accept it for a few years, but it's foolish to say never.
If they paid any attention to FFV fires they'd be covering over one hundred per day. __________________- Yeah, but there's like 1000,000,000x more of them.
Well, I was being cautious with the figure because I'd forgotten it. I know there are a lot of FFV fires in the USA every day.
Who said I won't count up errors without it? I've never once said that it won't right some wrongs, I just don't think that all the other **** that comes with it is worth just getting a few things right. Hopefully in a few years we might be in Championship and I won't have to worry about it
Forgot to say that yes, I will concentrate on errors made by var because people used to pitch it as it would eliminate them "Never will a team be relegated by a poor decision again blah de blah..."
This level of scrutiny frustrates the feck out of me. Let’s have some common sense where there is some actual airspace between the player being offside and the last defender and not be measuring it by a part of a foot/shoulder etc. I used to get pissed off by players stepping up to play people offside, as the rule always used to stipulate (I believe) that the attacking player had to be seeking to gain an advantage, by being in an offside position. My argument was always that the player stepping up was gifting an advantage and the attacking player was not seeking it, so why should he have been penalised. Don’t get me started on natural body silhouettes and arms in unnatural positions.
I think this is down to the refs who are looking at VAR not having the excuse of 'I didn't see it' not to make a decision. And they would have to explain why they made a marginally 'wrong' decision.
I suspect they will change the offside rule anyway to make it much easier to implement VAR decisions. The offside rule has often been something of a joke down through the years, Once there had to be daylight, then not. Now it's an improperly placed big toe, or so it seems. One thing it ain't good for - linespeople running up and down trying to do line of sight when quite obviously the game is too fast for them these days. And how is that Phase 2 [or whatever it's called] thing coming along? I remember Gordon Strachan being absolutely bowled over when Van Nistelroy scored for ManU and he hadn't been briefed on the update or hadn't remembered it. Anyway - examples: Graziano Pelle scores first in the 6-1 drubbing of Aston Villa. Only he doesn't. Linesman got it so wrong it was ridiculous. And Manolo Gabbiadini scored a LC Final hat-trick. Only he didn't. That was so blatant it stank to high heaven.
Part of this is certainly bad rules being put under the magnifying glass by VAR's exasperating exactness. The solution to this is to fine tune the rules. The other part is the whole ref running off to check. What's the bloody point? Just go with cricket: obviously wrong, overruled. Obviously right, play on. Anything in the middle? Ref's ooriginal decision is final.
Yeah I don't like the idea of refs checking themselves either, think if that happens then they're already looking for a reason to change their mind rather than as a fresh incident. 30 second limit and var official makes the decisions would be a decent base imo.
I'm of the other opinion that refs when looking at it would have to admit that they've made a mistake. I'm not sure many would want to.
No doubt some will think like that but I reckon the majority will be more likely to be thinking 'oh they think I've got that wrong, what did they see that I missed?' And that's when you'll get silly decisions like the slightest touch being given as a foul etc.
Presumably the VAR official has seen something...it will be a brave ref who thinks, 'Yes, I can see that is a foul according to the rules but no arsehole would ever enforce it....but now I have to because I am looking at it and everyone (including adjudicators) can see I am.' I will be very interested to see how often a ref disagrees with VAR.
Anyone watch the USA v Sweden game tonight? Nice to see VAR doing what it was brought in for and getting the decisions right. Another point about VAR, is that every referred incident can take as much as 5 minutes to decide. 2 or 3 of those could make a match run on for over 15 minutes (there was 7 minutes stoppage time in tonight's game). The early leavers could be could be going 20 minutes before the end.
Yep. I find myself watching it just for the controversy. Sweden wouldn't have got that offside var decision. Are the refs a little overwhelmed by this competition perhaps?
This world cup is a fantastic example of why the assertion that VAR will stop big team bias is nonsense.
However, maybe I missed it as I was riding the crest of the Southgate wave last year, but I don't remember VAR causing too much controversy last year?
