| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) 20:40 - Feb 20 with 4282 views | Superblue95 |
|  |
| |  |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 20:41 - Feb 20 with 3691 views | blueconscience |
Thought it was suppose to remove indecision!
Times like that make it feel like we are watching an American sport. [Post edited 20 Feb 2019 20:42]
|  |
| |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 20:48 - Feb 20 with 3657 views | Superblue95 |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 20:41 - Feb 20 by blueconscience |
Thought it was suppose to remove indecision!
Times like that make it feel like we are watching an American sport. [Post edited 20 Feb 2019 20:42]
|
Steady on, if this were an American sport we would have only seen 5 minutes of football and about 40 of adverts | |
| |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 20:49 - Feb 20 with 3649 views | ITFC_Forever |
It will never be anything else. |  |
| |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 20:53 - Feb 20 with 3639 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
Sounds rather like it just took a long time to get to the right decision.
Personally I would rather that than the wrong decision was rapidly reached for a major call.
That said, it should be able to be done much quicker. |  |
| |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 20:55 - Feb 20 with 3630 views | MrTown |
Time efficiency needs to be improved massively.
But both penalties came to the right decision in the end.
And in the Juve v Madrid game a penalty was ruled out after VAR correctly.
So in all cases the right decision has been made which is the main objective of VAR, but it's the time taken to do so and the lack understanding and confusion in the stadium which is its biggest fall. |  |
| |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 21:02 - Feb 20 with 3587 views | Superblue95 |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 20:53 - Feb 20 by Nthsuffolkblue |
Sounds rather like it just took a long time to get to the right decision.
Personally I would rather that than the wrong decision was rapidly reached for a major call.
That said, it should be able to be done much quicker. |
Tbh, I didn’t think it was a penalty. He was clearly trying to move his arm out of the way but just couldn’t do it in time. Certainly could have gone either way.
Just farcical that it took 5 minutes to come to a conclusion either way | |
| |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 21:05 - Feb 20 with 3581 views | Simonds92 |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 21:02 - Feb 20 by Superblue95 |
Tbh, I didn’t think it was a penalty. He was clearly trying to move his arm out of the way but just couldn’t do it in time. Certainly could have gone either way.
Just farcical that it took 5 minutes to come to a conclusion either way |
Agree its never a peno imo. The incident has a clear camera angle of what happened therefore they were clearly debating it for a prolonged period of time. Of this is the case how an earth os it a clear and obvious error by the referee that needs to be overturned? |  | | |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 21:05 - Feb 20 with 3580 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 21:02 - Feb 20 by Superblue95 |
Tbh, I didn’t think it was a penalty. He was clearly trying to move his arm out of the way but just couldn’t do it in time. Certainly could have gone either way.
Just farcical that it took 5 minutes to come to a conclusion either way |
I haven't seen it - was simply going on what the commentator in Sky studio said.
I think football needs to learn lessons from cricket rapidly. Where there is a clear and obvious error, the on-field decision should be reversed. Where there isn't, the referee's call should be respected. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 21:07 - Feb 20 with 3566 views | HARRY10 |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 20:53 - Feb 20 by Nthsuffolkblue |
Sounds rather like it just took a long time to get to the right decision.
Personally I would rather that than the wrong decision was rapidly reached for a major call.
That said, it should be able to be done much quicker. |
Major call ?
Do they phone someone as well ? | | | |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 21:15 - Feb 20 with 3530 views | BloomBlue |
Especially as it's design to correct clear mistakes, if it takes that long to correct a decision it's not a clear mistake. |  | | |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 21:31 - Feb 20 with 3501 views | BloomBlue |
And now they're saying for the first goal the ref couldn't review it because the pitchside screen was broken. | | | |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 21:32 - Feb 20 with 3495 views | Superblue95 |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 21:31 - Feb 20 by BloomBlue |
And now they're saying for the first goal the ref couldn't review it because the pitchside screen was broken. |
 | |
| |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 21:39 - Feb 20 with 3474 views | BloomBlue |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 21:32 - Feb 20 by Superblue95 |
|
And the Man city player was booked for it, how can a ref book a player if he couldn't review the incident. | | | |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 21:42 - Feb 20 with 3467 views | Garv |
I'm shocked.
Ridiculous handball. Footballers have hands, until they accept this fact and accept that at times the ball will hit it, and only punish blatant movements TOWARDS the ball, there will still issues.
To have results and competitions possibly decided by handball decisions like that is comical. |  |
| |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 21:47 - Feb 20 with 3437 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 21:39 - Feb 20 by BloomBlue |
And the Man city player was booked for it, how can a ref book a player if he couldn't review the incident. |
Possibly booked for dissent afterwards, though.
It does seem like the technology is under-invested in (ridiculous in such an affluent sport and with so much money potentially riding on one decision too) and they are not getting the process right at present.
When the review system first came in with cricket, there was an advantage to the umpire calling it against you as any doubt meant the review was upheld. Now there has to have been a clear and obvious error otherwise the original decision is upheld. That has to be the right course of action. | |
| |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 21:53 - Feb 20 with 3424 views | Superblue95 |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 21:42 - Feb 20 by Garv |
I'm shocked.
Ridiculous handball. Footballers have hands, until they accept this fact and accept that at times the ball will hit it, and only punish blatant movements TOWARDS the ball, there will still issues.
To have results and competitions possibly decided by handball decisions like that is comical. |
The decisions didn’t do them much harm in the end | |
| |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 21:53 - Feb 20 with 3423 views | BloomBlue |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 21:47 - Feb 20 by Nthsuffolkblue |
Possibly booked for dissent afterwards, though.
It does seem like the technology is under-invested in (ridiculous in such an affluent sport and with so much money potentially riding on one decision too) and they are not getting the process right at present.
When the review system first came in with cricket, there was an advantage to the umpire calling it against you as any doubt meant the review was upheld. Now there has to have been a clear and obvious error otherwise the original decision is upheld. That has to be the right course of action. |
But if only some of the technology is working then by default they have to go with the refs original decision. | | | |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 22:23 - Feb 20 with 3354 views | Darth_Koont |
For some reason, when football refs do it it takes three times longer than in rugby. At certain times it's slow in rugby because it's about seeing millimetres when a foot or ball touches the line or to see if it's grounded correctly in a pile of bodies. In football the VAR decisions are much clearer but take an age to be confirmed anyway. |  |
| |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 22:26 - Feb 20 with 3347 views | Darth_Koont |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 21:42 - Feb 20 by Garv |
I'm shocked.
Ridiculous handball. Footballers have hands, until they accept this fact and accept that at times the ball will hit it, and only punish blatant movements TOWARDS the ball, there will still issues.
To have results and competitions possibly decided by handball decisions like that is comical. |
Issue there I think was that Otamendi was far enough away that he couldn't argue the ball hit him. I know his instinct was right to try and put his arm behind him but the result was his arm movement blocked the shot. | |
| |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 23:06 - Feb 20 with 3304 views | tractorboy1978 |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 22:26 - Feb 20 by Darth_Koont |
Issue there I think was that Otamendi was far enough away that he couldn't argue the ball hit him. I know his instinct was right to try and put his arm behind him but the result was his arm movement blocked the shot. |
Blatant penalty - the ball travelled a decent distance, his arm was out and stopped a shot that was on target. Whether he was trying to move it is irrelevant. The “deliberate” handball is misleading - it’s extemely rare someone deliberately handballs it. | | | |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 23:31 - Feb 20 with 3277 views | blueconscience |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 23:06 - Feb 20 by tractorboy1978 |
Blatant penalty - the ball travelled a decent distance, his arm was out and stopped a shot that was on target. Whether he was trying to move it is irrelevant. The “deliberate” handball is misleading - it’s extemely rare someone deliberately handballs it. |
The fact he gave the penalty isn’t the issue, it is the fact it took him 3 minutes to decide!! | |
| |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 23:59 - Feb 20 with 3241 views | Garv |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 23:31 - Feb 20 by blueconscience |
The fact he gave the penalty isn’t the issue, it is the fact it took him 3 minutes to decide!! |
The issue is definitely the fact that he gave a penalty. | |
| |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 00:05 - Feb 21 with 3225 views | blueconscience |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 23:59 - Feb 20 by Garv |
The issue is definitely the fact that he gave a penalty. |
Ok then, lets hope not too many decisions take that long!!! | |
| |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 00:06 - Feb 21 with 3226 views | Garv |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 22:23 - Feb 20 by Darth_Koont |
For some reason, when football refs do it it takes three times longer than in rugby. At certain times it's slow in rugby because it's about seeing millimetres when a foot or ball touches the line or to see if it's grounded correctly in a pile of bodies. In football the VAR decisions are much clearer but take an age to be confirmed anyway. |
Of course the reason VAR works in other sports is those sports are used to having long breaks and being naturally quite stop start. Football is not that sport and should not be refereed by a computer that doesn't work.
What also makes me laugh is the idea that eventually it will try and involve the fans. All right for fans at Wembley or wherever with a big tacky screen, what about those who have an old fashioned scoreboard or worse?
It's crap and should not be encouraged or supported. | |
| |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 00:33 - Feb 21 with 3205 views | Darth_Koont |
| So, VAR is still a farce then (n/t) on 00:06 - Feb 21 by Garv |
Of course the reason VAR works in other sports is those sports are used to having long breaks and being naturally quite stop start. Football is not that sport and should not be refereed by a computer that doesn't work.
What also makes me laugh is the idea that eventually it will try and involve the fans. All right for fans at Wembley or wherever with a big tacky screen, what about those who have an old fashioned scoreboard or worse?
It's crap and should not be encouraged or supported. |
That doesn't make sense. The time to review the decision is the time it takes to review the decision. And in rugby it's much, much quicker for the sort of obvious decisions that are reviewed in football matches and without as many camera angles to get the clearest view.
In rugby the VAR official also quickly reviews footage while play is ongoing and can halt play when it's clear what's being seen. Football could also play on more than it does but for some reason everything has to come to a grinding halt and simple decisions then need to be discussed in detail for minutes at a time. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
