VAR

[seenitall]

2 minutes ago, FIF said:

NFL games took 4 hours before they even had video referals. Your argument is a big nothing.

 

 

If that's what you call excitement you should watch wrestling instead.

 

 

There is no reason that a video ref cannot watch and comment whilst the game is in progress. There are always stoppages when a goal is scored or a penalty given so really there shouldn't be much difference in the holdup. We could speed up games further by immediately booking players who question the referee and booking or giving free kicks for time wasting.

The great appeal of football worldwide and in my opinion one of the reasons it is the greatest game in the world, is it's simplicity and the fact that the top level pro game is no different in essence to the game we first play as kids. The more it is turned into an elite sport with TV money the only effective way to play it then its appeal will begin to die. The magic of the game is captured by the disputes, the coulda woulda shoulda moments, they create the excitement - you need frustration or the sheer elation of getting away with it maybe and the arguments that linger for years in the minds of fans. (I know, jumpers for goalposts)

 

This will just turn the game into a sanitised version of the sport we love - players like Steve Walsh, Speedie etc would never thrive in a sanitised system and even Jamie would struggle - we will be the losers along with the sport........

[MrSpaM]

Microchips sown into the players shirts at the chest and a series of detectors up the side of the pitch would tell you if a player was offside 99.9999% of the time if done properly, makes me wonder why they haven't thought about doing that yet

[Kitchandro]

16 hours ago, Wookie said:

People complaining about VAR in the same week Clattenburg revealed he had a 'game plan', I'm all for it.

Clattenberg saw the incidents fine...it's the way he chose to interpret them which was wrong.

 

This technology doesn't solve that issue. This is for entire incidents that have been missed or seen totally incorrectly (i.e. the ref gives a handball and the video proves it didn't hit his hand).

 

Referees will still be able to manage the game.

[Kitchandro]

22 minutes ago, MrSpaM said:

Microchips sown into the players shirts at the chest and a series of detectors up the side of the pitch would tell you if a player was offside 99.9999% of the time if done properly, makes me wonder why they haven't thought about doing that yet

Quite often offsides are determined by the leg or the head being in a certain place, so no it wouldn't.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Kitchandro said:

Quite often offsides are determined by the leg or the head being in a certain place, so no it wouldn't.

A simple rule change that it's the trunk of the player would solve that. It's a man-made rule which really isn't very clever or clear.

[norwichfox]

3 minutes ago, FIF said:

A simple rule change that it's the trunk of the player would solve that. It's a man-made rule which really isn't very clever or clear.

What made the rest of the rules? It could be the reason why no woman understands the offside rule though.

Edited 8 December 2017 by norwichfox

[Guest]

Just now, norwichfox said:

What made the rest of the rules?

Woman.

[Suzie the Fox]

8 minutes ago, Kitchandro said:

Quite often offsides are determined by the leg or the head being in a certain place, so no it wouldn't.

Could also sew the micro-chips in their socks or have them on their boots ?

[filbertway]

When VAR is used I think they need to trust in the decision of the actual person watching the screen. Nobody wants to see the VAR take a minute or two then have the ref run over and watch the same clips.

 

If the VAR is confident of the correct decision then go with their call. If not, then let the decision stand. It has it's uses, the VAR should only inform the ref if they have come to a different decision

[norwichfox]

1 minute ago, FIF said:

Woman.

I was editing my post to add the woman comment as you were posting yours....

[MrSpaM]

1 hour ago, Kitchandro said:

Quite often offsides are determined by the leg or the head being in a certain place, so no it wouldn't.

I always thought offside was supposed to be measured by the chest

[davieG]

1 hour ago, MrSpaM said:

I always thought offside was supposed to be measured by the chest

I believe it's any part of The body that can legally make contact with the ball, so your arm sticking out beyond the off side line wouldn't put you off side.

[Donut]

By the time youve seen a player make a pass, turned your head and looked for the offside even if its a glance there will be daylight between the players.

 

The any part of your body that can score thing is so daft. Usually in really tight offsides a small gap shows the player was on as the pass was made.

 

VAR is a good addition it just has to be for factual decisions. No point reviewing a decision like the bournemouth penalty at weekend for example its hard to get opinions that match

[Stadt]

It’s daft how the ref has to run over to a tv, there should be a ref in a room somewhere in the ground giving the decision if the ref has missed it.

[Stadt]

2 hours ago, Kitchandro said:

Clattenberg saw the incidents fine...it's the way he chose to interpret them which was wrong.

 

This technology doesn't solve that issue. This is for entire incidents that have been missed or seen totally incorrectly (i.e. the ref gives a handball and the video proves it didn't hit his hand).

 

Referees will still be able to manage the game.

When Dembele poked whoever in the eyes a TV ref would have him sent off. 

[MrSpaM]

1 hour ago, Wookie said:

It’s daft how the ref has to run over to a tv, there should be a ref in a room somewhere in the ground giving the decision if the ref has missed it.

Or the ref should just wear a watch with a feed to the video on it

[Stadt]

49 minutes ago, MrSpaM said:

Or the ref should just wear a watch with a feed to the video on it

Probably too small, maybe they cary an iPad round 

[Grebfromgrebland]

11 hours ago, Suzie the Fox said:

Could also sew the micro-chips in their socks or have them on their boots ?

We could replace the players with microchips

[ozleicester]

Ever closer to ending sport and creating entertainment. Hate all this technology crap...human error is part of the game

[Guest]

18 hours ago, Wookie said:

Probably too small, maybe they cary an iPad round 

I thought they were all refs so why can't the one with the best view (on TV) make the decision. No need to waste time with going to the other ref (s). If it's too close to call then the video ref just lets it go with the decision made of the pitch.

 

 

2 hours ago, ozleicester said:

Ever closer to ending sport and creating entertainment. Hate all this technology crap...human error is part of the game

I understand that argument but I'd prefer that at the highest levels crap refereeing doesn't ruin matches and tournaments.

 

Maradona's cheating should never have knocked us out of the WC. That was a disgrace.

[ozleicester]

49 minutes ago, FIF said:

I thought they were all refs so why can't the one with the best view (on TV) make the decision. No need to waste time with going to the other ref (s). If it's too close to call then the video ref just lets it go with the decision made of the pitch.

 

 

I understand that argument but I'd prefer that at the highest levels crap refereeing doesn't ruin matches and tournaments.

 

Maradona's cheating should never have knocked us out of the WC. That was a disgrace.

It was a disgrace...but, it has provided a billion discussions for more than 30 years and it is the unpredictability (5000/1) of sport and football, that makes it great.  (edit)..AND... if he had been sent off for the hand pf god... we would never have seen... the 2nd OMG goal...!

 

The continued influence of tech will make the games pointless we will end up watching playstation matches.

Edited 9 December 2017 by ozleicester

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, ozleicester said:

It was a disgrace...but, it has provided a billion discussions for more than 30 years and it is the unpredictability (5000/1) of sport and football, that makes it great. 

 

The continued influence of tech will make the games pointless we will end up watching playstation matches.

I appreciate your opinion. Personally I would rather there were a billion discussions about how England outclassed Argentina and went onto win their second world cup.

[ozleicester]

2 minutes ago, FIF said:

I appreciate your opinion. Personally I would rather there were a billion discussions about how England outclassed Argentina and went onto win their second world cup.

lol.. to be fair it would probably have been.. a million discussions about he we went out on penalties in the semi final

[StanSP]

10 minutes ago, ozleicester said:

It was a disgrace...but, it has provided a billion discussions for more than 30 years and it is the unpredictability (5000/1) of sport and football, that makes it great.  (edit)..AND... if he had been sent off for the hand pf god... we would never have seen... the 2nd OMG goal...!

 

The continued influence of tech will make the games pointless we will end up watching playstation matches.

this has nothing to do with VAR? 

 

[Ian Nacho]

Surely they have to make it fair by every third round tie having VAR?