Your verdict on VAR

[Manofpride]

It's here now and it won't go back! If it's going to be part of the game will they be using it for Sunday League?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0d2VT5md6c

[Andy_Faber]

Two great examples of SENSIBLE use of decision review this evening in the Texans/Bills NFL game, one a simple yes/no a bit like like offside, one an intrepretation a bit like handball, both overturned, pretty quickly, and NO FUSS, either on the field or on the US networks. Football could learn from the way decision review has been embedded in NFL

[AdiSalisbury]

Maybe, but NFL is already slow, stop start, and boring. I think cricket is a better example where they have umpires call, why not have it in football where if the VAR can't be certain after 10 seconds, it's referee's / linesman's call

[MadAmster]

It works way better in the Netherlands. Why? Because they use it the way FIFA says it should be used. The FA and the PL decided they know better. The software FA/PL use is way more advanced than what the Dutch use. They can't do the lines in red/blue bit to see if the player is 1mm offside. They only have a say when they think it's CLEAR and OBVIOUSLY offside, otherwise the old adage of doubt going to the attacker applies. If VAR thinks the ref got it wrong, the ref goes to the pitchsid escreen and then decides for himself. Exactly the way FIFA say it should be used and there are far less issues here than there are in the PL.

[swaledale]

Well we benefitted at Palace today with the red card, but then surprise surprise the ref went over and checked it himself!

[ramAnag]

Oliver going to the screen certainly gave the stewards a job to do. One bloke was apoplectic...looked like a relative of that idiot that Cantona took exception to years ago.

Seriously...the downside of the ref going to look at a monitor is that the crowd comes into it whereas if it’s just an anonymous official in a box somewhere they know they can’t impact on the eventual decision.

All in favour of Adi’s ‘referee’s call’ as in the way ‘umpires’s call’ is currently used in cricket but I suppose nothing will keep everyone happy.

[MadAmster]

Oliver going to the screen certainly gave the stewards a job to do. One bloke was apoplectic...looked like a relative of that idiot that Cantona took exception to years ago.

I said at the time that I thought the steward with #3 on his back was actually beckoning fans to "come on down".

[swaledale]

I said at the time that I thought the steward with #3 on his back was actually beckoning fans to "come on down".

For me I'd have it so that the match referee can review an incident he isn't sure of, his (or her) call every time. As it stands I can see refs avoiding making a decision and hoping those numbwits at Stockley ParK save him from controversy.

The other way I saw it working was in allowing each Manager say four appeals per game, so that if they felt a goal had been a result of a foul or a penalty hadn't been given then they could ask for a review. As it is being used now just makes the game a laughing stock, I'd seriously question going to a premier league game now.

I see West Ham had a goal ruled out tonight, though in this case it was the daft handball rule thats been brought in rather than VAR that was at fault. Why oh why do they keep tinkering with the rules?

[mistaram]

[QUOTE=swaledale;39406980]For me I'd have it so that the match referee can review an incident he isn't sure of, his (or her) call every time. As it stands I can see refs avoiding making a decision and hoping those numbwits at Stockley ParK save him from controversy.

The other way I saw it working was in allowing each Manager say four appeals per game, so that if they felt a goal had been a result of a foul or a penalty hadn't been given then they could ask for a review. As it is being used now just makes the game a laughing stock, I'd seriously question going to a premier league game now.

I see West Ham had a goal ruled out tonight, though in this case it was the daft handball rule thats been brought in rather than VAR that was at fault. Why oh why do they keep tinkering with the rules? [/QUOTE
Swales I was watching the Sheff U match that decision to rule the goal out as ludicrous so obvious it was an accidental hand ball, but the crazy rule change made it a joke

[MadAmster]

[QUOTE=mistaram;39407051]

Swales I was watching the Sheff U match that decision to rule the goal out as ludicrous so obvious it was an accidental hand ball, but the crazy rule change made it a joke

It is, indeed the new Law/interpretation, that, rightly, according to that Law/interpretation, saw the goal disallowed. The chances are the ref didnt see the handball and VAR put that right.

Change the Law back so it's down to the ref to decide if any handball was intentional or not. The most ludicrous element of the current situation is that there are 2 different handball Laws in effect. One for defenders and one for attackers. There should be ONE Law and that should apply to everybody.