Your verdict on VAR

[ramAnag]

Nobody said they were going to be changed mid season if at all, but you were inferring quite clearly that you can't have it both ways with VAR, when the point being made was that firstly the rule change on handball was nonsensical which was a different argument to that about VAR.

VAR is being applied differently in England than elsewhere as has been discussed many times on here, with refs seemingly awaiting a decision from Stockley Park rather than going over to the pitchside monitor and seeing for themselves.

With respect other sports are different, Rugby, Cricket are games which stop and start, the whole point of football is its dynamic nature, the way VAR is being used is ruining this.

Sometimes your very obtuse in your reasoning and seem to miss the threads of the argument and I'm not the only one who has pointed this out.

You’re entitled to your opinion Swale, even if you do seem to be heading towards one of your periodic more ‘personal’ attacks...and I’m not the only one to have pointed this out.

To be clear and as I’ve said...I totally accept the comments on law changes but as we’ve now agreed they aren’t going to happen before next summer and are slightly separate from the VAR debate.

I’m attempting to broaden the discussion to compare football with other sports in relation to the use of technology.

My rugby example referred to a ‘try’ in the corner during a match being played, circumstantially, on the world’s biggest stage. It had nothing to do with the ‘stop, start’ nature of the game. The fans were celebrating and the decision was one involving millimetres. It was the most marginal and questionable of decisions but it was accepted without the current near hysteria surrounding so many VAR decisions in the Premier League.

Similarly with cricket...the introduction of the third ‘video’ umpire has had massive benefits although the ‘umpire’s call’ aspect seems to me to be a bit of a cop out, allowing - as it frequently does - the umpire to be ‘right’ depending on whether his decision is challenged by the batting or bowling side.

In the Test v SA last week the match outcome possibly pivoted on a caught behind decision leading to the dismissal of Edgar. The ‘evidence’ was flimsy...the ‘spike’ tiny...but there was a ‘spike’ and the umpire’s decision of ‘out’ was upheld by the TMO.
The batsman walked off grumbling and shaking his head, as all batsmen are prone to do, but ultimately there were no complaints.

So...on a thread entitled ‘Your verdict on VAR’...is it so unreasonable to consider the impact on football compared to other sports? It’s been used in cricket, RU, RL, tennis and athletics for years. Sometimes there have been suggestions - particularly where there have been doubts about the grounding of the ball in rugby - that the action should be watched in ‘real time’ but in none of these other sports have we witnessed the all too regular overreaction we now see in football.

Not sure it’s ‘obtuse’ to raise that issue and my point about ‘having it both ways’ was simply that, in an era when every household has access to such relatively advanced technology we expect the decisions to be technically spot on. Unfortunately when they are - and are proved to be so - we still complain and that, old chap, is my ‘verdict on VAR’.

[ramAnag]

More VAR nonsense today.
Defy anybody to explain why Van Dijk’s challenge on De Gea was illegal and that Liverpool goal was ruled out.
Not the fault of VAR but human error from the moron who watched it.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Makes a change for it not to go LiVARpool's way....

[ramAnag]

Makes a change for it not to go LiVARpool's way....

They got lucky with one against Wolves a few weeks ago I agree, but that today was everything that is wrong with VAR imo.

1) There was no clear and obvious mistake by the referee so why overule it?
2) Van Dijk did nothing wrong...to disallow it the VAR official has to see something wrong and there really wasn’t anything...complete make believe.

They have the technology to help one human being get things right - a good thing...and then another human being totally ***** it up.

[AdiSalisbury]

He made no attempt to challenge for the ball as I understand it? Still prefer var removed altogether

[macstheman]

I tend to go with rA on this!! Supposed to be a contact sport, soon be like netball!!
Having said that de Gea is a wimp!! Real mardarse on coming for crosses when opponent challenging. Should have given the goal for that reason alone!!

[MadAmster]

Putting my ref's hat on........ look at the picture below. They are in the air, the ball is still on the way, van Dijk has already "backed into" de Gea. I hope I would have called the foul. Why? van Dijk has turned his back on de Gea and can't see where he is. He knows he is close but not exactly where. van Dijk is no longer in control of where he is going and hits de Gea in the air. de Gea has his eyes firmly fixed on the ball. van Dijk can't even see the ball as he backs into de Gea. That is a foul in the centre circle so why not in the penalty area?

It's like sliding, once you start the slide you no longer have control. Once you jump, you can't change direction. Backing in is a foul, be that on the ground or in the air.

Now to replace my ref's hat with my keeper's hat.......
1. I'd have been upset if I hadn't caught the ball anyway
2. If I had dropped the ball, I'd have been upset if the ref hadn't given a foul

[ramAnag]

With respect MA, I don’t think you can use a ‘still’ photo to prove anything at all in this instance, least of all that van Dijk is ‘backing in’.
Both are obviously looking at where the ball is being ‘delivered’ from which means that van Dijk is facing the same direction as de Gea but the former’s backside is nowhere near making contact.
Honestly can’t see how van Dijk could have jumped more ‘fairly’...he was just stronger and more determined than de Gea who although, like Roos, is a spectacularly good shot stopper he is, as mac suggests - and again like Roos - a bit of a wimp where likely contact is concerned.
With either your ref or goalie’s ‘hat’ on I suggest you’d have been very disappointed indeed had Derby had a ‘goal’ like that disallowed.

[MadAmster]

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one rA. The fact that Roy Keane disagrees with me tells me I'm right

[ramAnag]

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one rA. The fact that Roy Keane disagrees with me tells me I'm right

Lol...have to admit I was very uncomfortable finding myself agreeing with Keane...only ever happened once before - over the ‘prawn sandwich brigade’.