O/T - Worst thing ever in football?

[ramAnag]

I disagree, it?s not about right or wrong it?s about the disruption to the game and the ?theft? (strong word) of that adrenaline rush that we in the lower leagues get when a goal is scored. Personally I?d scrap it but there?s money involved now so no chance

Clearly the law makers believe it is about right or wrong. I take your point about the adrenaline rush, but I don’t understand why cricket followers can cope with that loss - eg when a crucial decision is reversed because of a minuscule inside edge or no ball, or a magnificent six saving catch is disallowed because a millimetre of the fielder’s heel touched the rope - and football supporters can’t be expected to.

[Andy_Faber]

Clearly the law makers believe it is about right or wrong. I take your point about the adrenaline rush, but I don’t understand why cricket followers can cope with that loss - eg when a crucial decision is reversed because of a minuscule inside edge or no ball, or a magnificent six saving catch is disallowed because a millimetre of the fielder’s heel touched the rope - and football supporters can’t be expected to.

Two possible reasons - there's little 'human judgement' in drs and stilllots in VAR, and drs has a relatively short review period, VAR can go on seemingly for ever

[Andy_Faber]

Clearly the law makers believe it is about right or wrong. I take your point about the adrenaline rush, but I don’t understand why cricket followers can cope with that loss - eg when a crucial decision is reversed because of a minuscule inside edge or no ball, or a magnificent six saving catch is disallowed because a millimetre of the fielder’s heel touched the rope - and football supporters can’t be expected to.

Possibly because the drs/hawkeye cricket review system has become part of the theatre of the game, and is pretty much guaranteed to be over in (I’m guessing) a minute, whereas VAR is still a dark art and can take forever. Someone above mentioned a time limit/real time VAr reviewing, that would be good, but MA is correct it appears EPL have applied it badly

[Ramshank72]

In cricket, it's never about intent or interpretation, every decision is clear cut, or umpires call. The only drama you get is whether someone grounds the ball or not on a catch, which you get without the DRS, albeit with differing delay. Though in cricket, players get fined for slow play, wonder how it would go down in football if players were docked half their match fee for time wasting?

[ramAnag]

Two possible reasons - there's little 'human judgement' in drs and stilllots in VAR, and drs has a relatively short review period, VAR can go on seemingly for ever

Have to disagree. There’s more ‘human judgement’ in DRS because there is always the ‘umpire’s call’ option to fall back on and I’ve seen some astonishingly lengthy decision making, particularly where ‘clean’ catches are concerned.

[Andy_Faber]

Have to disagree. There’s more ‘human judgement’ in DRS because there is always the ‘umpire’s call’ option to fall back on and I’ve seen some astonishingly lengthy decision making, particularly where ‘clean’ catches are concerned.

Clean catches sI'll agree with. Youre wrong on umpires call, its a misnomer, it should be 'stick with your earlier decision', there's no FURTHER human intervention

[ramAnag]

Clean catches sI'll agree with. Youre wrong on umpires call, its a misnomer, it should be 'stick with your earlier decision', there's no FURTHER human intervention

Completely agree. ‘Umpire’s call’ means ‘stick with your earlier decision’, i.e. the original HUMAN decision.

[swaledale]

Whatever, for me VAR has completely spoilt football, I sincerely hope its never introduced in the championship, though I fear it will. The goal line technology was fine to determine whether the ball had crossed the line, the rest is just a further diminution of what football used to be about.