Reply With QuoteYup.
But we all (well fans) called this as going to happen.
|
Moderator
What a load of absolute, utter shite.
Which absolute wanker sat at Stockley Park decided that Pickford's assault on Van Dyk wasn't a straight red???
There's absolutely zero point in VAR if it's going to be used as badly as that.
Pathetic.
Moderator
Yup.
But we all (well fans) called this as going to happen.
Moderator
True enough.
But, with decisions like that and the ridiculous Mane offside, I think the game would be better off without it. The technology itself works very well....but it's being implemented by morons.
Moderator
Or deliberately implemented badly, so that next season when decisions go the way of the big clubs its not even remarked upon. . .
Or am I to cynical?
Moderator
Originally Posted by Jammy89
I almost wish that were true...but i think the people running VAR are just shit...and that's even more worrying than the scenario you put forward.
Hall Of Fame
I can see what you mean but I´m happy with that decision. I mean, he was offside but it was just very close and so the right decision was taken and the technology is there to make those close calls.
What gets me is the human interpretation of the VAR evidence when it comes to decisions like hand ball. For me, VAR has shown up how cr*p many of our officials are who were hiding before when decision making was harder. Now, with the evidence in front of them, to watch repeatedly, it´s clear that they are not consistent either between officials or between decisions (the same official).
Referee interpretation needs to be removed from the game and the decisions need to be compleytely technical (e.g. if the ball hits the defenders hand/arm in the box, it is a penalty, no matter what). This may seem ´unfair´on occasion but it will be consistent and THE SAME RULE for everyone. For bad fouls it is harder but should follow the same line.
Moderator
The problem with that decision (other than the ridiculous current version of the offside law) is that the decision on when the ball left the foot isn't questioned-a frame or so earlier and Mane mightn't have been offside so I don't see how they can be so precise with drawing the lines to judge the offisde player when the decision about when the ball is considered to have left the player's foot isn't subjected to the same rigour.
Hall Of Fame
After last nights result I thought we were the worst team in the league. Then I remembered the VAR team. The tackle by T Rex was a straight red. End of !
Hall Of Fame
True enough. It might be better to say, if the call is within 30 cm then count it as level and let it go. This would reduce the deliberation time - it’s the studying of close calls that takes an unacceptable time to judge.
Also, as with Mane’s goal yesterday, the offside was so close that it made no difference to the goal being scored or not.
The net result is that the game was spoilt, one team/group of supporters is left hugely frustrated and the other feeling a bit sheepish.
Moderator
One way to fix it is to say that to be offside, both of the player's feet have to be ahead of the last player. This idea that if there's a part of the body they could score with that's past the line then it's offside is utterly ludicrous. Has anyone ever scored with their ankle or their arse from 20 yeards??
At least if the rule was about both feet then you could say aye, he was ahead of the player-and it wouldn't matter by how much.
Posting Permissions
