How come in rugby league, cricket, North West Counties Dominoes league division 2, and Birstall Pigeons Fanciers Committee meeting (June 13th 2015) they can use the ****er effectively, yet with the squillions of funds sloshing about in football they STILL cannot get it right. FFS
It's genuinely amazing how apocalyptically bad it is. Just copy the formula from Rugby completely FFS.
Just read something along the lines of it's just more **** refs in a room making **** decisions. Sums it up.
Im pretty neutral on the idea of video refs. If they work like in rugby and cricket, I'm all for it. This though can rightly **** the **** off. It's somehow managed to make referees worse. Only in football...
Like Bob I've not seen much of this. What is the system? Personally I don't think it's needed. Football isn't as technical as cricket or rugby with some of these things that need to be slowed down and seen over and over to be sure. It's actually a pretty simple game. The issue for me is that the rules allow so much importance to lie on a referee's decision, which can never be reliable. Penalties can be awarded which completely change a game's outcome even if the offence occured on the corner of the box with the attackers back to goal and absolutely no danger. It's not proportionate. Meanwhile a ball accidentally brushing a defenders hand can get him sent off, banned for a game and his team concede a goal. It's a ridiculously strong punishment for something that referees regularly struggle to get right. I'm not against technology, but I think the issue is that the marginal calls have become too important. And I strongly believe it isn't just the real big talking points in a game that matter. If you watch a live game you often see how a whiny home crowd means that their team get loads of little free kicks which accumulates into a big advantage over an entire game. I think this is a big part of what we call home advantage. They might pat themselves on the back if offside calls and goal decisions are made more accurately, but that isn't the whole problem.
Chile would have had a penalty against us (Australia) if not for VAR. It can be used correctly but some will use confirmation bias to rubbish it.
It's not the VAR that's at fault, like on the pitch it is human opinion, it comes down to a person(s) interpretation.
In the 3rd 4th place game a mexico player made a high foot tackle and the referee rightly gave a free kick so no extra delay when it when to the video. The portugal player is still rolling around the floor holding his head but the video clearly showed light contact was only on the arm, result mexico player sent off ( it may have been second yellow ) In the final a chile player shoulder charges a german and a free kick is given it goes to the video which clearly shows the chile player elbowing the other bloke in the face and only a yellow given. As said other sports are able to make it work so why not football? Are they trying to show / prove it's not good and therefore not use it, or is it just teething troubles?
Dermot Gallagher as good as confirms it'll be just as ****e with VAR. "The interesting thing is, I spoke to a referee at a game on Saturday and he's convinced it is a penalty. What I say is, when the VAR comes, we have to accept that it will not be 100 per cent true to what we want. If I was the VAR ref for that game, I would've said it wasn't a penalty but the guy I spoke to on Saturday said it was so we will still have that little bit of cloud." Just more bollocks for bollocks sake. Leave the game be.