It's kind of interesting why these are the 2 grounds with no massive telly facility.
VAR - Not the hero we want, the one we need
- Thread starter Pavl3n
- Start date
It's still open to interpretation? Pens going to be given for aiming ball at players arms in box, this is going to happen, and it already has.
Look out in prem next season, every player will have to learn how to keep there balance with arms behind there back.
It's going to be a shambles
Look out in prem next season, every player will have to learn how to keep there balance with arms behind there back.
It's going to be a shambles
The touch was obvious and made the striker stumble in a very promising situation. It clearly was not a dive, cannot believe posters above believe the striker forced anything.
I agree that the referee should have stopped the game before the foul on the other side of the pitch, especially since the uproar of the Swiss attackers was suggesting something relevant just happened - but this is how VAR works I guess. They have to wait to check the videos and change a decision until there is a natural interruption during the game. However giving the penalty to Switzerland was the only right thing to do.
Last but not least: this does not change anything to the fact that Portugal beat us and deserve to play the final.
I agree that the referee should have stopped the game before the foul on the other side of the pitch, especially since the uproar of the Swiss attackers was suggesting something relevant just happened - but this is how VAR works I guess. They have to wait to check the videos and change a decision until there is a natural interruption during the game. However giving the penalty to Switzerland was the only right thing to do.
Last but not least: this does not change anything to the fact that Portugal beat us and deserve to play the final.
It's going to be like Riverdance at set pieces.
Not all contact is a foul. Not all fouls need contact. Why do people keep forgetting this?
Yep, with flattley on the Whistle! Going to be fun
VAR can help referees, but in the end the final decision is human based, and that means error prone.
Also, VAR won't hide some stupid football rules, but expose them. So, in general I don't think the fans will be much satisfied.
When football gets simpler rules and lesser involvement of referees it will be better, otherwise I don't see such a big difference.
Also, VAR won't hide some stupid football rules, but expose them. So, in general I don't think the fans will be much satisfied.
When football gets simpler rules and lesser involvement of referees it will be better, otherwise I don't see such a big difference.
It says they’re looking at people being able to use an app to see the replays. Of course they’ll need to get a way for you to get a signal inside Old Trafford first.
Agreed.
The decisions by the referees will always have some (unconscious) subjective bias and thus always be open to interpretation and controversy.
Thus for me VAR should only be used where there can be 100% certainty of getting the decision right I.e. goaline and offsides. The ball either did or did not cross the line. The player was or was not offside. End of.
Fouls imo still need to be left to the discretion of referees otherwise the controversy will remain if the ref interprets the VAR differently to you.
The play must go on though, otherwise you might be killing a valid counter. Of course there'll be bizarre incidents like this one but they're the exception rather than the rule.
I don't think anyone is naive enough to think VAR will have no negative side effects. It's the positive vs negative balance that makes VAR a good thing. It's the biggest resource a ref team can have to help them make the right decision. If they still make the wrong decision after all this, it's on them, not on the technology.
VAR is beautiful.
I love the VAR. Almost knocked out by Jlingz but the VAR prevented that.
No bad word about the VAR ever again.
No bad word about the VAR ever again.
RIP live football.
That's ridiculousVAR is beautiful.
No such thing. Either you're offside or you're not.That's ridiculous
Whoever decided a toenail being offside is a legitimate reason to overturn a given goal just doesn’t understand football.
Yeah, no way that's a clear and obvious error. I support VAR but this is not one of those cases it should be used.
At least the line they use there weren’t as bad as that mata one back in the day
100%. It's football, but just not as we know it/I want it to be.
That's before we even get into a discussion on whether you can call that offside given the camera angle is hopeless (defender's shoulder vs Sterling's boot).
I think this could be the final nail in the coffin for me walking away from football. Not just because of this shitty decision tonight but because its going to ruin the game. Also typical for England that for years when we actually needed it (Maradona, Lampard, Solcampbell etc) it wasn’t around. The only time England need the bit of luck and boom there it is
I think it is a good change. One referee will allow a goal because "only a toenail offside" while another referee will disallow a goal because "a toenail offside".
They used software to make the decicion 100% fair and no room for human error.
It might not be fun for live football but it is fair. No more argueing about offside or not. With the VAR and the software it will be offside or no offside. No discussion possible anymore.
No wonder they try to avoid using it for offside, 
.
Did they not have the previous frame they could have flashed up?
.Did they not have the previous frame they could have flashed up?
Its not ridiculous, its perfect, the right outcome and the right decision. It's one of the reasons VAR will vastly improve football.That's ridiculous
It’s just a shit interpretation of the rule. Benefit of the doubt should always go to the attacker in those situations.
It takes a special kind of genius to implement a change in the game that’s sole purpose is to reduce the number of goals.
The VAR is also used if a goal was scored when
With this VAR system, where there is no room for human error, there is no doubt about it being offside or not. I do agree that attacker should get the benefit of the doubt in normal situations but the VAR takes away any doubt.
I think the goal of the change is to make the game more fair. Goal line technology prevents unfair goals being allowed and so does the VAR. It will just get some time to get used to it and it will take away some of the charm of 'everything is possible'.
It's not software. It's another referee looking at a replay of a poor camera angle on TV with some imprecise MS Paint lines thrown in.
That offside decision was terrible.
You can't blame VAR for following the rules of the game. If the linesman had seen it, he would have called it as offside as well. I think the debate should be about whether the offside rule in itself should be more lenient or not.
The commentator said the Lingard goal was being checked by software instead of a human.
Nah, there's gonna be loads more goals. Mainly penalties to start with, but wait until the defences push out a little bit.
And the crap sides don't get to move out of their own end hardly at all.
The software produces the calibrated lines, based on the best available camera angles, and the lines are then projected onto the replay image, and then the referee makes a decision. That's very different to e.g. goal-line technology.
The bigger question is would I rather accept marginal decisions and a flowing game, or would I rather have constant delays while marginal decisions are re-interpreted? Easy decision for me.
I meant it was ridiculous how close it was, not that it was wrong. My bad.
Oh sorry, my bad. 100%. I mean its horrid luck and no doubt it would have went with the attacker in seasons gone by. Are you happier to be playing Holland or would you have preferred England in the final. I think Ronaldo would have taken this England back 4 to the cleaners, think the Dutch will be a tougher game.
Yeah, same.
And that’s not getting into the stupidity of repeatedly watching play getting waved on when someone is a mile offside - risking injuries and yellow/red cards - knowing that we’re just going to end up with yet another booooooring VAR break.
I do despise this.
If it's an obvious offside call(like plenty happen), the assistant should raise the flag right away and play stopped.
It’s unavoidable though. From now on, if a linesman ever flags incorrectly he’ll be fecking crucified so they’re just not going to bother. Other than in the most extreme cases.
Yea I think it's such a fundamental shift in the way football is played/managed. I don't see that the benefits of continual review of marginal decisions outweighs the costs to the flow of the game. I'm fine accepting the odd mistake, because to me that's a lesser evil that a stop-start flow. One of my favourite parts of football is how it flows compares to other sports. But I realise plenty of others disagree with that opinion.
If your toenail is actually offside then you're offside. Unless "understanding football" means literally ignoring the rules of football.
Might as well argue that a goal isn't a goal if it only just crosses the line, or a handball isn't a handball if it only slightly touches someone's hand.
Deciding that somebody is offside is offside means you don't understand football? I wasn't aware there was a rule that said that a certain amount of offside is ok but not too much.