Don't tell me that the VAR Thread is still going?

eh? in what way am I not happy about the guys on the pitch making the calls?

 

we'll likely see some of that in the Prem next season or the one after.

 

Nah! They'll have it sorted by then.

Today, unless I dozed off. There were no VAR calls made in the WWC match with Norway and Englaland.
That'll definitely help with the post series stats.

 

I guess the only fix for that is to not blow the final whistle and just wait for the ball to go out of play so you can review before saying the game is over.

 

I just meant the VAR process in general you're not happy about. Nevermind...

 

Just two things ....
Here's a genuine question:

Do you think it will be 75% come next June?

On th ebright side for VAR - how many football fans are actually watchi

Well, you card enough about the other call when I said it might not be a penalty. What's a good argument once is the same the next time ...

 

Except that it wasn't said as part of an argument. It was a stated gut feeling. It was a notion stated separately to anything else in this thread...

*note..........


Nothing in any of the arguments I've proposed is similar to that. So, for not the first time, your assertion about me is wrong.

 

BRILLIANT..... the modern game.... conceived and brought to you by hyper-speed Boolean Algebra ....
I prefer the old game - conceived and brought to you by people having fun....

Some say that it "has to evolve"
I agree that it does evolve - but not that anything like a game ever "has to".....

 

As I pointed out to Delaynomo - it wasn't advanced to help my argument. It was a completely stand-alone statement. Unlike Trump, I don't wish to posit those types of personal opinions into an argument.

Back to my opinion on the matter - I'd really love to know if I'm wrong and less than 3-1 of the guys on this board (for example) ever care about the VAR incidents in games they are not watching. Come on guys - give us a poll At the moment it's 3-2
me, sam and USScouse lined up against Delaynomo and Hobo
what about the rest of yis???

Personally -
Which ones will I care about next season?? (I'll be watching Liverpool, so they don't count.) So, probably only the Man City ones will concern me out of any games I am not watching. The only other times I will think of VAR (EVER) is

a) when it is ruining the accustomed spectacle/excitement of some game that I am actually watching
or
b) when I come on this bloody thread ....

 

Watching Ronaldo celebrate the same goal twice is all the justification I'd ever need to be against anything that instantiates such a spectacle....

 

I will remain forever fascinated by how any discussion about that incident can last any more than about 10 seconds.

Here's a thought.... If exactly that had happened to Jamie Vardy in the Man City vs Leicester game and the ball had broken immediately upfield and Vincent Kompany had banged in his piledriver, I wonder would any Liverpool fans on Earth (hell, throw in Mars and the Moon too) be prepared to state truthfully that it was a 50-50 tussle they saw?? By my view of what's a foul and what isn't, I wouldn't have to ....

 

Just as an aside. It was refreshing after the WWC match, England v Norway. To hear people talking about the game and how it was played.
Not a single peep about VAR. it was like watching football.

 

Many people said.....That is not true Donald.
Most people thought Lamela piled into VvD to draw a PK.

I know you said you didn't want to discus it anymore but you're not getting the last word on a fake statement.

I won't discus this anymore.

 

↑
As I pointed out to Delaynomo - it wasn't advanced to help my argument. It was a completely stand-alone statement. Unlike Trump, I don't wish to posit those types of personal opinions into an argument.

You are wrong again! But we will disagree about how you're wrong, and maybe even what "right" and "wrong" and "disagree" and "help your argument" mean, so... let's leave it.

Nope: See, as far as this one goes, one of the two of us is better qualified to say what I meant by writing that line.

 

I can't even remember what my opinion on this was - but I DO KNOW one thing. Whatever it was, It was given to me by my eyes and not by some kind of subconscious analysis.

 

It's interesting. You are saying that VvD took a deliberate kick at Lamela and somehow that vid backs you up. That is really incredible

I see VvD eyes on the ball trying to make a clearance. Lamela is coming in from his side, he Lamela turns and shoulders into VvD just as he kicks.
Deliberate yeah, many people say so!!!!

 

You're getting way off the point. A casual observational question put into the thread (referencing merely what seems to me but not to you a fairly commonsense statement) neither makes it part of my argument or even in any way useful to my argument. You, of course, can say that it does, you can say anything you like. You can whistle it in the key of Q for all I care, but it doesn't change the fact that with this
Well- for what it's worth I would wager that the rate is also about 3-1 concerning my bold bit above...
All I was doing was propounding the proposition of if anyone could be bothered to ask.

How the heck can that be read as bolstering an argument?

Incidentally, many great essayists have a penchant for diverting into anecdote midway through a didactic tract. Such speculation sometimes illuminates unseen alleys.
(Speaking of alleys - when George Costanza says to Jerry Seinfeld "I know my alleys" he's saying the same thing I'm saying.) I know mine too.
This underlined above is obviously an opinion about a statement (a statement that you chose to argue about - mostly, I think, simply because you like to argue. I find it hard to believe that you really truly believe the opposite of
"most people only care about VAR stoppages insofar as they are actually happening"

As George Costanza also famously said:
That's it for me, folks.

 

Again (disclaimer) I don't spend a whole lot of time reading the rule book, but if you are not allowed to kick people, how can two players ever be allowed to swing at a ball from opposite directions, one of them always from the position of (after he has kicked the other guy) knowing in preconception that he might likely kick the guy?

In some minor way that is allowing a player to kick another.

Of course, the alternative of .... when in that situation both players must stop and back away, isn't exactly suitable for the game...

 

Meanwhile .. the new VAR thread races to catch the old one ....

and that really is it for me .... for now....

 

Only one player was attempting to play the ball. The other was intent on playing the man. "Intent" worked but he paid.

I'll never mentipn this again....in the VAR. thread