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

I doubt it would be as cluster********-y as you describe and what I described is, to me, better than the current implementation of VAR. that said, maybe 4 AR's has been trialled and abandoned but I'm not aware of it.

to repeat:
This is another outcome of VAR: no one, no matter how much football they have watched, can quite trust their eyes. The instinct players, referees and viewers have built up over years, the sense that something just looks like a foul, no longer applies. Worse, the law is different at different times and in different parts of the pitch. Some things – incidents in the box or leading to a goal – will be checked, creating strict liability; others will not. It used to be that a shove on the halfway line would bring a whistle but you could probably get away with it in the box; now the polarities have reversed and the slightest contact in the box is liable to bring sanction.

 

Got to admit it. Now I'm curious on how VAR will be handled in the prem. Yeah it's FIFA run but will the FA after seeing what has gone on over the last few months make changes to keep the game flowing.
Or will they keep making the same time consuming mistakes.

The Offside law and the Penalty (diving) review are the most contentious.

The offside call will always be a problem. "Where was he at the moment the ball was played forward?" Split seconds.

Let's see how it's all handled. If they continue the long winded delays, or call back teams from the showers then they haven't learnt a thing.

 

one lives in hope.

otoh

one has lived in hope before .

 

See even now you're going on this lengthy explanation and I tried skimming through it. Then I tried reading it. Both times I have no idea what you're trying to say.

 

But Hawkeye has been a great improvement for tennis.

 

as has the GDS for footie. absolutely great addition to the game.


even though the effing thing may have cost us the title !!!

 

My point is the majority of tennis officials are only there to make line calls. And they don’t always do a very good job. So just having more officials is not necessarily an indicator for a better outcome.

 

Odd as it sounds I'm 400% with Hobo on this. I can't imagine anything worse.
How about we give them little yellow flags they can throw when the see something wrong. Then they can all gather and talk about the dinner date they had last night.

 

refs and ARs are in constant communication now during the game - adding at most one more voice to a discussion wouldn't add anything worth worrying about. it's not like they'd review everything now is it, just hard-to-call events.

you're all wrong. just afraid to try something new.

 

not to me it isn't.

what I described is a step towards full-blown VAR, and gives a chance to get the damn thing right before human beings get totally elbowed aside.... with the added advantage of maybe never going full-blown VAR the way you want it.

having offsite officials making game-deciding calls makes zero sense to me.

tell you what .... forget the 2x AR's thing, if VAR decisions were made only by the on-pitch ref, and not some invisible, nameless, unseen guy - who has as far as anyone watching knows has never managed any kind of big game (but is nevertheless good at watching TV) - I could live with that.

 

not sure if those points are relevant delay. tennis action plays out in a tiny fraction of the space a footie game does, and involves 2 participants not 22 with - yes - almost all decisions binary (in or out, foot fault yes/no). no subjective decisions to be seen, no fouls or diving etc in sight. so dead simple in comparison, except the fact the ball is tiny and gets whacked at 100mph or whatever. yet the officials feel they need 22 eyes not 6 !

the fact they "don't always do a very good job" in tennis isn't an indicator that added ARs in footie wouldn't improve decisions.

 

At the risk of beating a dead horse, VAR got another contentious decision totally wrong IMO. A "handball" (still haven't seen anything to clearly indicate it struck her upper arm and not her chest) in the England-Sweden (W) game. Absolute horseshit and definitely not "clear and obvious." Just micro-managing garbage. F uck the people running VAR and FIFA until the cows come home.

 

Reading VAR aficionados telling everyone how "getting it right" is the only important consideration always makes me think of the description of accountants - knowing the cost of everything and the value of nothing.

 

Yeah, it was hardly a case of her arm away from her body. ( that sounds serious ) It may have jammed between the players but hardly hand ball.

Another subjective call.

 

And talking about subjective.

 

oh ffs. what's mind-boggling is your absolutism. that clip is 100% inconclusive, mostly because you can't actually - y'know - SEE the arm you're claiming she used, at the point where the ball hit her.

did she use her arm? damned if I know, and if that's the view the VARs used, they are full of it.

sweet jesus christ.

 

the ball could quite easily have hit her in the chest ffs.

PS you're straying into zaq territory now .....

 

I agree 100 %

I saw that before the Var. and on top of it being obvious, it looked very intentional. Should have been a yellow

 

Copa America is turning into a joke when it comes to VAR.
Semifinal Argentina Brasil VAR denies to crystal clear penalties and one results in a goal for Brasil on the counter attack.

Now for the third place playoff medel and messi gets red for a confrontation. I could see messi getting a yellow for his involvement but there is no way thats a red for Messi