Give it time. They are still working out the best way to use it. Even when they do work it out there will still be decisions that drive you mad. This is my experience in sports here in Australia that use video reviews.
Just to be clear Im not poking fun at racism in football. There is clearly racism in football, that is not a joke. I just don't think all bad calls are because of racism. Don't attribute malice to what can easily be attributed to gross INCOMPETENCE! In this case I think this choke falls under a third category that is quite common in football. I forgot to mention it before, but I will now. Remember how I said refs usually choke on red cards and penalties in the first 5 minutes of a match? I think the same goes for the dying minutes of a match. Not many refs have the balls to call that and be wrong. Which I can understand. Before VAR, the refs had that scapegoat. HOWEVER... Now that we have VAR. There is literally NO REASON not to do this.
Yeah I recon we will get to something decent in the end... I keep forgetting this Cup is a testing ground at senior level... gotta stay positive I suppose.
Hey now, VAR gave you back your second goal against Cameroon But FIFA does have a responsibility to communicate what happened on that play. Maybe the VAR crew simply thought it wasn't a clear-cut penalty, but it would help if they said as much...
But that begs the question, when else is it going to be tested between now and the WC finals given that this tournament is almost over and they still don't know what they're doing? Under-17 world cup perhaps?
It would be interesting to find out if the Ref said no to VAR. He seemed so sure in his mind, waving his hands emphatically. He had the authority to say no to the people in the video booth and go with his gut. Refs are not obligated to use VAR. I can't blame VAR for that. Just the Ref himself.
I will say this. Germany "C" or "Z" the Mexicans better watch out cause those kids mean business. They want to get a shot at the "A" team and are not messing around.
What's with the Germany C talk. Germany came with a team, and that's Germany. It was their choice to bring this team. Don't be taking props from other teams facing them. It de-legitimizes the effort from the other complete national teams. If you beat them, you beat Germany "F", if they beat you, you lost against Germany "Q". Ridiculous!
Italian and German league will implement it for the whole new season. So there will be plenty of instances that can help iron it out
Psychologists have argued for years that the most efficient order is to start with the weakest of the five takers and work your way towards the best. The pressure on the penalty taker gets progressively greater with every penalty. The first taker has the lowest pressure since a missed shot at that stage can still be rectified as your keeper has four or five opportunities to save a PK. Every kick from then onwards reduces the opportunity to correct a mistake and the mental pressure on the fifth taker is by far the greatest. Of course this only works in a shootout that is close (as is typical).
Don't care either way. At the end of the day we came here to get more points for the FIFA ranking and secure pot 1 (should we make it to the world cup). Confed Cup is nice and all, but it ain't really a continental trophy like the Copa America... it's a glorified summer cup that just so happens to give juicy points.
I think the problem with that doesn't take into account that if the first shot misses, it sets the tone for the rest of the takers and heightens the pressure on them to make. And that's compounded as more players miss. So it might be better to put the best takers first to set the right tone and make their shots.
Of course any missed penalty is a bad thing. Psychologists simply argue that missing the first penalty is less of a bad thing than missing the fourth or fifth. Losing a finger is bad but losing your entire hand is worse. If you put a bad taker in first then his miss can still be rectified, if the same bad taker is in fourth or fifth position then his miss is fatal. If, as you suggest, several people miss then of course none of this applies. The psychological pressure argument only works in close shootouts
Of course there is no right answer without knowing how the shootout plays out. The psychological argument you mention is, to me, a classic example of overthinking because regardless of whether you believe there is more pressure later on than earlier in the shootout you can't know which kicks are the most important until it plays out. OR you can, by simplifying the thought process -- The most important shot is the next one. The point has to be to put yourself in a position to win, and to do that you have to put your best right at the top. Otherwise you could end up in a situation (like today) where your best shooters don't even shoot. It's literally the worst thing that can happen.
The bundesliga will use it all through next season. Seeing that maybe one ref and var team will come from that league that's probably not all that helpful.
One of the reasons either theory is hard to prove or disprove is that national teams typically don't have a clear hierarchy of 'best to worst' takers. In international squads there are typically several players who are used to taking penalties for their respective club sides. Alexis, Vidal and Arranguiz who scored for Chile today have all taken penalties for their clubs this season (and have all missed some too). So is there really a best or worst taker for Chile? France have several experienced takers as have Germany. Hence the proof is in the pudding.
The one thing for certain, is that psychologists aren't preciselly those whom take penalty kicks in a shoot out......
Yes but no reason to simply dismiss this theory. After all a penalty shootout is largely a psychological battle. After all every player good enough to play for Chile or Portugal has the necessary base skill to score a penalty. So if one team scores all their kicks and the other team misses eveything then this battle wasn't won on skill but on psychology