******** that. Leave the offside to the linesman. End of. Christ. It'll turn into the fvcking american football stopping fiasco if you have your way
I have no problem with "legal" disruption. That is a valid tactic for the less technically gifted team. But the original post suggests we shouldn't have VAR because VAR may stop weaker teams being more competitive by getting away with "illegal' acts (this has to be what is implied as VAR would not penalise any "legal" disruption). The rules are the rules so the reasoning in that post makes no sense whatsoever.
Not really. I'm saying let any close offside go and only review if a goal is scored. It would actually reduce stoppages. Refs should err on giving the attacker the benefit of the doubt. Numerous attacks are kill with borderline offside calls in the center circle. Drives me nuts.
it should be like every other sport. Teams/coaches get the opportunity to go to VAR, but the opportunities are limited.
Well, I wouldn't say "no sense whatsoever" would you have the referee call a penalty at every 2nd corner kick? I doubt it. So, in this light we must concede that the rules are to some extent not written on Moses Tablets but interpretive. and I can see a game of football not only being ruined through waiting for silly calls to be VAR worked out, but also the tendency of these decisions to bolster stronger teams (unnecessarily). So, if the cheating around the minotr rules goes on, I say, so be it. It hasn't unduly bothered me ..... One big BIG problem i also see is taking away a ref's ability to be a judge as well as just a juror. I mean, how far are we gonna go with this damn thing. Will Pep and Jurgen and Arsene (well, no arsene any more apparently) now have a hired guy in the dug-out whose only job is to count up to 6 seconds every time the opposing keeper has the ball. And in the case that if it makes it over by a fraction stop the play and scream VAR VAR VAR for an indirect free kick in the box??? And a yellow for the keeper on the 2nd time. And what about challenges that are subsequently wrong? Do i get my 20 seconds back? This is gonna be a real annoyance.....
Not really. Every other sport has figured out a way to best incorporate it into their games and I'm very rarely aggravated by it. I really don't get the opposition to it. Considering what is at stake for teams at the highest level, to have the chance to win something taken away from you because a ref misses an obvious call when the technology exists to greatly reduce the risk of that happening is a no brainer for me. An obvious bad call costs us the CL and you guys are okay with that because we are afraid of a stoppage in play?
Yeah it is. Some people have the idea that var is some sort of AI computer algorithm that will instantly give the correct answer. Instead of 2 second tier refs sitting in front of TV sipping tea whilst waiting to be called on. Then the big delay will be them not seeing the incident the same way. "That was a dive" "No it wasn't it was a trip and I've got them in the pools for a draw" (Let's get another cup of tea and discus this some more shall we.)
But where/how does your suggested limitation of the amount of times a team can use it gel in logic with your main point (about righting wrongs). If you're out of uses by the time the wrong happens (which will be the case if every corner infraction is argued?) For to sustain your main greivance it has to be unlimited, and that will be a disaster. So, it can't fix problem A without creating problem B And I prefer problem A (i've lived with it this long)
No. There will be no VAR reviews for the 6-second rule. There's no need for policing the 6-second rule. There is a need for policing offside calls that lead to goals, because too often it is the call that is gotten wrong that swings a match. There's no real reason VAR should take much longer than a normal goal or a normal pen. Add a bit extra stoppage time, there you go. It's really that simple if they integrate it correctly. Then again the clubs voted against it, so maybe I'm missing something. Is there an opinion piece out there expressing why this is, why they didn't implement it next seasno?
There's no reason to think this, there is already a stoppage for every goal scored. Longer for pens, as there is a stoppage for the foul, as the box is cleared, as the kick is taken, and as it often goes in there's even more stoppage after that. The WBA-LIV match demonstrated clearly that it doesn't much change the flow of anything (and there will not be 3 checks of VAR in the first half of all that many matches, ever) -- it adds a little bit of time and this was with the first iteration of the rules. Streamline it further, it will be even less noticeable.
Not necessarily. In cricket you a get a couple appeals per inning. Appeal and you are right, you get to appeal again, appeal and you are wrong, you lose it. Give the managers the chance to appeal and if they choose to use it on frivolous things likes minor shirt pulls on a corner and they are wrong, they lose it. It forces managers to be selective in what they appeal, but it also gives them a chance on an obvious error.
Easy. In general, ONLY the ref can request VAR whenever he feels he needs confirmation of something. How the ref chooses to use this is up to him. Can be compared to free kicks where some refs will blow for every slight foul but some will let the game flow more. If the teams are to be allowed to call for VAR, they only get one challenge (carried forward if they are correct). This challenge can only be used to challenge cards, free kicks, penalties and goals. In practice, managers will save the challenge for the big events - red cards, penalties and goals.
I was really against it at first too and it will have growing pains but the power isn't taken away from the head referee. He is just informed by Big Brother when they recommend he looks at a play again. It's up to him on whether he looks or not. Obviously we all want to stamp out the Spurs-like diving, the goals that cross the line but aren't called (goal line technology is perfect but this is another route), and incorrectly called offside. Properly implemented, it will not be a hindrance to the flow of the game more than any controversial call already is. This just gives the ref a 2nd viewing, if he feels he needs one. With VAR, England would've tied the game up with Germany in 2010 (but probably still lost 4-2) and we would probably have 4 more points this season.
the game WILL be stopped for everything that could even remotely be a foul or pen. refs will be scared shitless not to use it. VAR = hell in a handbasket.
... the rules regarding use of VAR. Just like they were used in WBA-LIV, they didn't use VAR for every throw-in did they? It's really not that complicated.
there are a small number of situations where VAR NEEDS to be used. a) penalties b) did ball cross goal line perhaps the offside rule needs to be modified so that play continues until a goal is scored or possession changes...
no offense meant, but ppl saying "eliminate the offside rule" don't really make any sense. it's there for a damn good reason. some on here will recall the term "goal hanging" from their young playing days ....
But what when coaches complain that the ref is getting it wrong. Surely the point is that then they HAVE TO use it..... If it is truly for disputes then all they must do is start to dispute .... Then all it will take is one eejit like Allardyce to start a trend .....
I'm not sure I follow. Coaches will always complain. There will always be bad calls, so coaches will complain. It's going to happen MUCH more often if you leave VAR out of the match on the most crucial moments, like pens or offsides that lead to goals. But complaining will never be a good reason to expand something so it alters the flow of a game. The idea with VAR in most sports is that it's left for the crucial moments. The NBA has gone too far and teh NFL has made it a kind of game, but we can avoid all of that. Those test cases allow us to see how NOT to do it. That's my answer to what I'm assuming your point is... but I can't really tell what you're upset about. The refs don't HAVE to do anything, they won't with VAR if it is instituted in the correct way.