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

Of course it's worth discussing when it leaves a situation where you think this is something like 50-50 and not a penalty... (and you think that I'm the one who can't spot a penalty??)


These are both workable forms of sane analysis, of course - but one is barely sane....

However you then leap casually into insanity by stating that you don't know how I can address the idea of what should have happened at a previous point in time... because I disn't read the rules created at a future point in time to what would have been that moment?? Or, based on the outcome of the thing I would have been involved in speculating on the input (beginning) of.
Now you are really losing it........

consider this time continuum a precedes b which precedes c
a = me and all the others saying what VAR should address
b = committee stage deciding what VAR does address
c = VAR in Real Time being what was agreed on

I don't have to read or understand the rules that were arrived at at a point in time after the discussion I'm positing should have been discussed, not to make a case that they should have been discussed.
That's completely off the point of my speculation or insistence or whatever you want to call it.....

 

↑
most people only care about VAR stoppages insofar as they are actually happening
Even if this were true (which is just an asserted anecdotal statement, so there's no reason to believe it is), I don't give a single shit what most people want or care about... and neither do you, since the only polling we have on this has people saying "put VAR in the prem" at a rate of around 3-to-1, which is an approval rate from multiple sources for what people "want" which I'm sure doesn't have any impact on your view of VAR.
---------- -------------- ----------------------

Well- for what it's worth I would wager that the rate is also about 3-1 concerning my bold bit above...

 

You argue like Trump. And I've heard many people agree with me.

 

He rescinded the card? I'm sorry, incorrect call or not, you can't tell a ref that you're going to rape his mother while he watches and then have the card rescinded because it was later deemed to not be a foul. Abusive language is abusive language. Period.

 

50%? That's generous.

 

actually granting people some ok arguments against VAR, because even if we went call-by-call and agreed they are getting it 90%right,

I didn't know Donald trump was posting here. Some people even say 100%.
Just like the WWC.

 

I agree...... however, it was funny.

It's a also a case of VAR actually being of some use for once....

What I'd like to know is how can a ref bend the rules like that to soothe and palliate his inner self, but then a ref categorically caaaan't in the case of the Australia defender that got sent off against Norway for a foul on the last player (undoubtedly a foul, but coming out of a 50-50 run together, and not from a situation where the defender was obviously beaten) last Saturday.
These letter of the law rules need tweaking to allow refs to overturn the rulebook when an infraction is not obviously cynical or intentional.

I have a bee in my bonnet about this since the Arsenal v Barcelona final where a potentially classic game was ruined as a possibility by such a call.....

 

I categorically DO NOT.

incidentally, asides like that are not part of an argument. The guy I was discussing this with said that he guessed that figures (unmeasured) had changed due to the present Women's WC and will be measured so afterwards.....

How is that any different to my saying I guess that an unknown ratio of something is 3-1???

No difference, frankly......

 

I think it's obvious from my postings amid the past 9,000,000 words or so that I'm not as bothered by the time-waste issue of VAR as some folks are...

It's the emotional offset that I am dead-set against. And will remain so.

Hobo and the VAR-bandwagon think that is an insane position, whereas I think it's just as valid a position as theirs, based on the idea that things good and bad tend to even out in bad sports calls for and against.... and for me it's always been a perfectly acceptable form of living through the sport waiting for that see-saw to lurch either way... and NOT some demoniac psychological auschwitz-equivalent assault upon the poor workings of the human soul that some of those offended by bad officiating seem to feel it always was.....
(Unbearable it must have been.... )

(Truth be told on the time-wasting - frankly, I'd prefer a situation where VAR expanded further and wasted even more time..... so that people might seriously return to discussing the other option of just having 4 officials referee a game....)

 

I think VAR made a time jump backwards to the Pont of infraction, so it never really happened.

 

Which is exactly the type of garbage Trump says. My gut tells me this. Many people tell me that. I am sure most people would agree. All meaningless in a logical debate.

 

when was this, hobo? and ... source(s) ?

 

I'd be curious to see how these numbers stack up now after the VAR farce of this summer.
Several high profile people have expressed a change of attitude towards it.

 

They've got to find a way of to do the checking without having the game grind to a halt each time.

 

The only way I see that happening is trusting the referee in the sky over the on-field referee. Make the check last only a minute (have a clock if you have to) and let the VAR ref make the final decision. Also, this would have to be for truly clear and obvious errors relating to goals and red cards. Most unbiased observers can agree on a replay incident pretty quick without having to drag the referee across the field to view it himself. Or am I being naive?

 

based on a lot of the VAR decisions we've seen, that's not the case. some calls are simply too tight and will never be unanimous.

I feel the opposite approach is better -- if VAR spots something, tell the ref, then HE looks at the sideline monitor and HE makes the decision. that'd save time, and imo the ppl making game-changing decisions should be on the pitch.

where you can boo and swear at them mercilessly.

 

But that's what's happening now, which you're not happy about...

 

I honestly don't know the answer but some of these var incidents are bordering on the bizarre now. Last night Toronto FC v Atlanta the ref had blown the final whistle , the players were walking off the field only to be called back to the pitch after a video review determined Toronto defender Nick DeLeon committed a handball inside the box.