Qatar World Cup 2022 (26 Viewers)

[thekidfromstrettoncamp]

What do you mean? I still believe that ordinary refs have eyes and brains.

Could we have"ordinary refs" doing our games then.

 

---

[chiefdave]

The problem is the implementation. The idea was to stop the massive errors, that's not what's its being used for.

Nobody wanted replays for if someones toe was a mm offside or the slightest bit of contact in the box.

 

[SBT]

That hasn't been enough down the years though has it. Unless you are happy to accept hand of God moments etc. Which is a fair enough viewpoint. I think the replays give the officials all the tools to get more decisions correct. The implementation is so bad however that I now don't think it's worth the hassle.

I don’t know, I think the game somehow managed to struggle on without VAR.

I’d happily take a Hand of God moment over the drawn out tedium and endless do-overs that VAR imposes on us every week.

 

[Skybluefaz]

I don’t know, I think the game somehow managed to struggle on without VAR.

Nobody is saying otherwise, you don't have to be a sarcastic prick in every interaction you have on here.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Is there anyone who still thinks VAR makes the game better? Just one person? No judgment if that’s genuinely what you believe, I just don’t know if it even has any fans left.

So I think we are to blame for it if I’m honest.
My lad reffed a game Sunday - cup tasty and competitive only yr8 kids but really good standard and he did really well he’s in yr11.
3-1 last 10 mins the team behind had just got a goal back and then there was a free kick on the edge of the box. Bit of a melee it wasn’t a good tackle. Anyway the one player then aggressively kicks the player on the ground and all hell breaks loose. Calms down and the game ends
One of the parents from the team that the aggressor plays for comes on the pitch and says why didn’t he book the other player.
My point is how on earth can a person watching that think that it’s ok to kick a player on the floor??!!

My point with var was supporting refs and assistant refs when they make subjective calls was too difficult for fans media players and managers so they asked for more accuracy and correctness. Which for goals is possible. Ball either is or isn’t over the line easy! Very sensible move
Everything else is subjective and therefore open to opinion and interpretation. Apart from offsides
I can’t work out if people just don’t know the rules or don’t understand technology. A tight offside is offside in terms of evidence, there’s no room for emotion if it’s tight but offside it’s offside. If what those groups wanted was for it only to be offside in a way that suited every persons understanding then they should have left it as it was or changed the offside rule

So var over reaches it could never ever do what people believe it is possible to do because the accurate and consistent decisions are subjective. Always have been and always will be.

So for football you need to know there’s no bias or incompetency you don’t need perfection. You need integrity and training and assurance that the highest possible standards are met

As my lad says every decision you make 50% of those watching agree with you and 50% disagree

 

[wingy]

It should be implemented how it is in rugby. The referee makes a call on field and refers it up to VAR to check his marking.

If a VAR official is proactively recommending a referee looks at the monitor, there’s an ingrained bias in the decision making.

Would that incident have been referred and given if it was a close game? I really don’t think so.

Second paragraph recently highlighted in the English Womens world cup Rugby final NZ.
First resulted in a sending off ,second a simple line out leading to a crucial score..
Second was accurate but first extremely subjective head contact.

 

[shmmeee]

Is there anyone who still thinks VAR makes the game better? Just one person? No judgment if that’s genuinely what you believe, I just don’t know if it even has any fans left.

In theory? Sure. In practice? Not in a million year.

 

[Nick]

The first one was a random, hidden VAR check and came back nothing wrong.

The issue is because of how early it was, doesn't matter if it's the first or last minute. They need to be consistent.

Same with fouls inside and outside the box.

 

[Great_Expectations]

Next game up - Netherlands v Senegal. Stadium capacity is 40,000 and isn’t even half full according to the commenters.

Best WC ever though according to Infantino…..

 

[The CableGuy]

Why did no one complain about the Russian WC?

Gas.

 

[chiefdave]

A tight offside is offside in terms of evidence, there’s no room for emotion if it’s tight but offside it’s offside.

In theory but in practice the tech isn't that accurate as there's absolutely no allowance for that. If you do that maths with the speed the ball travels and the camera frame rate the margin of error is surprising large.



Then there's also the issue of the camera angle, unless the camera is dead in line you have issues with the parallax viewing angle.

Essentially you need something similar to umpires call in cricket. for the ones that are too tight go with the decision on the pitch.

 

[Terry Gibson's perm]

Next game up - Netherlands v Senegal. Stadium capacity is 40,000 and isn’t even half full according to the commenters.

Best WC ever though according to Infantino…..

I was just about to comment on the crowds they really are pathetic and they are trying avoid showing the spaces as they pan around, they need that ex wasps goon Vaughan to write the official figures down.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Next game up - Netherlands v Senegal. Stadium capacity is 40,000 and isn’t even half full according to the commenters.

Best WC ever though according to Infantino…..

It’s embarrassing. We need to stop giving the World Cup to countries that aren’t really capable of qualifying or particularly interested in the game.

 

[PVA]

I’m fine with VAR for binary decisions – i.e. offside – if they implement it better.

I don’t like it when a goal is ruled out after they spend 3 minutes to determine the striker was a pube width offside. They should have maybe 30 seconds to look at the replay and draw the lines. It should be obvious straight away whether it was offside or not. If it’s not obvious then the onfield decision stays, don’t spend 5 minutes analysing it.

Subjective decisions e.g. fouls/penalties should not be part of VAR.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

In theory but in practice the tech isn't that accurate as there's absolutely no allowance for that. If you do that maths with the speed the ball travels and the camera frame rate the margin of error is surprising large.



Then there's also the issue of the camera angle, unless the camera is dead in line you have issues with the parallax viewing angle.

Essentially you need something similar to umpires call in cricket. for the ones that are too tight go with the decision on the pitch.

Excellent it’s why I’d stick with attackers benefit and allow technology to judge only those decisions that are definitively right or wrong. Ins and outs and blatant mistakes but how does one define blatant mistakes

 

[Evo1883]

In theory? Sure. In practice? Not in a million year.

My memory is shit , can't even remember saying this

 

[Liquid Gold]

Interested now?

Come on England

 

[Nick]

This Holland game is empty.

 

[thekidfromstrettoncamp]

Quite a few England fans missed the start having waited 2 hours due to eticketing problems.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

This Holland game is empty.

For a 'football mad' country, the local support doesn't seem particularly interested. The stadium was half full by 60m when the hosts were playing... Has that ever happened before?!

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

What's with this weird noise the 10 Senegal fans are making? It's like the fucking Temple Run music, and I can't unhear it.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

ITV excelling themselves again. Picture's so jerky on the ITV Player it's just about unwatchable.

 

[Tommo1993]

Turned off radio and didn’t look at phone this afternoon so I could catch up when I got home. Just finished.

Shame to leak the two goals but we took our goals well. Was willing for Wilson to smash it home but he passed.

 

[shmmeee]

My memory is shit , can't even remember saying this

Its this fucking new site design. I’d quoted you and someone else then tried to delete just yours and it renamed the other quote.

@Nick any ideas what the correct workflow is here?

 

[AOM]

This has been a poor game so far

 

[jordan210]

I do like how the attendance is higher than the capacity. Good to see wasps account has got a new job

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

I do like how the attendance is higher than the capacity. Good to see wasps account has got a new job

It's another game where a large chunk of the fans have left stupidly early, or never came back after half time.

The attendance was shite in the first place. No where near 1 million fans going to Qatar, another lie.

The tournament is a complete embarrassment.

 

[itsabuzzard]

Interested now?

Come on England

Not really. Laid a nice bit of concrete on a sunny afternoon. Might watch the highlights later on.

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

 

[Otis]

Is there anyone who still thinks VAR makes the game better? Just one person? No judgment if that’s genuinely what you believe, I just don’t know if it even has any fans left.

I don't have any problem with VAR. The system is fine. It's the people who manage it and operate it. That's the nonsense. It could work just fine, but is so frustrating because of the people in the booth and the way they interpretate it.

 

[Otis]

I still believe in the tech. The implementation is consistently bad and ruined the concept really.

 

[Otis]

The problem is the implementation. The idea was to stop the massive errors, that's not what's its being used for.

Nobody wanted replays for if someones toe was a mm offside or the slightest bit of contact in the box.

Exactly. It could be and should be a boon to the game. Nothing wrong with VAR itself, but if refs are going by micro whiskers, it makes the whole thing a joke.

Said before. Clear and obvious. If after watching the footage after 20 seconds and that not showing up a clear and obvious error, they should go with the calling on the field.

Put a time limit on it. Should be no more than 30 seconds max.

 

[Sky Blue Harry H]

I don't have any problem with VAR. The system is fine. It's the people who manage it and operate it. That's the nonsense. It could work just fine, but is so frustrating because of the people in the booth and the way they interpretate it.

You were doing so well and I was 100% with you, then you threw in 'interpretate'.
At that point Otis, I wondered if SheafisGod had hacked your account.

 

[lifeskyblue]

No the system is at fault not the individuals who interpret it.
Offside is offside whether a millimetre or a country mile. Can’t argue that we should interpret it differently unless laws of the game changed and/or technology improved.
As for other VAR decisions they are about interpretation. I wouldn’t have given either of the decisions in the England game but others would…matter of opinion. The VAR officials and ref had the opinion that the first wasn’t but the second was. I could argue that consistency wasn’t there (and should be) but not that opinions weren’t valid. We all have seen those decisions given/not given …with or withourVAR.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

I don't have any problem with VAR. The system is fine. It's the people who manage it and operate it. That's the nonsense. It could work just fine, but is so frustrating because of the people in the booth and the way they interpretate it.

I think that’s unfair. The remit is too large and unmanageable and ultimately undeliverable

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Looks a strong USA team against Wales tonight