I never wanted VAR personally but isn't it achieving what people wanted?
Off side by a bollock hair is still offside, isn't that what people were after?
It's meant to sort out clear and obvious errors, not this shambles.
Aye. Football's all about the we woz robbed conversations and it's played (and reffed) by humans.As I said, if I had my way I'd fuck it off completely
I don't get the argument, are you saying they should say he's off by a few millimetres so let it go?
As I said, if I had my way I'd fuck it off completely but I haven't been banging on about introducing it for years like some people though I did think it worked well in the World cup.
I don't get the argument, are you saying they should say he's off by a few millimetres so let it go?
As I said, if I had my way I'd fuck it off completely but I haven't been banging on about introducing it for years like some people though I did think it worked well in the World cup.
Regardless of the controversy, Norwich have played brilliantly.
on the few occasions I've sen them play I've been impressed. Surprises me they are where they are.
Really like that young lad they've got, Cantwell is it? He isn't playing this evening.
That was ridiculous.That offside was ridiculous, I’d get rid of it completely, it’s ruining the game
People wanted it for things like Lampards disallowed goal for England against Germany. Things that were so obvious they were ridiculous. Not for trying to check offsides by millimetres.I don't get the argument, are you saying they should say he's off by a few millimetres so let it go?
For me they need to change the offsite to either be full or most of body off side if this is going to work, someone’s left ear offside just isn’t working (unless you were lineker!)That was ridiculous.
The bottom line is, if you had a strong enough microscope you could disallow a lot more goals. No-one is ever going to be exactly level you would have thought. There would always be micro millimeters in it.
The whole point was to identify clear and obvious errors. That was not a clear and obvious error and therefore the goal should stood. And the closer the incident is, the longer it is going to take for VAR to mull over it and make their decision.
I like the idea of VAR, but to my mind this is not what it should be used for.
Clear and obvious errors only.
That's definitely what I'm saying, Clint, yes. Because a few millimetres is not a clear and obvious error.I don't get the argument, are you saying they should say he's off by a few millimetres so let it go?
My concern is that they spent ages looking at the attackers position but seemingly neglect to do the same analysis of when the ball was played. In the screenshot above, has the ball been played at that point? Maybe a frame back? Or forward? With the uncertainty of an inflatable ball, why focus on millimetres?View attachment 13769
That one is not clear and obvious. Ten second look, goal should have stood.
I bet that took at least two minutes looking at that.
It's very, very simple to my mind. Look at that. In the above incident it is so close, too close. Let the goal stand.
They could even set a time limit on it, how long a look they take at things.
Still not clear after 20-30 seconds, let the goal or offside stand.
Another one today. That Wolves goal should have stood.
The only clear and obvious mistake is VAR itself.VAR has ruined football.
The Wolves goal should have stood and the liverpool goal missed Van Dijk's handball in the build up to Liverpools game.
It was supposed to be the clear and obvious mistakes.
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
Have to disagree, to a degree, because I have always wanted the technology, but not to such ridiculous anal lengths as this. This what we have now is just ludicrous.Problem is as per CVD post earlier is that people have slagged off referees and demanded technology for years.
Now they have their wish and they don’t like it. If you want benefit of doubt to attacker and all that then should have stayed with human beings. You can’t have someone offside by his bell end proven by the technology then complain it’s too severe. Take away the human element and you lose common sense and judgement calls
This sort of thing barely gets a mention and it drives me mad. The technology simply isn't accurate to the level they are trying to apply it. Even if there were no other issues that would need to be addressed.No it isn't, the technology isn't accurate:
View attachment 13781
Exactly right. They are going to such anal lengths when the technology is clearly not supporting that.This sort of thing barely gets a mention and it drives me mad. The technology simply isn't accurate to the level they are trying to apply it. Even if there were no other issues that would need to be addressed.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?