by Snowflake Royal » 30 Oct 2019 08:50
SanguineJohn Madejski's WalletSanguine
he didn't 'accidentally touch someone', he trod on his foot. That's a foul anywhere else on the pitch, so it's a penalty too. I found the MoTD analysis of the Keane foul frustrating. They (and Shearer in particular) have rightly been highlighting how VAR hadn't been used up to now to <i>give</i> a penalty, and the second that it is, and it was a foul whether Keane intended contact or not, they are up in arms. Bizarre.
Wahey , been waiting for you to come and defend your beloved VAR. No one apart from you and the VAR ref thinks that was a pen
Well, a) that's not true, and b) VAR is not my 'beloved' (when did you morph into DD), I just try to have a level of debate beyond 'waaaaaaa, stop spoiling my footballz!'
URZZZZ But then you look at some of the incidents VAR hasn’t given and you wonder how the Brighton one can be given compared to others
And this is where I find VAR confusing. I thought they were only meant to overrule something which is a “clear and obvious error”. Take an offside decision by literally millimetres. If the linesman doesn’t flag it, can they really overrule him? Is the situation defined as a “clear and obvious error” if we’re talking about millimetres here. I’d have thought that if they were spending minutes and minutes looking at the situation, it’s not clear or obvious, otherwise they’d have already made their mind up
If they could iron out the inconsistencies that arises because of VAR and if it wasn’t so slow, people may become on board with it. Personally, after three months, i haven’t seen any signs of development which is why I think it needs to go, along with other people. But I guess time will tell. There has been occasions this season where it has been used to good effect
by Franchise FC » 30 Oct 2019 16:05
Hoop BlahURZZZZ But then you look at some of the incidents VAR hasn’t given and you wonder how the Brighton one can be given compared to others
And this is where I find VAR confusing. I thought they were only meant to overrule something which is a “clear and obvious error”. Take an offside decision by literally millimetres. If the linesman doesn’t flag it, can they really overrule him? Is the situation defined as a “clear and obvious error” if we’re talking about millimetres here. I’d have thought that if they were spending minutes and minutes looking at the situation, it’s not clear or obvious, otherwise they’d have already made their mind up
If they could iron out the inconsistencies that arises because of VAR and if it wasn’t so slow, people may become on board with it. Personally, after three months, i haven’t seen any signs of development which is why I think it needs to go, along with other people. But I guess time will tell. There has been occasions this season where it has been used to good effect
I believe that the checks run against a goal for things like offside are deemed to be factual checks and so clear and obvious doesn't come into it. It's not accurate to make calls of the nature it is though, so it's ridiculous the extent they've gone to.
The rest is all just one subjective opinion vs another because they're not making factual judgements. There's no consistency and there's no real benefit to them game.
It's interesting that there is always this comparison with how well it works in Rugby. From the little I've followed of the RWC, TMO has made a number of errors and taken ages over them too. The communication is infinitely better, yes, but it's still nowhere near a perfect solution.
by John Madejski's Wallet » 30 Oct 2019 19:04
Snowflake RoyalSanguineJohn Madejski's Wallet Wahey , been waiting for you to come and defend your beloved VAR. No one apart from you and the VAR ref thinks that was a pen
Well, a) that's not true, and b) VAR is not my 'beloved' (when did you morph into DD), I just try to have a level of debate beyond 'waaaaaaa, stop spoiling my footballz!'
Sangers is right. Treading on someone's foot accidentally and impeding them is still a foul even if it was an accident.
by Victor Meldrew » 30 Oct 2019 19:37
Franchise FCHoop BlahURZZZZ But then you look at some of the incidents VAR hasn’t given and you wonder how the Brighton one can be given compared to others
And this is where I find VAR confusing. I thought they were only meant to overrule something which is a “clear and obvious error”. Take an offside decision by literally millimetres. If the linesman doesn’t flag it, can they really overrule him? Is the situation defined as a “clear and obvious error” if we’re talking about millimetres here. I’d have thought that if they were spending minutes and minutes looking at the situation, it’s not clear or obvious, otherwise they’d have already made their mind up
If they could iron out the inconsistencies that arises because of VAR and if it wasn’t so slow, people may become on board with it. Personally, after three months, i haven’t seen any signs of development which is why I think it needs to go, along with other people. But I guess time will tell. There has been occasions this season where it has been used to good effect
I believe that the checks run against a goal for things like offside are deemed to be factual checks and so clear and obvious doesn't come into it. It's not accurate to make calls of the nature it is though, so it's ridiculous the extent they've gone to.
The rest is all just one subjective opinion vs another because they're not making factual judgements. There's no consistency and there's no real benefit to them game.
It's interesting that there is always this comparison with how well it works in Rugby. From the little I've followed of the RWC, TMO has made a number of errors and taken ages over them too. The communication is infinitely better, yes, but it's still nowhere near a perfect solution.
Right or wrong, the rugby TMO is with a screen visible to the crowd (both live and on tv), with communication audible to the crowd and the very least they do is justify their decision with both touch judges, the referee and the TMO coming to a joint decision. And yes, they still get some things wrong, but my experience is very few.
However, the clock is stopped for the TMO so no game time is lost at all, so the 'ages' is irrelevant - unlike football
by Franchise FC » 31 Oct 2019 06:48
Victor MeldrewFranchise FCHoop Blah
I believe that the checks run against a goal for things like offside are deemed to be factual checks and so clear and obvious doesn't come into it. It's not accurate to make calls of the nature it is though, so it's ridiculous the extent they've gone to.
The rest is all just one subjective opinion vs another because they're not making factual judgements. There's no consistency and there's no real benefit to them game.
It's interesting that there is always this comparison with how well it works in Rugby. From the little I've followed of the RWC, TMO has made a number of errors and taken ages over them too. The communication is infinitely better, yes, but it's still nowhere near a perfect solution.
Right or wrong, the rugby TMO is with a screen visible to the crowd (both live and on tv), with communication audible to the crowd and the very least they do is justify their decision with both touch judges, the referee and the TMO coming to a joint decision. And yes, they still get some things wrong, but my experience is very few.
However, the clock is stopped for the TMO so no game time is lost at all, so the 'ages' is irrelevant - unlike football
"unlike football"?
Time is added on (or is meant to be) for VAR stoppages by the ref.
John Madejski's WalletSnowflake RoyalSanguine
Well, a) that's not true, and b) VAR is not my 'beloved' (when did you morph into DD), I just try to have a level of debate beyond 'waaaaaaa, stop spoiling my footballz!'
Sangers is right. Treading on someone's foot accidentally and impeding them is still a foul even if it was an accident.
Impeding my arse
And you know it's not a pen when the receiving manager sheepishly laughs at being lucky with the decision
by Victor Meldrew » 31 Oct 2019 10:11
Franchise FCVictor MeldrewFranchise FC Right or wrong, the rugby TMO is with a screen visible to the crowd (both live and on tv), with communication audible to the crowd and the very least they do is justify their decision with both touch judges, the referee and the TMO coming to a joint decision. And yes, they still get some things wrong, but my experience is very few.
However, the clock is stopped for the TMO so no game time is lost at all, so the 'ages' is irrelevant - unlike football
"unlike football"?
Time is added on (or is meant to be) for VAR stoppages by the ref.
But that’s exactly the point. Time is ‘specifically’ added on in rugby and ‘might’ be added on in football. Time is managed by what is effectively the fourth official in rugby and should be in football.
by Franchise FC » 31 Oct 2019 10:43
Victor MeldrewFranchise FCVictor Meldrew
"unlike football"?
Time is added on (or is meant to be) for VAR stoppages by the ref.
But that’s exactly the point. Time is ‘specifically’ added on in rugby and ‘might’ be added on in football. Time is managed by what is effectively the fourth official in rugby and should be in football.
Couldn't agree more, that's why I added "or is meant to be".
by Victor Meldrew » 31 Oct 2019 10:50
Franchise FCVictor MeldrewFranchise FC But that’s exactly the point. Time is ‘specifically’ added on in rugby and ‘might’ be added on in football. Time is managed by what is effectively the fourth official in rugby and should be in football.
Couldn't agree more, that's why I added "or is meant to be".
I think I might be arguing with the wrong person
by Franchise FC » 31 Oct 2019 13:28
Victor MeldrewFranchise FCVictor Meldrew
Couldn't agree more, that's why I added "or is meant to be".
I think I might be arguing with the wrong person
The Great (or grey) Buffoon?
by Victor Meldrew » 31 Oct 2019 14:42
Franchise FCVictor MeldrewFranchise FC I think I might be arguing with the wrong person
The Great (or grey) Buffoon?
I wouldn't argue with the Great Buffoon - just invite him to choose a ditch.
I'm happy to phone the coroner and even pay for the phone call (well, my company will, of course)
p.s. What makes you think I'm grey - or is that you ?
by Franchise FC » 31 Oct 2019 16:15
Victor MeldrewFranchise FCVictor Meldrew
The Great (or grey) Buffoon?
I wouldn't argue with the Great Buffoon - just invite him to choose a ditch.
I'm happy to phone the coroner and even pay for the phone call (well, my company will, of course)
p.s. What makes you think I'm grey - or is that you ?
Surprisingly, despite being ancient, I don't have much grey.
No, the "grey" man is the buffoon with the wayward hair, matching his personality.
BTW, The Fat Dictator, Billy Bunter Liar or The Dozy Ditchman might suit as well.
Hoop Blah As predicted, VAR isn't really solving any of the issues video technology was supposed to address.
At the same time it's created it's own issues, slowed down the game at times, impacted on the way referees appear to be making decisions, and it's starting to have a negative effect on the joy of watching a game.
by Franchise FC » 02 Nov 2019 04:33
tmesisHoop Blah As predicted, VAR isn't really solving any of the issues video technology was supposed to address.
At the same time it's created it's own issues, slowed down the game at times, impacted on the way referees appear to be making decisions, and it's starting to have a negative effect on the joy of watching a game.
I was in favour of VAR at first, but I think it's having a very negative impact on the game. All it seems to be used for is to rule out goals because a player was half an inch offside.
Sutekh VAR a disaster yet again. How on earth was Firmino offside?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 84 guests