Reply With Quote
Did you not see Var used for Ronaldo weak punch in the Iran game that led to a yellow?
why isnt var used on normal fouls that could lead to cards
instead its more used for whatever happens near or inside the box to score...
Did you not see Var used for Ronaldo weak punch in the Iran game that led to a yellow?
They got the call correct.
You see what you want to see.
Your ability to judge anything is worthless.
When the ball was contacted Kane was onside. It was a crap goal anyway. Kane got a hat trick off a crap goal and two penalties. Wooo whooo....
Meaningless individual number awards. Good for you.
2 challenges per game, automatic VAR review for all penalties and goals. Done.
Son, grudge posting only makes you ignorant.
On the first replay on Fox, it showed his shoulder clearly offside at the point of the pass (ball on foot). Then on the second replay on the freeze he was even, but the passer's foot was still a foot from the ball. This is simple stuff. Don't talk you can't back up; and go watch the replay on the Fox Sports Go app if you need confirmation.
I like it a lot. Nothing will ever get 100% of the calls right, but this improves the efficiency exponentially.
There's still things to tighten up, but there should be no doubt that VAR came to bring more justice.
told y'all sons, another toll to make people accountable. Otherwise we would've gotten away without the goal, this way we don't get to rob other countries.
Na, it's still bs.
Compare the penalty that wasnt given to serbia v Switzerland, to the one called on Argentina yesterday.
Or the yellow given to the Mexican in 13seconds today, to Boateng breaking two swedish counterattacks in the first ten minutes, inside and outside the box, without even a common foul called.
Those are interpretation plays. You will get different opinions with or without technology, at least they get to see it over and over again and analyze the plays carefully. With no interpretation plays (like offsides), VAR is an all around success.
There's really no debate to be had. The only flaws VAR has is because of bad application, but that will eventually get solved with experience.
No, just no. The Swiss penalty on Gabriel Jesus is a interpretation play. Two Swiss players grabbing and jumping on top of a serb is clear as day. Same with Boateng grabbing swedes shoulder, jersey and throwing him to the ground from behind as the last man.if those aren't fouls then what the is?
Again: interpretation plays. But I do agree that the plays they decide to check from game to game have been very inconsistent. That's why I think the best thing to do will be to just give teams 2 or 3 challenges each and have them decide which plays get reviewed. That will solve most of the controversies.
This.
If the ref is the only one that gets to decide when a review goes to VAR then ultimately you have accomplished nothing. Ref bias cannot be ruled out if only he makes the calls of which play to review.
Or the penalty on Hector Moreno. It did not look like a foul.
Im on my phone and can't be bothered to format, the link will do, tell me this is an interpretation play with a straight face
https://youtu.be/on1DjHd-DZk
That's stright murderbut is still, technically, an interpretation play. I'm sure that if the ref would have called a penalty there, there would have still been no VAR review. The same with Mashcerano's penalty. If the ref wouldn't have called it, they wouldn't have reviewed it via VAR. So, the problem isn't VAR itself.
Again, the problem is in the application. They should just let teams get challenges, like in the NFL.
Yeah this was ridiculous. Anyway this interpretation only flies without VAR, because you don't know exactly what the ref saw (and I'm fine with it). If VAR is to stay the rules have to be clearer tbh. Can't have two outcomes for the same situation when we are all looking at the same thing as they are. Plus the challenge thing.
That Costa Rica penalty
If anything, we need more VAR intervention, tbh.
my nig, it's a tool that increases transparency. If the ref is re ed and doesn't use it he gets more exposure as a bad ref. If it's a really monumental call then there is a good chance that VAR is used and it greatly increases the chance of a good call. Without VAR no ref is allowing the korea goal from today tbh. This ain't about perfection, but about more transparency.
Good thing there was no VAR in 1986 for Maradonna's "Hands of God" goal. He'd be an afterthought right now.
so many things would change. England would have no ring for example. At least VAR is a step in the right direction.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
