Heard from some fans at the game, they had no idea what was going on. think they need to re think the whole thing
Over my life time I've been to hundreds of games and seen thousands upon thousands of refereeing decisions where I had no idea why they'd made it. Not sure how this is any different.
I've always thought it should be like American football, the referee is miked up and says what the free kick/card is for. I think not only would it inform the fans, but it would clarify the referee's thought process if he has to vocalise the rational behind the decision. Too many times have I seen a centre half and big striker challenge for a high/long ball and a decision given seemingly at random because the referee feels there must have been a foul somewhere.
Heard from some fans at the game, they had no idea what was going on. think they need to re think the whole thing
Over my life time I've been to hundreds of games and seen thousands upon thousands of refereeing decisions where I had no idea why they'd made it. Not sure how this is any different.
I've always thought it should be like American football, the referee is miked up and says what the free kick/card is for. I think not only would it inform the fans, but it would clarify the referee's thought process if he has to vocalise the rational behind the decision. Too many times have I seen a centre half and big striker challenge for a high/long ball and a decision given seemingly at random because the referee feels there must have been a foul somewhere.
Think in most over sports like cricket, rugby or tennis is used the big screen says TRY and the clock is stopped. Cant do that in football. Turns it into a panto
Instead of stopping the game for every incident, they could review the whole game at the end and be able to adjust the result after a few hours when they are really sure!
I guess the issue of that is if a team go 5-0 up with four goals potentially being chalked off... the other team will have long shut up shop and instead of trying to score themselves (which they should do @ 1-0) they'll be trying to stop it going 6-0
If advantage should be given to the attacker, how can someone be offside because of their knee? How can Mata legislate for that in the heat of a game?
Yeah the VAR presentation was laughable but the decision seems as much on the current offside rule, I always preferred the unofficial"daylight" between the attacker and defender
Marginally offside so correct decision made somehow but the studio ref had to guess from angle given (really he should've sent it back and said the pictures were inconclusive).
Those lines were a shambles and it does nothing for building a positive case for rolling it out.
Moaning that the correct decision was made because it slowed the game down.
But the correct decision was made, surely thats the best thing for football,
That said that a delay took the players out of rhythm but is it any longer than a player getting treatment or a club taking ages to make a sub
IT WAS NOT THE CORRECT DECISION! Matta was on-side.
It was actually correct by the letter of the law.
The law states if any part of the players body is offside then the player is offside
No it wasn't! The letter of the law gives the benefit of the doubt to the attacker. That is FIFA Law. There is no way the evidence shown on MOTD can prove anything else.
My main issue at the moment is that nothing seems to be changing with VAR even as issues are identified- for example, from match number one of the trial people have been calling for better communication when an incident is reviewed - if it's a trial why haven't they addressed this by miking up the refs - how hard is that to do? Seems like what they are saying is its VAR in this exact form like it or lump it.
There's nothing trial and error about it at the moment just doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
Ultimately it will be the fans who decide whether they want this or not. Having four or five two/three minute stoppages in a game while they sort out offsides and fouls, etc is not what I would call entertainment. Especially as the fans in the stadium are not included in the process. They just sit there and wait for the outcome however long it takes.The product of football is in danger of destroying itself whilst striving to find perfection.
The exciting end to end element of the game will suffer and could even disappear as officials are too embroiled in trying to sort out whether there was an offside, handball, dive or foul at the opposite end and stopping the game while a team makes a quick counter attack.
Maybe I am missing something but if it's rolled out across the board then I will find something else to do with my free time.
How about the Rochdale v Millwall game? Played on a pitch that was fucking awful. Tottenham complain, and the pitch gets relayed Still let's make sure the lovely boys don't have their day ruined.
They need something along the lines of 'Umpires Call' in cricket if it is to work in any way
But in cricket it is not used to eliminate clear and obvious errors, it is mostly used tactically on the most marginal calls against best batsmen or to break key partnerships
Apparently clear and obvious error is in relation to penalties etc. Where as offsides (much like goal line technology) is supposedly clear cut and either on or off, one or the other, nothing down to interpretation therefore it can always be reviewed not just "clear and obvious"
All according to Graham Poll on the tele box the other night
Comments
I've always thought it should be like American football, the referee is miked up and says what the free kick/card is for. I think not only would it inform the fans, but it would clarify the referee's thought process if he has to vocalise the rational behind the decision. Too many times have I seen a centre half and big striker challenge for a high/long ball and a decision given seemingly at random because the referee feels there must have been a foul somewhere.
Normally wouldn't be so pissed off but I got a tenner on Mata to score anytime... grrr
Stupid line but correct decision.
Moaning that the correct decision was made because it slowed the game down.
But the correct decision was made, surely thats the best thing for football,
That said that a delay took the players out of rhythm but is it any longer than a player getting treatment or a club taking ages to make a sub
Matta was on-side.
The law states if any part of the players body is offside then the player is offside
Those lines were a shambles and it does nothing for building a positive case for rolling it out.
Frustrating as a supporter of VAR.
"It was close. There are teething problems with VAR - but if it takes 20 minutes, that's how long it should take"
Fuck off Steve. As if anyone wants to sit waiting for even 2minutes, never mind 20.
Trial and error...eventually will get it right
There's nothing trial and error about it at the moment just doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
The exciting end to end element of the game will suffer and could even disappear as officials are too embroiled in trying to sort out whether there was an offside, handball, dive or foul at the opposite end and stopping the game while a team makes a quick counter attack.
Maybe I am missing something but if it's rolled out across the board then I will find something else to do with my free time.
“Clear and obvious error”
Played on a pitch that was fucking awful.
Tottenham complain, and the pitch gets relayed
Still let's make sure the lovely boys don't have their day ruined.
All according to Graham Poll on the tele box the other night
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/amp/football/43106899?__twitter_impression=true
If they change that then there must be a possibility cameras can be used in a similar way to goal line technology to ensure 100% accuracy