|
Post by Los Alfareros on Feb 8, 2024 16:36:54 GMT
Just fuck it off. It still comes down to a persons interpretation of an incident, so no different from an onfield referee!!!
Use tech for goalline and offsides, that is all.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2024 16:44:07 GMT
Just fuck it off. It still comes down to a persons interpretation of an incident, so no different from an onfield referee!!! Use tech for goalline and offsides, that is all. Isn't the offside part of VAR the main issue with it?
|
|
|
Post by terrorofturfmoor on Feb 8, 2024 17:13:23 GMT
What's it ever really achieved??? Disallowed a goal for someone's heal or elbow being offside!!! What advantage do you actually have if you elbow just strayed fractionally offside, I mean???
Give the job back to the linesman, if they miss a slight offside, then they miss it, it works in favour and against for ALL teams, and down the years it's been a talking point in the pubs, but we accepted it, and got on with it!!! Now it just takes away the celebration out of a goal when you have to wait for clarification!!!
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Feb 8, 2024 17:32:59 GMT
Just fuck it off. It still comes down to a persons interpretation of an incident, so no different from an onfield referee!!! Use tech for goalline and offsides, that is all. Exactly. As long as there is a human in the loop there will be controversy.
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Feb 8, 2024 18:48:47 GMT
not really, with daylight you can pretty much see instantly. What's considered "daylight" though? If, as you mentioned previously, it's just any part of your body that you can score with is level the it's onside, then you'll still have the same issues of drawing lines to see if the body part IS level or if it's actually 1mm in front of the defender etc. If daylight is 6 inches, you'll have to check it is 6 inches and not 5 etc. "Daylight" has to actually have some tangible and measurable meaning, so they'll still need to measure that. It can't just be "common sense" or "it'll be obvious" because those are different for everyone. You're then back to a point of it being completely subjective and people moaning about inconsistency/big club bias/awful referees etc. etc. I’ve thought about this "clear daylight" thing. Then thought what if there is clear daylight but the attackers arm is trailing or being held out behind him. Then what? He could be almost a yard ahead but not offside because there is not clear daylight.
|
|
|
Post by leicspotter on Feb 8, 2024 18:55:37 GMT
Clear and obvious...end of!
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Feb 12, 2024 21:28:12 GMT
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Feb 12, 2024 21:30:21 GMT
It was better before VAR and that is a stone cold fact. Goal line technology is the only thing that should exist. Because it works
|
|
|
Post by citynickscfc on Feb 12, 2024 21:40:46 GMT
It was better before VAR and that is a stone cold fact. Goal line technology is the only thing that should exist. Because it works "Better" how? I disagree by the way. We won't see VAR anyway in a long while, if ever. This is iteration 1 or 1.1, so obviously like any beta or system that is being developed it needs changing and change is a good thing and often necessary. Statistically it's miles better and in the end should put an end to corruption in most cases (not all). Other sports have it, but when games are played in Belarus and the finalists include Russia with Putin in the crowd... even video replays won't help. It's all about how it's implemented and right now it's not being done in the most efficient or fair way. Imo that's because referees are holding on to way way too much power, and I believe that they too are inherently corrupt. They all want to manage the best teams games at the top level, so politics, bribery, any form of power really well be a constant. Even training using real footage (remember stoke pulling shirts at corners?), it's a form of bias.
|
|
|
Post by stokiejoe on Feb 12, 2024 21:43:45 GMT
The rugby system is far superior. First it is instigated by the referee, he says what his decision is on the pitch and asks for clear evidence to overturn it. In the event of that not being available his decision stands.
Rugby rules are far superior in that players don't argue or show dissent otherwise they are dealt with. If they don't move 10 yards away quickly enough they have to move a further 20 yards back. Also no blue card the yellow card is 10 minutes in the sin bin so a cynical foul for example leads to 10 minutes with 10 men. Twice and sent off or straight red available.
Stupidly in football a player is injured and a yellow issued to the transgresser but the injured player if treated has to leave the pitch for 30 seconds. Therefore rewarding the team committing the foul by playing against 10 men.
|
|
|
Post by sportsman on Feb 12, 2024 21:56:06 GMT
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Feb 12, 2024 21:58:41 GMT
It was better before VAR and that is a stone cold fact. Goal line technology is the only thing that should exist. Because it works "Better" how? I disagree by the way. We won't see VAR anyway in a long while, if ever. This is iteration 1 or 1.1, so obviously like any beta or system that is being developed it needs changing and change is a good thing and often necessary. Statistically it's miles better and in the end should put an end to corruption in most cases (not all). Other sports have it, but when games are played in Belarus and the finalists include Russia with Putin in the crowd... even video replays won't help. It's all about how it's implemented and right now it's not being done in the most efficient or fair way. Imo that's because referees are holding on to way way too much power, and I believe that they too are inherently corrupt. They all want to manage the best teams games at the top level, so politics, bribery, any form of power really well be a constant. Even training using real footage (remember stoke pulling shirts at corners?), it's a form of bias. It was better because you could celebrate a goal without waiting
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Feb 12, 2024 22:04:49 GMT
It was better before VAR and that is a stone cold fact. Goal line technology is the only thing that should exist. Because it works "Better" how? I disagree by the way. We won't see VAR anyway in a long while, if ever. This is iteration 1 or 1.1, so obviously like any beta or system that is being developed it needs changing and change is a good thing and often necessary. Statistically it's miles better and in the end should put an end to corruption in most cases (not all). Other sports have it, but when games are played in Belarus and the finalists include Russia with Putin in the crowd... even video replays won't help. It's all about how it's implemented and right now it's not being done in the most efficient or fair way. Imo that's because referees are holding on to way way too much power, and I believe that they too are inherently corrupt. They all want to manage the best teams games at the top level, so politics, bribery, any form of power really well be a constant. Even training using real footage (remember stoke pulling shirts at corners?), it's a form of bias. This is a very interesting post and you’ve clearly put a bit of time into the virtues of VAR. My point, in layman’s terms is that it isn’t fit for purpose right now. If it’s going to happen, do more research of every possible outcome, make it idiot proof, don’t just bring it in on a whim, which is basically what’s happened. The constant changing of handball for example, what a load of shite it is at the moment, it’d be better if they just said if it hits your hand it’s handball (not that I’d want that) but just make it crystal clear 🤷🏻♂️
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Feb 12, 2024 22:07:00 GMT
|
|
|
Post by idle on Feb 13, 2024 6:50:36 GMT
Just fuck it off. It still comes down to a persons interpretation of an incident, so no different from an onfield referee!!! Use tech for goalline and offsides, that is all. Isn't the offside part of VAR the main issue with it? No. While it gets much shit because the decisions and new rules are just ... shit, the main problem is making football a non-contact sport within the penalty areas. There are umpteen million other problems as well.
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Feb 13, 2024 10:28:49 GMT
He is very good at managing up
|
|
|
Post by theonlooker on Feb 13, 2024 10:40:41 GMT
Some of the comments on the Youtube video are interesting.
"Never answered the question"
"Politicians answer"
Yeah, we know. We know all too well.
|
|
|
Post by owdestokie2 on Feb 13, 2024 11:23:46 GMT
Who can remember;
- the attacker being given the benefit of the doubt in close offside decisions to enhance entertainment?
- penalties being given for deliberate handball
It’s embarrassing to see a referee being called over to a monitor after minutes of deliberation by the VAR adjudicators who can’t make a decision.
What’s next for VAR, monitoring throw in’s…….😂😂😂😂
IMHO. We only need goal line technology
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Feb 13, 2024 11:26:51 GMT
Some of the comments on the Youtube video are interesting. "Never answered the question" "Politicians answer" Yeah, we know. We know all too well. He was definitely put off by Jordan's horrific jacket roll neck combo. Is that how they dress in that there London?
|
|
|
Post by citynickscfc on Feb 13, 2024 11:52:53 GMT
"Better" how? I disagree by the way. We won't see VAR anyway in a long while, if ever. This is iteration 1 or 1.1, so obviously like any beta or system that is being developed it needs changing and change is a good thing and often necessary. Statistically it's miles better and in the end should put an end to corruption in most cases (not all). Other sports have it, but when games are played in Belarus and the finalists include Russia with Putin in the crowd... even video replays won't help. It's all about how it's implemented and right now it's not being done in the most efficient or fair way. Imo that's because referees are holding on to way way too much power, and I believe that they too are inherently corrupt. They all want to manage the best teams games at the top level, so politics, bribery, any form of power really well be a constant. Even training using real footage (remember stoke pulling shirts at corners?), it's a form of bias. This is a very interesting post and you’ve clearly put a bit of time into the virtues of VAR. My point, in layman’s terms is that it isn’t fit for purpose right now. If it’s going to happen, do more research of every possible outcome, make it idiot proof, don’t just bring it in on a whim, which is basically what’s happened. The constant changing of handball for example, what a load of shite it is at the moment, it’d be better if they just said if it hits your hand it’s handball (not that I’d want that) but just make it crystal clear 🤷🏻♂️ I can't disagree but football is a game full of idiots 😅. Just look at Fifa
|
|
|
Post by jesusmcmuffin on Feb 13, 2024 14:38:43 GMT
They need to change the offside rule to clear daylight. If any goalscoring part of the body is level, then it's a goal. Would see far more goals as well, as all the one's ruled out for a big toe being off would now be given. No they don’t. There’s no need to change rules that have been perfectly good for decades just to suit VAR. And “clear daylight” would still end up requiring highly marginal calls at times and lines to be drawn. Plus I don’t think more goals is automatically better. It isn’t basketball. If we bring clear daylight in then again is open to interpretation but much prefer the idea . You could also argue you're offside or you're not
|
|
|
Post by swampySCFC on Feb 13, 2024 19:45:43 GMT
Tony is a really nice bloke I believe but I did and would expect more from a bloke on around a 1 mill salary a year
|
|