|
Post by jesusmcmuffin on Jun 6, 2024 13:26:17 GMT
Completely missed a push in the back in the lead up to Oxford's seconds goal though. VAR doesn't eliminate controversies, it just shifts them to different places. Ultimately, there's a human being deciding if something's a foul or not, and that's always open to interpretation. Kind of thing that happens many times in a game, what we need VAR to stop doing, looking at every single challenge. Way too many goals being ruled out for slight pushes etc. The handball rule the biggest problem. Deliberate handball isn't a ball being hit at your hand from 10 feet away.
|
|
|
Post by AlliG on Jun 6, 2024 14:24:57 GMT
Completely missed a push in the back in the lead up to Oxford's seconds goal though. VAR doesn't eliminate controversies, it just shifts them to different places. Ultimately, there's a human being deciding if something's a foul or not, and that's always open to interpretation. Kind of thing that happens many times in a game, what we need VAR to stop doing, looking at every single challenge. Way too many goals being ruled out for slight pushes etc. The handball rule the biggest problem. Deliberate handball isn't a ball being hit at your hand from 10 feet away. In the same way the "unnatural position of the arm" is now an accepted position for VAR, I would like to see a similar "unnatural position of the leg" when it comes to deciding if a challenge is or isn't a penalty. If a player in the penalty area sticks their leg out 45% to the side to make contact with the defender, then I would like to see VAR award a foul against the forward (for kicking the defender) and not a penalty. Who knows, it might even reduce the amount of cheating (though probably not)
|
|
|
Post by jesusmcmuffin on Jun 6, 2024 14:32:05 GMT
Kind of thing that happens many times in a game, what we need VAR to stop doing, looking at every single challenge. Way too many goals being ruled out for slight pushes etc. The handball rule the biggest problem. Deliberate handball isn't a ball being hit at your hand from 10 feet away. In the same way the "unnatural position of the arm" is now an accepted position for VAR, I would like to see a similar "unnatural position of the leg" when it comes to deciding if a challenge is or isn't a penalty. If a player in the penalty area sticks their leg out 45% to the side to make contact with the defender, then I would like to see VAR award a foul against the forward (for kicking the defender) and not a penalty. Who knows, it might even reduce the amount of cheating (though probably not) Players creating a foul has crept in more. Put your foot into an outstretched one and go down. We saw a ref give a correct decision against one of the worst culprits, Harry Wilson and his decision overturned after after a slo mo replay where it can look like a foul.
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Jun 6, 2024 15:38:49 GMT
Just seen Malcolm in his Stoke top on BBC News👍 How much should I invoice Bet365 for, for the free promotion on national TV
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Jun 6, 2024 16:32:49 GMT
In the same way the "unnatural position of the arm" is now an accepted position for VAR, I would like to see a similar "unnatural position of the leg" when it comes to deciding if a challenge is or isn't a penalty. If a player in the penalty area sticks their leg out 45% to the side to make contact with the defender, then I would like to see VAR award a foul against the forward (for kicking the defender) and not a penalty. Who knows, it might even reduce the amount of cheating (though probably not) Players creating a foul has crept in more. Put your foot into an outstretched one and go down. We saw a ref give a correct decision against one of the worst culprits, Harry Wilson and his decision overturned after after a slo mo replay where it can look like a foul. There will have to be a massive shift in VAR management and its application if we are to see any progress in any of the issues that have dramatically increased as a result of its implication. I dont have much confidence that it will get the kind of revision it needs, and fans might continue to be frustrated. I don't think the authorities understand its issues tbh. There has to be a big rethink to shift the proportion of fans against it from 70-80% as it stands. Really glad we don't have it in the Championship. the League is frustrating enough without adding another few layers.
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Jun 6, 2024 18:50:19 GMT
In the same way the "unnatural position of the arm" is now an accepted position for VAR, I would like to see a similar "unnatural position of the leg" when it comes to deciding if a challenge is or isn't a penalty. If a player in the penalty area sticks their leg out 45% to the side to make contact with the defender, then I would like to see VAR award a foul against the forward (for kicking the defender) and not a penalty. Who knows, it might even reduce the amount of cheating (though probably not) Players creating a foul has crept in more. Put your foot into an outstretched one and go down. We saw a ref give a correct decision against one of the worst culprits, Harry Wilson and his decision overturned after after a slo mo replay where it can look like a foul. Ric was quite adept at it.
|
|
|
Post by jesusmcmuffin on Jun 6, 2024 18:53:05 GMT
Players creating a foul has crept in more. Put your foot into an outstretched one and go down. We saw a ref give a correct decision against one of the worst culprits, Harry Wilson and his decision overturned after after a slo mo replay where it can look like a foul. Ric was quite adept at it. Campbell did it as well towards the end of the season , was it at Soton? Ref saw through it but one of those on a slo mo replay perhaps would look like a foul.
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Jun 6, 2024 18:55:34 GMT
Players creating a foul has crept in more. Put your foot into an outstretched one and go down. We saw a ref give a correct decision against one of the worst culprits, Harry Wilson and his decision overturned after after a slo mo replay where it can look like a foul. There will have to be a massive shift in VAR management and its application if we are to see any progress in any of the issues that have dramatically increased as a result of its implication. I dont have much confidence that it will get the kind of revision it needs, and fans might continue to be frustrated. I don't think the authorities understand its issues tbh. There has to be a big rethink to shift the proportion of fans against it from 70-80% as it stands. Really glad we don't have it in the Championship. the League is frustrating enough without adding another few layers. I doubt that 70/80% of fans are against VAR. The 10/20% that are against it make 80% of the noise about it. That sounds more like the truth. I really wish we had it in the championship where bizarre inconsistent decisions are rife. It might not change them immediately but at least it would highlight them.
|
|
|
Post by jesusmcmuffin on Jun 6, 2024 19:04:19 GMT
There will have to be a massive shift in VAR management and its application if we are to see any progress in any of the issues that have dramatically increased as a result of its implication. I dont have much confidence that it will get the kind of revision it needs, and fans might continue to be frustrated. I don't think the authorities understand its issues tbh. There has to be a big rethink to shift the proportion of fans against it from 70-80% as it stands. Really glad we don't have it in the Championship. the League is frustrating enough without adding another few layers. I doubt that 70/80% of fans are against VAR. The 10/20% that are against it make 80% of the noise about it. That sounds more like the truth. I really wish we had it in the championship where bizarre inconsistent decisions are rife. It might not change them immediately but at least it would highlight them. Yep agree Crawley were against it for the final but saved their season The standard of refereeing on the pitch at our level is so poor I would happily have it.
|
|
|
Post by RedandWhite90 on Jun 6, 2024 19:25:17 GMT
I doubt that 70/80% of fans are against VAR. The 10/20% that are against it make 80% of the noise about it. That sounds more like the truth. I really wish we had it in the championship where bizarre inconsistent decisions are rife. It might not change them immediately but at least it would highlight them. Yep agree Crawley were against it for the final but saved their season The standard of refereeing on the pitch at our level is so poor I would happily have it. Why? It would go from making dreadful decisions in real time, to making dreadful decisions following replays with nobody having a clue what's going on in the ground. Hope the Prem sees sense and sacks it off. Where one leads others will follow.
|
|
|
Post by jesusmcmuffin on Jun 6, 2024 19:39:19 GMT
Yep agree Crawley were against it for the final but saved their season The standard of refereeing on the pitch at our level is so poor I would happily have it. Why? It would go from making dreadful decisions in real time, to making dreadful decisions following replays with nobody having a clue what's going on in the ground. Hope the Prem sees sense and sacks it off. Where one leads others will follow. Plenty were moaning re the penalties we weren't given and gave the reason above , referees are so poor and miss so much. I like the idea but not the way it's used. Every goal shouldn't be so scrutinized with the intention of disallowing it almost . Offside is a tricky one, some say there should be an advantage etc but where do you draw the line ( no joke intended)? Offside is offside unless it can be resolved in seconds then not too keen on it. Big games with so much at stake though shouldn't be decided on poor, incorrect decisions
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Jun 6, 2024 20:19:03 GMT
Yep agree Crawley were against it for the final but saved their season The standard of refereeing on the pitch at our level is so poor I would happily have it. Why? It would go from making dreadful decisions in real time, to making dreadful decisions following replays with nobody having a clue what's going on in the ground. Hope the Prem sees sense and sacks it off. Where one leads others will follow. 19 votes to 1. Not sure why anyone would want to get rid of the opportunity to review decisions. Obviously the way it's used can be improved as it has been in other sports.
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Jun 6, 2024 20:21:31 GMT
There will have to be a massive shift in VAR management and its application if we are to see any progress in any of the issues that have dramatically increased as a result of its implication. I dont have much confidence that it will get the kind of revision it needs, and fans might continue to be frustrated. I don't think the authorities understand its issues tbh. There has to be a big rethink to shift the proportion of fans against it from 70-80% as it stands. Really glad we don't have it in the Championship. the League is frustrating enough without adding another few layers. I doubt that 70/80% of fans are against VAR. The 10/20% that are against it make 80% of the noise about it. That sounds more like the truth. I really wish we had it in the championship where bizarre inconsistent decisions are rife. It might not change them immediately but at least it would highlight them. Where have you got your 10/20% figure from ? The FSA's annual national supporter survey and a specific survey on VAR don't support you. In 2017 75% were in favour of it being introduced. That has now dropped to 25% support and two thirds being against. 80% of match-goers and two thirds of TV watchers rated their experience of it as poor or very poor, with only 1 in 20 rating it as good. Given today's 19-1 result, there now needs to be a national debate involving all stakeholders, including fans, about how it can be improved.
|
|
|
Post by hughjarse on Jun 6, 2024 20:29:17 GMT
I doubt that 70/80% of fans are against VAR. The 10/20% that are against it make 80% of the noise about it. That sounds more like the truth. I really wish we had it in the championship where bizarre inconsistent decisions are rife. It might not change them immediately but at least it would highlight them. Where have you got your 10/20% figure from ? The FSA's annual national supporter survey and a specific survey on VAR don't support you. In 2017 75% were in favour of it being introduced. That has now dropped to 25% support and two thirds being against. 80% of match-goers and two thirds of TV watchers rated their experience of it as poor or very poor, with only 1 in 20 rating it as good. Given today's 19-1 result, there now needs to be a national debate involving all stakeholders, including fans, about how it can be improved. This is so true. The answer is not to reject it as you cannot rewind technology, we need to provide guidance to its future evolution. The people who are trying to implement it clearly require additional training. Sorry guys but it’s here to stay.
|
|
|
Post by RedandWhite90 on Jun 6, 2024 20:42:35 GMT
Why? It would go from making dreadful decisions in real time, to making dreadful decisions following replays with nobody having a clue what's going on in the ground. Hope the Prem sees sense and sacks it off. Where one leads others will follow. 19 votes to 1. Not sure why anyone would want to get rid of the opportunity to review decisions. Obviously the way it's used can be improved as it has been in other sports. Game's gone
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Jun 6, 2024 20:45:53 GMT
I doubt that 70/80% of fans are against VAR. The 10/20% that are against it make 80% of the noise about it. That sounds more like the truth. I really wish we had it in the championship where bizarre inconsistent decisions are rife. It might not change them immediately but at least it would highlight them. Where have you got your 10/20% figure from ? The FSA's annual national supporter survey and a specific survey on VAR don't support you. In 2017 75% were in favour of it being introduced. That has now dropped to 25% support and two thirds being against. 80% of match-goers and two thirds of TV watchers rated their experience of it as poor or very poor, with only 1 in 20 rating it as good. Given today's 19-1 result, there now needs to be a national debate involving all stakeholders, including fans, about how it can be improved. Wouldn't know haven't seen the way your survey was framed. I would have thought only dyed in the wool Luddites would want to get rid of it. Everything should be under constant review as to how it can be improved anyway. The way systems are used can be improved. Interpretation of rules and directions to match officials can be changed to make decisions quicker and less debatable. The clock won't be turned back, that's just fantasy.
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Jun 6, 2024 22:48:53 GMT
There will have to be a massive shift in VAR management and its application if we are to see any progress in any of the issues that have dramatically increased as a result of its implication. I dont have much confidence that it will get the kind of revision it needs, and fans might continue to be frustrated. I don't think the authorities understand its issues tbh. There has to be a big rethink to shift the proportion of fans against it from 70-80% as it stands. Really glad we don't have it in the Championship. the League is frustrating enough without adding another few layers. I doubt that 70/80% of fans are against VAR. The 10/20% that are against it make 80% of the noise about it. That sounds more like the truth. I really wish we had it in the championship where bizarre inconsistent decisions are rife. It might not change them immediately but at least it would highlight them. Inconsistent decisions even out by the end of the season and are mostly forgotten about quickly, which I prefer to decisions that take 5 minutes, make games intolerably long, encourage officials not to make their own decisions and often cause even more controversy and talking points.
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Jun 6, 2024 22:53:57 GMT
Where have you got your 10/20% figure from ? The FSA's annual national supporter survey and a specific survey on VAR don't support you. In 2017 75% were in favour of it being introduced. That has now dropped to 25% support and two thirds being against. 80% of match-goers and two thirds of TV watchers rated their experience of it as poor or very poor, with only 1 in 20 rating it as good. Given today's 19-1 result, there now needs to be a national debate involving all stakeholders, including fans, about how it can be improved. Wouldn't know haven't seen the way your survey was framed. I would have thought only dyed in the wool Luddites would want to get rid of it. Everything should be under constant review as to how it can be improved anyway. The way systems are used can be improved. Interpretation of rules and directions to match officials can be changed to make decisions quicker and less debatable. The clock won't be turned back, that's just fantasy. It just so happens that most football fans are luddites by your definition. Its not about turning the clock back, it's about listening to the fans, who happen to be a clear majority, who are clearly not satisfied with it and acting accordingly. Understanding why they are using it, when to use it and how to use it would be a nice start! The fact that alot of people want to get rid of it (again a majority) seems to be born out of sheer frustration and a total lack of faith in those who manage it.
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Jun 7, 2024 6:38:48 GMT
Wouldn't know haven't seen the way your survey was framed. I would have thought only dyed in the wool Luddites would want to get rid of it. Everything should be under constant review as to how it can be improved anyway. The way systems are used can be improved. Interpretation of rules and directions to match officials can be changed to make decisions quicker and less debatable. The clock won't be turned back, that's just fantasy. It just so happens that most football fans are luddites by your definition. Its not about turning the clock back, it's about listening to the fans, who happen to be a clear majority, who are clearly not satisfied with it and acting accordingly. Understanding why they are using it, when to use it and how to use it would be a nice start! The fact that alot of people want to get rid of it (again a majority) seems to be born out of sheer frustration and a total lack of faith in those who manage it. You seem conflicted. You either want it improved or binned off. Trying to improve it is completely understandable and should be a given. In any competitive environment everything should be under constant review with a view to how it can be improved. I think whether you get a majority or not depends very much how you frame the question. I don’t really mind offending most football fans. I don’t get their tribal behaviour either which seems pretty backward too. Sorry about that just saying it how I see it.
|
|
|
Post by ceejays on Jun 7, 2024 7:05:00 GMT
I think VAR discredits itself with the toenail offsides.That needs to be amended. Secondly another irritating aspect is the ref running to the screen . You know full well the outcome. When will a ref say sorry no my decision is right ( Oliver v Everton only one I can think of ) . Then the muppets in stockly park . As an example Liverpool second goal v Aston Villa went to bar for offside. Now you would think the line would be drawn parallel to the 18 yard line. No. It was so skewed as to be laughable. You then wonder whether agendas exist . As Forest tried to say .
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Jun 7, 2024 7:17:39 GMT
Where have you got your 10/20% figure from ? The FSA's annual national supporter survey and a specific survey on VAR don't support you. In 2017 75% were in favour of it being introduced. That has now dropped to 25% support and two thirds being against. 80% of match-goers and two thirds of TV watchers rated their experience of it as poor or very poor, with only 1 in 20 rating it as good. Given today's 19-1 result, there now needs to be a national debate involving all stakeholders, including fans, about how it can be improved. Wouldn't know haven't seen the way your survey was framed. I would have thought only dyed in the wool Luddites would want to get rid of it. Everything should be under constant review as to how it can be improved anyway. The way systems are used can be improved. Interpretation of rules and directions to match officials can be changed to make decisions quicker and less debatable. The clock won't be turned back, that's just fantasy. I was actually asking where you got your figure of 10/20% from. If it's a personal estimate, I don't think the evidence supports you. I don't think it's reasonable (and a tad patronising) to categorise those fans who would now prefer to get rid of it as luddite. If there were a simple majority opposition to new technology, there wouldn't have been the high level of support for it when it was first introduced. Much of that support has now melted away. The majority now think that the adverse effect on the watching experience, whether inside the ground or on TV, is not a price worth paying for the relatively small increase in correct decisions which is claimed. I think the Wolves resolution has been a good catalyst for opening up the debate (the amount of media we've been asked to do on it is evidence of that) and it is to be hoped that the PL will now take that debate on how to improve it forward, involving all stakeholders. Just for the record, I am not personally in favour of its abolition, but its not my personal views which matter when representing fans.
|
|
|
Post by andystokey on Jun 7, 2024 7:22:17 GMT
Wouldn't know haven't seen the way your survey was framed. I would have thought only dyed in the wool Luddites would want to get rid of it. Everything should be under constant review as to how it can be improved anyway. The way systems are used can be improved. Interpretation of rules and directions to match officials can be changed to make decisions quicker and less debatable. The clock won't be turned back, that's just fantasy. I was actually asking where you got your figure of 10/20% from. If it's a personal estimate, I don't think the evidence supports you. I don't think it's reasonable (and a tad patronising) to categorise those fans who would now prefer to get rid of it as luddite. If there were a simple majority opposition to new technology, there wouldn't have been the high level of support for it when it was first introduced. Much of that support has now melted away. The majority now think that the adverse effect on the watching experience, whether inside the ground or on TV, is not a price worth paying for the relatively small increase in correct decisions which is claimed. I think the Wolves resolution has been a good catalyst for opening up the debate (the amount of media we've been asked to do on it is evidence of that) and it is to be hoped that the PL will now take that debate on how to improve it forward, involving all stakeholders. Just for the record, I am not personally in favour of its abolition, but its not my personal views which matter when representing fans. I still don't agree that any law in the game should have a different benchmark in one league or competition than another. The idea that a pixel makes a difference in the highest league and doesn't in another is in of itself a problem for me.
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Jun 7, 2024 7:38:29 GMT
I was actually asking where you got your figure of 10/20% from. If it's a personal estimate, I don't think the evidence supports you. I don't think it's reasonable (and a tad patronising) to categorise those fans who would now prefer to get rid of it as luddite. If there were a simple majority opposition to new technology, there wouldn't have been the high level of support for it when it was first introduced. Much of that support has now melted away. The majority now think that the adverse effect on the watching experience, whether inside the ground or on TV, is not a price worth paying for the relatively small increase in correct decisions which is claimed. I think the Wolves resolution has been a good catalyst for opening up the debate (the amount of media we've been asked to do on it is evidence of that) and it is to be hoped that the PL will now take that debate on how to improve it forward, involving all stakeholders. Just for the record, I am not personally in favour of its abolition, but its not my personal views which matter when representing fans. I still don't agree that any law in the game should have a different benchmark in one league or competition than another. The idea that a pixel makes a difference in the highest league and doesn't in another is in of itself a problem for me. The laws of the game are exactly the same at every level, Andy. It's a question of whether it's appropriate to use technology to take decisions on those laws, and sometimes override the on-field officials, at the top level but not at lower levels.
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Jun 7, 2024 7:40:23 GMT
Wouldn't know haven't seen the way your survey was framed. I would have thought only dyed in the wool Luddites would want to get rid of it. Everything should be under constant review as to how it can be improved anyway. The way systems are used can be improved. Interpretation of rules and directions to match officials can be changed to make decisions quicker and less debatable. The clock won't be turned back, that's just fantasy. I was actually asking where you got your figure of 10/20% from. If it's a personal estimate, I don't think the evidence supports you. I don't think it's reasonable (and a tad patronising) to categorise those fans who would now prefer to get rid of it as luddite. If there were a simple majority opposition to new technology, there wouldn't have been the high level of support for it when it was first introduced. Much of that support has now melted away. The majority now think that the adverse effect on the watching experience, whether inside the ground or on TV, is not a price worth paying for the relatively small increase in correct decisions which is claimed. I think the Wolves resolution has been a good catalyst for opening up the debate (the amount of media we've been asked to do on it is evidence of that) and it is to be hoped that the PL will now take that debate on how to improve it forward, involving all stakeholders. Just for the record, I am not personally in favour of its abolition, but its not my personal views which matter when representing fans. Maybe it is patronising I don’t know. I find football fans behaviour weird and backward on a number of levels. Imo a human being who needs segregating from other human beings because they are watching a sporting contest are extremely weird. If that’s patronising I’ll wear the label.
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Jun 7, 2024 7:42:09 GMT
I still don't agree that any law in the game should have a different benchmark in one league or competition than another. The idea that a pixel makes a difference in the highest league and doesn't in another is in of itself a problem for me. The laws of the game are exactly the same at every level, Andy. It's a question of whether it's appropriate to use technology to take decisions on those laws, and sometimes override the on-field officials, at the top level but not at lower levels. And why is football unique in that respect? Technology is used in most high value sporting competitions.
|
|
|
Post by andystokey on Jun 7, 2024 7:46:25 GMT
I still don't agree that any law in the game should have a different benchmark in one league or competition than another. The idea that a pixel makes a difference in the highest league and doesn't in another is in of itself a problem for me. The laws of the game are exactly the same at every level, Andy. It's a question of whether it's appropriate to use technology to take decisions on those laws, and sometimes override the on-field officials, at the top level but not at lower levels. The survey used shows a dissatisfaction amongst supporters and what it tells us that the majority don't agree with the way the law is "benchmarked" or interpreted as well as the delay. I think we should also be clear the majority of grassroots and lower league football including our own isn't referred this way and supporters still disagree with it. It's one of the remaining pleasures watching our games that once the decision is made its not changed.
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Jun 7, 2024 7:51:48 GMT
I was actually asking where you got your figure of 10/20% from. If it's a personal estimate, I don't think the evidence supports you. I don't think it's reasonable (and a tad patronising) to categorise those fans who would now prefer to get rid of it as luddite. If there were a simple majority opposition to new technology, there wouldn't have been the high level of support for it when it was first introduced. Much of that support has now melted away. The majority now think that the adverse effect on the watching experience, whether inside the ground or on TV, is not a price worth paying for the relatively small increase in correct decisions which is claimed. I think the Wolves resolution has been a good catalyst for opening up the debate (the amount of media we've been asked to do on it is evidence of that) and it is to be hoped that the PL will now take that debate on how to improve it forward, involving all stakeholders. Just for the record, I am not personally in favour of its abolition, but its not my personal views which matter when representing fans. Maybe it is patronising I don’t know. I find football fans behaviour weird and backward on a number of levels. Imo a human being who needs segregating from other human beings because they are watching a sporting contest are extremely weird. If that’s patronising I’ll wear the label. If you insert the words " some" or " a minority" before "football fans", I'll agree with you, but not as a generalisation about "football fans". Crowd segregation is of course a totally different and unconnected subject and debate to VAR, which is the topic of this thread. I don't think it is at all "weird" or "backward" to want to get rid of VAR.
|
|
|
Post by baconburger on Jun 7, 2024 7:58:21 GMT
Maybe it is patronising I don’t know. I find football fans behaviour weird and backward on a number of levels. Imo a human being who needs segregating from other human beings because they are watching a sporting contest are extremely weird. If that’s patronising I’ll wear the label. If you insert the words " some" or " a minority" before "football fans", I'll agree with you, but not as a generalisation about "football fans". Crowd segregation is of course a totally different and unconnected subject and debate to VAR, which is the topic of this thread. I don't think it is at all "weird" or "backward" to want to get rid of VAR. Then we agree to disagree on a perfectly amicable basis. I think it’s relevant because I don’t understand what ‘some fans’ think is unique about football compared to other spectator sports.
|
|
|
Post by jesusmcmuffin on Jun 7, 2024 8:26:19 GMT
I think VAR discredits itself with the toenail offsides.That needs to be amended. Secondly another irritating aspect is the ref running to the screen . You know full well the outcome. When will a ref say sorry no my decision is right ( Oliver v Everton only one I can think of ) . Then the muppets in stockly park . As an example Liverpool second goal v Aston Villa went to bar for offside. Now you would think the line would be drawn parallel to the 18 yard line. No. It was so skewed as to be laughable. You then wonder whether agendas exist . As Forest tried to say . Yep agree with that but isn't offside offside? If you start bringing areas of advantage in then it's back to the decision being made away from the technology.
|
|
|
Post by idle on Jun 7, 2024 11:56:25 GMT
I think VAR discredits itself with the toenail offsides.That needs to be amended. Secondly another irritating aspect is the ref running to the screen . You know full well the outcome. When will a ref say sorry no my decision is right ( Oliver v Everton only one I can think of ) . Then the muppets in stockly park . As an example Liverpool second goal v Aston Villa went to bar for offside. Now you would think the line would be drawn parallel to the 18 yard line. No. It was so skewed as to be laughable. You then wonder whether agendas exist . As Forest tried to say . Yep agree with that but isn't offside offside? If you start bringing areas of advantage in then it's back to the decision being made away from the technology. So what? I'd rather the refs make that decision with the advantage criteria than dodgy measurements. The refs (or at least they should) have a better understanding of the game than a bunch of refs with a thick line measuring toenails with curved lenses and no criteria for when the ball was played while sitting miles away from the action. The same goes for penalties and cards, and any other decision on pitch. The only thing tech should be used for is the goal line tech, but even that takes understanding to use.
|
|