- Aug 18, 2008
- 2,706
- 2,817
Out of interest, why?
Frankly, I don't like it as an idea either, but I find it preferable to the current open ended scenario where any goal is automatically reviewed.
Because you cant have a subjective goal.
Out of interest, why?
Frankly, I don't like it as an idea either, but I find it preferable to the current open ended scenario where any goal is automatically reviewed.
Well for starters, as has been pointed out there is still a great deal of subjectivity on what is or isn't a foul. Take the Lamela incident. Lots of people are saying it should have been a pen. Quite a few people saying, nah not a pen. If a manager challenges and the ref says he's not over turning his initial decision, imagine all the cries of fix and agenda then.Out of interest, why?
Frankly, I don't like it as an idea either, but I find it preferable to the current open ended scenario where any goal is automatically reviewed.
I think it defeats the point of VAR introduction. VAR is there to attempt to reconcile incorrect decisions in a sport where the financial stakes become greater and higher as time goes by and referees are being vilified for human error.Out of interest, why?
Frankly, I don't like it as an idea either, but I find it preferable to the current open ended scenario where any goal is automatically reviewed.
The Prem have a different interpretation of handball to UEFA and FIFA so in Europe that will count as handball, doesn't help when there's different laws for Seperate bodies, bit ridiculous if you ask me.
Really? That's so nice of him. Please say hi back and tell him he's one of my favorite players.
Neville and spitty were going on about this last night...apparently its down to the high threshold thats been set to overrule referees.
Doesn't really make a lot of sense, they showed that during the incident Oliver wasn't even looking at it as he was watching the bigger pack of players, but surely thats exactly when it should be used.
Its not overruling him if he completely missed it, id be pissed if we were on the other end of that one.
Worked pretty well at the World Cup...In practice this would mean a VAR check every time someone hit the deck at a corner. So pretty much every corner. Unworkable.
Out of interest, why?
Frankly, I don't like it as an idea either, but I find it preferable to the current open ended scenario where any goal is automatically reviewed.
I hate it. Yes it went for us on Saturday but I hate it.
Very happy to see 30,000+ Wolves fans chanting f*ck VAR even after their goal was given last night. Hope to hear that sung up and down the country this season. By a huge margin, match going fans are against it, and understandably so. The moment of absolute unbridled joy when you score a goal is being replaced by apprehension that it will be disallowed. It's not football.
I dont understand peoples problems with the rule change it makes perfect sense to me and its exactly how it should be.
Any advantage leading to a goal by use of the hand deliberately or accidentally should be disallowed.
Ashley Cole cross for Chelsea's winner against us back in the day comes to mind he didn't mean to handle but it hit his hand which moves the ball in front of him enabling him to hit a cross straight in resulting in a goal
Today that goal would rightly be disallowed.
I remember everyone being so incensed by it me included.
Henry's goal for France and many many more.
If you gain advantage for use of the hand it should be penalized and free kick given none of this subjective he didn't really mean it shit
This is my thoughts with var. Much like without, it will balance itself out.I know we will have decisions made this season because of var and the new rules like we already did in the champs league last year. City fans have already forgotten how they got something from new rules except they didn't score .VAR or no VAR it will not prevent people complaining when things go against them.
I just hope if VAR doesn't work for us we don't turn on him and use him as our new scapegoat in future. "Fuck sake Tripp...I mean VAR"
That's your opinion though on the rules , these have recently been put in much like last season in champs league . You can disagree as much as you want but now unless they are changed your opinion of what is wrong won't matter.The rule is a nonsense there has to be intent for it to be a foul - the City goal was a good goal the rule is wrong and the offside in the there game against West ham when his arm was offiside is total bull
VAR should be a thirty second look and that's it - and maybe allow managers to have two VAR claims a game otherwise its VAR is a total crock
The VAR people have confirmed that they looked at the Lamela incident and said " Lamelas arm was pulling the city player and so if with enough force he would have fell backwards but he fell forwards and thus it was a dive " I am paraphrasing but you get the drift .
Also Simon Jordan said and I paraphrase again " Pep last year said that Lorentes goal should not have stood but the deflected goal on Saturday should have stood " the smell of hypocrisy is stinking the football world out .
The new rule reference VAR where no goal should be scored whether accidental or on purpose when the ball hits an arm is a brilliant law and long live VAR . For myself if the Lorente goal was ruled out I would have been pissed but I would understand and except it .
Just as the Jesus goal was ruled out correctly in my opinion the rules don't allow for opinion the ball hits or brushes the hand = no goal
such a clear and simple law . The Var laws regarding offsides is also brilliant because whether a centi metre or a yard offside is offside .
As in real life you can't be a little bit dead you are either dead or alive as in offside not offside.