I did wonder and worry that you were ill. Hope you get better soon.
I agree on monitors. Is it clear and obvious - or not? If people staring at a screen in super slow motion can’t get that right then why does it need the referee to come and look at the same screen? The only thing I would change is a time limit. If it takes 4 or 5 minutes to decide whether somebody did something or not then it’s not reached the clear and obvious threshold.
In general I’m just bored with pundits banging on about it. Referees decisions will always remain subjective with or without VAR. For me it works as long as nobody is talking about blatant miscarriages of justice. VAR should eliminate that from the game.
Thats the problem , even with VAR there are blatant miscarriages of justice because the VAR officials are reluctant to over rule their mates.
It is not working at present and has been at times disappointing to say the least.
Mike Riley and his sidekick Swarbrick should resign, they have made the problem worse, and have no real idea how the system should work.
Yet again officials are inconsistant, and unaccountable.
I think the idea that VAR has a set amount of time (30 seconds or a minute) to overrule the ref and if it can't then the original decision stands might be a way of improvement.
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 34 minutes ago
I think the idea that VAR has a set amount of time (30 seconds or a minute) to overrule the ref and if it can't then the original decision stands might be a way of improvement.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
DM Yes!
I miss the celebration of the goal......
It would be a bit like umpire’s call in cricket. After so many seconds it just becomes: “referee’s call” and the decision stands.
In fact this concept of: “referee’s call” should be extended. It might help explain many decisions if the VAR people say the evidence is there, but it’s not conclusive.
Or we could take Merseyside's preference of 30-60 minutes for each call to make sure everything's within the absolute letter of a woolly law. And then why stop there? Too many players stealing yards at throw-ins these days. I'm sure VAR could confirm that as well.
30 to 60 mins per call !!
Game would last several hours.
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 3 hours, 27 minutes ago
Or we could take Merseyside's preference of 30-60 minutes for each call to make sure everything's within the absolute letter of a woolly law. And then why stop there? Too many players stealing yards at throw-ins these days. I'm sure VAR could confirm that as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cheeky Dungeon.
My points remain the same. VAR will improve and the laws have to evolve if they continue to use it as they do.
However, the current issue is the total lack of consistency in how it’s used.
And where we still disagree, is the I think some
decisions are less subjective than you. Like getting kicked and giving a free kick.
The Liverpool handball shows the downside to VAR. where no one can agree on the right outcome, what value does VAR add?
In time, a better offside rule will be able to be called instantly like goal line decisions. How is that not value add?
VAR is here to stay. More decisions will be right, and with time it will improve. Until then, we probably need to debate decisions not if they’re VAR or not, just if they are correct.
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 4 hours, 10 minutes ago
Or we could take Merseyside's preference of 30-60 minutes for each call to make sure everything's within the absolute letter of a woolly law. And then why stop there? Too many players stealing yards at throw-ins these days. I'm sure VAR could confirm that as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Want to get rid of that - allow the ref to turnover if it isn't taken from the right place - would stop it pretty quickly.
Will there be VAR in tonights game pep's ?
comment by Nevsaysagoal2city (U5194)
posted 5 hours, 13 minutes ago
Will there be VAR in tonights game pep's ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As VAR isn’t used in qualifiers I’m guessing not. We’ll just have to blame the ref for incorrect decisions instead!
I'm looking forward to seeing swift, manual incompetence again instead of lengthy, technological incompetence.
It's the personal touch that counts.
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 6 hours, 39 minutes ago
I'm looking forward to seeing swift, manual incompetence again instead of lengthy, technological incompetence.
It's the personal touch that counts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on the current applications, this is a fair point and I agree.
Page 1 of 1
First
Previous
1
Next
Latest
Sign in if you want to comment
Nev still loves VAR
Page 1 of 1
posted on 13/11/19
I did wonder and worry that you were ill. Hope you get better soon.
I agree on monitors. Is it clear and obvious - or not? If people staring at a screen in super slow motion can’t get that right then why does it need the referee to come and look at the same screen? The only thing I would change is a time limit. If it takes 4 or 5 minutes to decide whether somebody did something or not then it’s not reached the clear and obvious threshold.
In general I’m just bored with pundits banging on about it. Referees decisions will always remain subjective with or without VAR. For me it works as long as nobody is talking about blatant miscarriages of justice. VAR should eliminate that from the game.
posted on 13/11/19
Thats the problem , even with VAR there are blatant miscarriages of justice because the VAR officials are reluctant to over rule their mates.
It is not working at present and has been at times disappointing to say the least.
Mike Riley and his sidekick Swarbrick should resign, they have made the problem worse, and have no real idea how the system should work.
Yet again officials are inconsistant, and unaccountable.
posted on 13/11/19
I think the idea that VAR has a set amount of time (30 seconds or a minute) to overrule the ref and if it can't then the original decision stands might be a way of improvement.
posted on 13/11/19
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 34 minutes ago
I think the idea that VAR has a set amount of time (30 seconds or a minute) to overrule the ref and if it can't then the original decision stands might be a way of improvement.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
DM Yes!
posted on 13/11/19
I miss the celebration of the goal......
posted on 13/11/19
It would be a bit like umpire’s call in cricket. After so many seconds it just becomes: “referee’s call” and the decision stands.
In fact this concept of: “referee’s call” should be extended. It might help explain many decisions if the VAR people say the evidence is there, but it’s not conclusive.
posted on 13/11/19
Or we could take Merseyside's preference of 30-60 minutes for each call to make sure everything's within the absolute letter of a woolly law. And then why stop there? Too many players stealing yards at throw-ins these days. I'm sure VAR could confirm that as well.
posted on 13/11/19
30 to 60 mins per call !!
Game would last several hours.
posted on 13/11/19
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 3 hours, 27 minutes ago
Or we could take Merseyside's preference of 30-60 minutes for each call to make sure everything's within the absolute letter of a woolly law. And then why stop there? Too many players stealing yards at throw-ins these days. I'm sure VAR could confirm that as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cheeky Dungeon.
My points remain the same. VAR will improve and the laws have to evolve if they continue to use it as they do.
However, the current issue is the total lack of consistency in how it’s used.
And where we still disagree, is the I think some
decisions are less subjective than you. Like getting kicked and giving a free kick.
The Liverpool handball shows the downside to VAR. where no one can agree on the right outcome, what value does VAR add?
In time, a better offside rule will be able to be called instantly like goal line decisions. How is that not value add?
VAR is here to stay. More decisions will be right, and with time it will improve. Until then, we probably need to debate decisions not if they’re VAR or not, just if they are correct.
posted on 13/11/19
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 4 hours, 10 minutes ago
Or we could take Merseyside's preference of 30-60 minutes for each call to make sure everything's within the absolute letter of a woolly law. And then why stop there? Too many players stealing yards at throw-ins these days. I'm sure VAR could confirm that as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Want to get rid of that - allow the ref to turnover if it isn't taken from the right place - would stop it pretty quickly.
posted on 14/11/19
Will there be VAR in tonights game pep's ?
posted on 14/11/19
comment by Nevsaysagoal2city (U5194)
posted 5 hours, 13 minutes ago
Will there be VAR in tonights game pep's ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As VAR isn’t used in qualifiers I’m guessing not. We’ll just have to blame the ref for incorrect decisions instead!
posted on 14/11/19
I'm looking forward to seeing swift, manual incompetence again instead of lengthy, technological incompetence.
It's the personal touch that counts.
posted on 14/11/19
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 6 hours, 39 minutes ago
I'm looking forward to seeing swift, manual incompetence again instead of lengthy, technological incompetence.
It's the personal touch that counts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on the current applications, this is a fair point and I agree.
Page 1 of 1