If you look up and squint really hard, you’ll see the point flying way over your head.
Pathetic to hear you bang the drum on something that the entire football community seems to have a consensus on. You’d probably do well as one of the officials using VAR because they seem to be absolutely clueless too.
So you obviously have not read Law 14. When you read the laws of the game, then you will know why decisions are made.
decisions are still being made by humans and are subjective. If you listened to Nuno he spoke very sensibly about how the REF can judge in real time better than a TV replay. He said he can judge the weight of a tackle or the intention of a player which you simply cannot do from a tv screen.
You only have to listen to Dermot the Ref on SKY he understands the rules as printed in the rule book but that's it.
That's his job, to know the rulebook. I think there should be more use of the monitor, but that's just another box ticking exercise, as it usually means the original decision will be changed.
just seen the REF provide an assist for CITY and it wasn't cancelled out even though he went to blow the whistle but then changed his mind
He never touched the ball, therefore play was not stopped.
Other sports are irrelevant, I, like billions of others only really watch football - Football is the biggest sport in the world and all of the others are tinpot in comparison.
One of the reasons for that is that football, unlike a lot of American sports aren't plagued with ridiculous and constant stoppages and timeouts
Football is the biggest and best sport in the world by a huge margin and it's got to onto that perch with minimal use of technology.
Just because technology is widely used in say NFL, doesn't mean it should be incorporated into football
I don't watch American sports either, not even MLS where VAR has been used for some time. But I do know that like most sports, the NFL has a safety net, where if the ref doesn't spot something, the correct decision can still be made, albeit in limited circumstances.
Technology has dominated football for many years. It's used in everything from monitoring training routines to disciplinary cases. Now it's finally evolved to the next level, in game action.
What does my head in, is why our goal to so f**king long to review. If you’ve got half a brain like me then as soon as you see it touch Adams shoulder and Mane scoring, it takes about 2 seconds to say GOAL, like it is.
Who is reviewing it for it to take about an hour and a f**king half?
Get normal people who can make a f**king obvious decision quickly ffs!
Personally I don't care how long it takes, but there were 3 incidents to be checked. 2 handballs and an offside. It takes time. Simon Hooper found no grounds for the original decision on the pitch to be confirmed, and it was over in 2 minutes, not much longer than the average of 90 seconds taken for a single incident.
Next season that goal will be allowed. And rightly so.
Give it a rest pal, or at least understand that you are in a minority of people who think it's good for the game, and in an even smaller minority of people who think it's working as it stand now.
People are fed up with it, but people like to blame VAR as if it's a pedantic robot going around sucking the life out of the game. At the end of the day the VAR is nothing but a set of officials who don't know their arse from their elbow, which h exacerbates the dire situation even more so.
How any one can look at the still of some of these offsides and think 'that's offside' is beyond me. The problem is referees cannot judge to the exact point where someone's arm pit starts and where it ends, nor can they judge the *exact* moment ball makes contact with the passers foot/head.
Its guessing, and its total bollocks. At least next season by the looks of it the microscopic offsides will be left to stand.
In rugby the referee makes a call and the video referee only interferes if it's a proven mistake, and in cricket there is an area of leeway given to officials called umpires call. They dont start giving decisions that the 99% accurate technology shows to be trimming a nail, unless the original decision is out.
In cricket, snicko and infrared technology are used to determine if there was a micro touch of a ball with a bat, and if there is, that's it. There's no umpires call for that, he's just overruled if he got it wrong. There's no booing, there's no chanting, the fans just accept it and get on with the rest of the game. Football fans should be able to (and in fairness our fans are good at that) but chanting and shouting is not going to get rid of VAR. It is now absolutely essential in the top tier of football to help keep the cheats out and fair play in.
There were 5 illegal ghost goals overturned at the weekend. If one (or more) of them had counted, and their team stayed up by 1 or 2 points come May, then the teams who went down instead, would be fully entitled to ask, "why wasn't that goal disallowed when it should have been?" amongst a tonne of other questions.
I don't know if or when the offside law will be changed. If it is VAR will apply it. But that doesn't really solve anything. The law is what it is. You just move the line somewhere else, and people will still debate how offside it is. But the line has to be drawn somewhere, and if the forward is beyond the line, he will still be judged offside.
As long as VAR applies the rules of the game, then it's working. I am in a minority in liking VAR, but I'm ok with that. I have wanted our sport to fall into line with many others for many many years, so I will make no apologies for wanting it, as I would rather have the correct decision there and then, than be upset by the consequences of a wrong decision, days weeks months and yes, years later.