Kane puts the boot in...twice..gets handed off by an Everton player...tiny contact...and Kane goes down like he's been koshed...pathetic by the England captain no less....what a cheat. Yes you can't push somebody in the face but to deliberately exaggerate it was a disgrace.
VAR never bothered to tell ref to red card Kane for deliberate feigning and exaggerating to get a fellow pro sent off.
Not a VAR issue. Feigning injuries while annoying, are also not a VAR issue.
Was it a violent conduct offence? Yes.
Was red card administered on pitch. Yes.
Check Complete.
I have said previously VAR is a good idea in principle, but like a lot of good ideas it breaks down in the real World. First, the technology isn't ( and probably never can be) accurate enough to be 100% reliable. The number of frames per second used in the cameras would have to be greater, and the cost's of doing that would be astronomical. Offside is a perfect example: A footballers foot is in contact with a ball for more than 1 frame, in super slo-motion (more frames) we can see the foot come into contact with the ball, over about 3/4 frames the ball will contract and distort whilst in contact with the foot...then in the next couple of frames the ball will be free of the foot and be in the air. So depending on A. How hard the ball is being kicked, and whether it was previously still, or moving (and if so what direction)...and B. How much air is in the ball, is it wet, or dry, or even the ambient temperature will all be factors in how many frames the ball was in contact with the foot....It'll be about 4 to 6 frames...or just under about a quarter of a second. Moving on to the player receiving the ball, was he behind, in line with, or in front of a defender when that ball left the passers foot? Only a camera perfectly parallel to the receiving player would be able to show this, and even then there would have to be much greater frame count to see (and not guess) the exact frame where the player is now clear of any defender. Just think how hard this is baring in mind the defender could be 10 metres away. Of course cameras are not ( and can't be) parallel to the action, no cameras could track the action that quickly, and so the camera view we get now is compromised by the laws of parallax. This is why some people in the crowd see him clearly in front of a defender, and others see him behind, it's all determined by where you are watching from. The coloured lines VAR uses now is a best guess at what a parallel camera might have seen. So trying to match up the exact frame a ball leaves a foot with the exact frame a player is forward of a defender isn't possible with today's technology, or even tomorrows technology, because it would cost too much to implement, and it would take too long to adjudicate ...oh and it doesn't exist.
So before anyone says what about the accuracy of the camera footage of 100 metre runners crossing the line, or bikes at the velodrome? ....Those cameras are A. moving at the approximate speed of the action, hence the background is blurry) and B. it's quite technical, if your that interested there's plenty of info online.
Bottom line is the technology used for VAR isn't accurate enough
If you're found to be in an offside position, there's no hiding place anymore. While you argue about freeze frames, most offsides given now are for clear offsides that everyone can see. The Salah goal at City the other week probably would have been given offside against Jota in the first couple of seasons, nowadays they don't even draw the lines on screen.
We're not getting rid of this thing, so just accept it. Next year, there will be the AI available for offsides, and the refs themselves will be announcing their decisions in the stadium after looking at the monitor.
Agree with most of that, however itâs been said a Million times alreadyâŚ.there is nothing wrong with the system itself itâs the f***in morons who use it, the morons in question have never kicked a ball in anger so have no real understanding of the emotions involved, itâs a bit like playing FIFA, to them itâs a video game, their decisions are bewildering because like I said they do not understand, until the powers at be involve ex players, ex managers and a referee not under the influence of the PGMOL, we will never have parity,
It works perfectly well in other sports, so why has football in the UK got so many issues, canât be the system can it, so only one place else to point the finger at ??
You can't have unqualified officials refereeing games. Can you imagine the allegations of bias levelled at ex players and managers, judging those decisions.
"He used to play for team A before. He's biased.
He used to manage the rivals of team B before. He's biased.
He wants revenge for a decision against the team he supports 5-10-20 years ago. He's biased.
His family are season ticket holders/used to check the tickets/supply the hospitality at the ground he's at today. He's biased."
That's just 4 suggestions. So your idea will never work.
I wonder what the procedure is when itâs the match official who elbows a player?
Iâm not saying itâs a big thing but if a player did that to a referee he would be banned for months.
There isn't a procedure. It's also nothing to do with VAR, even though it's ultimately video evidence that will decide what the punishment is. I would expect a lifetime ban, if not given by the FA, then by FIFA. He's on the FIFA list.
Either ALL claims for a penalty should be reviewed by VAR, or NONE should be reviewed by VAR.....otherwise the decision to review or not will always be controversial and lead to mistakes.
If we accept that the Boss of the game is the ref, then the VAR officials are his underlings, and as such they have a natural fear to overrule him.
They are not brave enough to make the call, in fear that they might get it wrong, especially if the ref has already called it. Leaving the decision whether to check an incident or not with the VAR operator will always be subject to bias (Probably subconsciously). This is why the so called big teams get favourable outcomes.
No they don't. All teams get their share of decisions for and against them, as we have. You don't review all claims for penalties, otherwise City games would last about 5 hours. Every incident is checked, then the VAR advises the ref to review an incident pitchside, when he thinks a clear and obvious error has been made on the pitch. The rest is up to the ref on the field.
Earlier you called VAR to be scrapped if it isn't 100% accurate. Putting on the LFC hat again, I can recall instantly of at least 6 points we've got this season, thanks in part to VAR decisions in our favour, including the last away game. It could make a massive difference at the end of the season. Ok there would have been a lengthy VAR check for offside on Nunez, if Konate had scored at the weekend, but with so much at stake, that's fair enough.
Think thereâs more complains about what you are than VAR.
Liverpool 7-0 mancs
