Oh, I agree 100%End it, end of conversation. It's killing the spontaneity of football which for me is the most important thing of all.
How can we be comfortable with something that stops you celebrating wildly when your team scores? Being awarded a goal two minutes later takes away everything for me, that's why we need to get rid of it.
Even then, the guy in the booth could be on a bung. That's the only explanation for some of the recent calls out from Stockley Park.Oh, I agree 100%
Just intrigued as to overall opinion. I can't see any argument for it, aside from maybe it makes corruption a bit harder but I think that's more an argument for other counties with a more clear history of match fixing/bent refs.
I must admit, a review system would probably be better. I'd make it one review that rolls over if correct.It works for other sports like cricket, tennis, and RU/RL.
The principle of VAR is fine, it's just in football where its application is so poor.
In football, cheating and glaring errors were previously allowed to stand (Thierry Henri handball against Ireland or Maradona handball against England), so I think some sort of review system is required. Maybe 3 reviews per team like cricket? Then we might have got a point at Donny for 2 missed handballs (ref incompetence?)
We would also have more spontaneity which someone has already mentioned.
Yep. Maybe an argument for “ is it over the line” decisions, but that’s it.It has created even more controversy than before its introduction and has slowed down the game. Scrap it apart from goal line technology
VAR isn't the problem as such. The people who use it are.
Blatant cheating is gotten away with anyway, under the ref, linos nose. Diving, kicking the ballaway, walking away with the ball and dropping it 40 yards away, taking throw ins 20 yards farther forward. These may be little things but they are all against the rules and more importantly the spirit of the game. Var is rubbish and needs ditching, but reffs and linos have a lot to answer for also.I think Dave raises a good point about maybe letting teams have reviews as I am as frustrated as anyone about VAR especially the ridiculous offsides, they need to go and the old rule of daylight be adopted, however on the same token again as Dave points out blatant cheating shouldn’t be gotten away with if the referees miss it.
Keep it. It is those who operate it that are making the mistakes, VAR itself is not the problem.
And next season with the rule change Fulhams goal stands.Engkish top flight refs have now been told to be less strict with regards to handball. Fulhams goal should never have been disallowed. Ain't VAR technology that's the problem it's the officials interpreting it.
VAR wouldn't have any effect on the Lampard goal. Different system for goal line technology that actually works.I'm for keeping it for three reasons...
1. It takes away the big club bias - think about how many close (and some obvious) decisions always generally went the way of the big club, especially at home. In this respect VAR has been a great 'leveller'. Even if it doesn't work perfectly, it is at least the same for all teams.
2. I think VAR has dramatically reduced cheatin and it eliminates absolute howlers from the officials - think about Lampard's non goal in the SA World Cup that was about a foot over the line
3. And last but by no means least - we would still be in the Premier League if VAR had been used in 2010
Clearly it needs to be improved. I think the easiest one, as many have said, is to introduce a bigger margin of error on offsides to say 20cm instead of 1mm (which is ridiculous). Also, everybody moaned about DRS in cricket at first but now it has added a new dimension to the game and I suspect very few would now want to get rid of it. Nobody likes change but I would say with a bit of tweaking VAR is a positive development for the game.
This is my view precisely.It works for other sports like cricket, tennis, and RU/RL.
The principle of VAR is fine, it's just in football where its application is so poor.
In football, cheating and glaring errors were previously allowed to stand (Thierry Henri handball against Ireland or Maradona handball against England), so I think some sort of review system is required. Maybe 3 reviews per team like cricket? Then we might have got a point at Donny for 2 missed handballs (ref incompetence?)
We would also have more spontaneity which someone has already mentioned.
Makes me think these bad decisions are an attempt just to undermine a system that has proven worth elsewhere.It works for other sports like cricket, tennis, and RU/RL.
The principle of VAR is fine, it's just in football where its application is so poor.
In football, cheating and glaring errors were previously allowed to stand (Thierry Henri handball against Ireland or Maradona handball against England), so I think some sort of review system is required. Maybe 3 reviews per team like cricket? Then we might have got a point at Donny for 2 missed handballs (ref incompetence?)
We would also have more spontaneity which someone has already mentioned.
have to disagree with a lot of that. You're trying to conflate two points.. It's not the players that are referring decisions to VAR it's the match referee himself. If it's not the match referee, it's the VAR ref himself bringing an incident to the referees attention. I really don't see why the onus should be passed from a referee to a player regarding a mistake being made.by an official. It isn't tennis or cricket where there is a natural break between points/ball. It has to be for the two refs to sort out. And why put pressure on a ref to get a decision right within sixty seconds? The important thing is they get it right. Sure, i agree some decisions are taking too long but i put that down to the over use of slomo.It's obviously not the fault of the technology. It takes a person to build it, decide how to operate it and apply it same as all tech.
I must admit, I'm very much against it and would get rid in a heartbeat but...
I can see a limited use base on referrals actually being quite good for the spectacle, especially as sometimes the crowd see what managers or captains don't.
We've got to stop the automatic referrals. That's the worst bit. I don't fundamentally oppose the use of technology full stop, I oppose the use of it diminishing the spectacle and joy of a goal.
I'd limit it to ONE review (rolling with success) and only for clear and obvious - i.e. an equivalent of umpires call, so a close offside is 'level' or 'linos call'
You'd have 20 seconds after a goal or red card to appeal. No more.
Make it so you'd have to be certain there'd been a howler before using it,as opposed to a brush off a fingernail that doesn't divert the ball or 2mm offside call.
At least that way it would be part of the tactics and decisions within the game, as opposed to a stupid sideshow that happens for no rhyme or reason.
All decisions made within 60 seconds.
Maybe even less appeals, maybe 1 per season (use it wrongly, you lose it) or something...
That would limit the use to absolute howlers...