So you think saying they were unlucky is moaning ,really.
I do have the sound down quite often to be fair - more depends on who the commentary team is!
I don't mind hearing all the swearing the players and managers do. Lack of atmosphere doesn't put me off a bit.
That's a definite plus. Apparently you could hear Rashford calling Maguire an effing knobhead the other day! Comedy gold.
Nick said 1 point, the feet, unfortunately the toenails are attached to feet, so either you are on or off side.
It would be so much easier if they stop trying to draw lines on it, and start simply watching the footage and seeing if they think he's offside or not. The same as a linesman used to do, but with the benefit of a slow motion replay. That's all it had to be, and it genuinely makes me upset that they've done it so stupidly and ruined football and there's nothing I can do about it.
I agree they’ve messed it up, but the Linesman and the VAR official both need to be clear on what they are looking at, is it just feet? Any part of the body you can score with? etc etc.
But if in Rugby the VAR sees the ball is short of the try line by a toe, then they’ll say No Try, why should Football allow that tolerance?
In my view once you forget about lines you can also forget about toe, shoulder, etc. It wasn't ever talked about before was it? The linesman just made a judgement call in the moment. That's how I would envision it working. Official watches the replay in slow motion and just makes a judgement call whether the forward is ahead of the defender, by looking at their body as a whole. Examples: if their toe is beyond but the bulk of their body is back and behind the defender (because he has his weight on the back foot) then potentially they would appear level and he'd be onside. Or their feet might be level, but the striker is leaning forward with more momentum so his head and shoulders are past the defender and then he will appear to be offside. If their bodies are about level but the forward's foot is in front then he might be given offside. It's just a judgement based on what you say. All the VAR does is give them the chance to look at it one more time, slowed down. Note, I'm purely talking about offsides here.
I agree. The VAR should be there to help the ref - he can view it at the side of the pitch if he needs a second look. For some reason it's ended up being that a guy in an office in Stockley Park is actually making the major decisions and the ref is just the spokesman. It's totally wrong.
I don’t have an issue with anything you’ve put, but you have to remember how we got in this mess and unfortunately it was because judgement calls weren’t accepted by managers, players or fans, especially when the media stepped in.
Pros and cons of both, Football can be a lot faster at times and yes I’d hope that is correct with your last sentence, but VAR seems to prove it wrong.
The major problem with the "Clear and Obvious" is what's clear and obvious to one set of people is not clear and obvious to the others, so if you are going to use it, you have to use it to the nth degree. The worms might be out the can by now, but I prefer the old way of the 3 officials making the decisions on what they see, The Championship has no VAR and I don't see arguments 5 times a game there, they just get on with it.
There are so many aspects to the application of VAR that make you seriously wonder what sort of idiots they had around the table discussing it. They totally jumped the shark and made it way overblown. It really could have been as simple as just installing those TVs at pitchside for the ref to go have a second look if he needed to. Just that minor change is all that was needed and I think would worked fine. The only extra member of staff you'd need is someone to run the replay footage on the TV for him.
