Discussion in 'Football & Other Sports' started by Nick, Feb 15, 2020 at 10:41 AM.
Anybody seen the disallowed goal?
By the laws of the game ‘offside’. By the spirit of the game ‘goal’. Those that wanted VAR because it would be definitive and show up officials mistakes have got what they asked for. Lino got it wrong by not flagging...albeit for a couple of centimetres. ‘Got to take interpretation out of decision making’ said some’...and then we have this. And still they moan that we now have to change the laws in order to allow a few centimetres leeway. Laughable if it wasn’t destroying the game. Give it back to refs and Lino’s; yes they make mistakes but at least we can sing ‘you don’t know what you doing’ and move on to the next incident. TV have got what they wanted...more controversy for them to show from every angle and in freeze frame and to discuss more than the football.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't think hardly anyone wanted this did they?
I was totally for VAR, but for clear and obvious errors only and not where you need to measure in micro fractions of a millimetre.
That goal should have stood.
That’s not an argument. Leicester would have a legitimate complaint if that had been allowed because it was not ‘clear and obvious’. They could rightly argue that by the laws of the game the VAR pictures demonstrate the player was fractionally offside.
At what point does a fraction become clear and obvious and how will that be implemented consistently? Leave it to the officials on the pitch
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I totally agree with This comment on BBC Sport.
"This is not football. If you showed 100 neutral fans that play and asked if it was offside, even in slow motion, not a single one would call it offside."
Being for VAR doesn't mean we have to accept nonsense like this.
No-one called offside on that last night. If we take it to these levels football is ruined as a game.
Clear and obvious only. No-one could ever say that was a clear and obvious error.
Not even open to interpretation. Not clear and obvious.
I would agree if he turned chillwell and Smashed it in the net but he made a short pass where another 3 passes followed! It’s bollocks
I have said before, you could get a device so accurate, a player could be offside by the merest microfibre sticking out from his football sock
Just apply common sense and VAR is workable. At the moment, it is a farce and a joke.
Like there is no such thing as level. Apply the right, extreme micro technology and someone will always be off by a fraction of a micro millimeter.
I don't know if it's because I've caught a fair bit of Wolves on TV ,but christ they've been the victim of this on so many occasions this season.
At least,5 goals chalked off in big games.
You know it's s little off topic but it's a little worrying with the implementation of all technology employed in keeping us safe ,that we have nothing to fear if we're doing nothing wrong ,but this example of how overreach can creep in and missuse can bring about injustices.
I don’t want the game to be that clinical, if the attackers body is offside I can accept that but half a foot is just ridiculous. Sadly we have ourselves to blame, the amount of complaints that the refs and linos got over the years has resulted in VAR being introduced. Just has taken the soul out of the game
Yep. Perfect word for it, Wingy. Overreach.
Nowt wrong with VAR. It's the implication of VAR and the anal lengths it is taken to.
I agree with Covstu. Pardon the pun, but half a foot is a step too far.
But this is the problem, the conversation is who has been the luckiest compared to who hasn’t!
This is ridiculous. the whole frame rate vs movement of player vs when is the ball actually played (when it touches the foot or forward pressure on the ball, especially when considering first time passes). Theres quite a big margin of error between frames.
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
And that was ever thus.
I agree the application of VAR has been shite (with part of me thinking this has been deliberate as those at the top have been so against it for so long) but it still doesn't sort out subjective decisions. Even making it clear and obvious is allowing subjective decision making.For me the only way for 'clear and obvious' to be quantified is a time limit any decision has 1 minute tops to be overturned - any longer it isn't clear and obvious and original decision stands.
I also think any VAR shouldn't be allowed to overturn an on-field decision - only refer it back for the on-field ref to decide.
It ain't rocket science.
I agree and have said the same. Put a time limit on it. I would even say 30 seconds. If you looked long enough you could always find the merest fraction in a tight decision.
If they cannot sort it out within 30 seconds, it is quite clearly not a clear or obvious error.
Impossible to tell definitively when it's played yet they're analysing positions to the millimetre with technology that isn't capable of doing it. The margin for error is apparently 14-20cm!
VAR is killing the game.
Separate names with a comma.