VARguments

[Mackem Attack]

Full game going to be replayed? It's really getting daft now.

‘Misapplication of the laws’: VAR error leads to full replay of Belgian match

Genk were denied a penalty retake in defeat to Anderlecht and the ruling to overturn it is believed to be first of its kind in European football

www.theguardian.com

That sets the worst possible precedent in football. Any idea who’s made it? Was it local FA or UEFA? If it’s UEFA then they’ll have a long line at their door in the morning

 

[tunstallhill]

The fact that every time there is a TV game without VaR it sparks excitement in the pundits, commentators, fans, managers, players and referees shows how much it has taken away from the beautiful game.

 

[Shambo]

Any idea who’s made it? Was it local FA or UEFA? If it’s UEFA then they’ll have a long line at their door in the morning

It was Belgiums Disciplinary Council for Professional Football, which oversees domestic refereeing.

 

[Mackem Attack]

It was Belgiums Disciplinary Council for Professional Football, which oversees domestic refereeing.

Suppose as a positive it doesn’t set a European wide precedent then at least

 

[bernardbresslaw]

I think that Coventry decision proves exactly what I said in my first post.

 

[AC Mack]

I was finished with it before it started.

 

[Vicham]

That sets the worst possible precedent in football. Any idea who’s made it? Was it local FA or UEFA? If it’s UEFA then they’ll have a long line at their door in the morning

And here we go. Barcelona president is now saying, they will demand a full re-play of El Clasico if they find evidence that it was indeed a goal that VAR could not spot

 

[Hendon Mad Frog]

I think that Coventry decision proves exactly what I said in my first post.

That the technology works?

I don't know why people are using this decision as some kind of excuse for VAR being shit. It's one of the least controversial of the season.

 

[bernardbresslaw]

That the technology works?

I don't know why people are using this decision as some kind of excuse for VAR being shit. It's one of the least controversial of the season.

How did it work? He was offside by a toenail, how did they know the exact time it left the boot?

 

[AJH88]

Football grew and was a success for hundred plus years without it, it was brought in to get rid of contentious decisions but it's just made new ones and it's all pundits talk about now

 

[Redandwhitedust]

That the technology works?

I don't know why people are using this decision as some kind of excuse for VAR being shit. It's one of the least controversial of the season.

The technology works. The argument is does the technology improve or spoil the game?

There's also the fact that even though the technology works, the way in which it is used arguably doesn't work. It slows down the game, gets involved in contentious decisions where it still comes down to a human eye and a human interpretation.

I do think there's a place for VAR. It benefits almost every other sport. Football just needs to find out how to use it effectively

 

[dangermows]

I think that Coventry decision proves exactly what I said in my first post.

It was offside.

 

[bernardbresslaw]

It was offside.

You don't understand how the technology works. You see a line drawn and you think that's always correct?

 

[dangermows]

You don't understand how the technology works. You see a line drawn and you think that's always correct?

Yes I do. It was clearly offside. You're wrong. No harm done. Night.

 

[bernardbresslaw]

Yes I do. It was clearly offside. You're wrong. No harm done. Night.

I know you hate to be wrong, but you're wrong.

 

[Sporty]

How did it work? He was offside by a toenail, how did they know the exact time it left the boot?

Law 11 - Offside

IFAB Laws of the Game

www.thefa.com

Offside offence

A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched* by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:

 

[bernardbresslaw]

Law 11 - Offside

IFAB Laws of the Game

www.thefa.com

Offside offence

A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched* by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:

That doesn't explain how they know when to draw the line. A tenth of a second earlier and he's onside.

 

[MackneyHackem]

The rule is wrong. Advantage should be given to the attacker.

Should be a foot or a **** hair at least. Not a toenail.

That doesn't explain how they know when to draw the line. A tenth of a second earlier and he's onside.

That’s not a good argument at all Bernie mate.

 

[bernardbresslaw]

The rule is wrong. Advantage should be given to the attacker.

Should be a foot or a **** hair at least. Not a toenail.


That’s not a good argument at all Bernie mate.

How?
It's madness to say someone was definitely offside because someone has drawn a line at the point they think the ball left the players foot. I bet you could "rock and roll" the footage like they do in cricket.
Jeff Stelling was saying the exact same thing yesterday.

 

[MackneyHackem]

How?
It's madness to say someone was definitely offside because someone has drawn a line at the point they think the ball left the players foot. I bet you could "rock and roll" the footage like they do in cricket.
Jeff Stelling was saying the exact same thing yesterday.

I don’t care about cricket or know anything about it.