deleted user 785
Striker
No. I'm not convinced it was a penalty tbh. Still an opinion.Really? Were they all Aussie?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
No. I'm not convinced it was a penalty tbh. Still an opinion.Really? Were they all Aussie?
But then how do you decide? What if the ref saw Kane getting pulled to the ground and thought it wasn't, like other posters on here don't? VAR suggests it is, and loads think it is. Who is correct?
That's the kind of thing in rugby that would be looked at, discussed and communicated to fans so you can understand why a decision was made and move on. You might disagree with the interpretation but at least you know what you're disagreeing about.
No. I'm not convinced it was a penalty tbh. Still an opinion.
In that situation I'd expect the ref to at least have another look at it from other angles. If he still looks at that and thinks "fair play, play on" then I'd send him home for being incompetent. There's no way any sane person could say Kane wasn't fouled
I guess they want refs confident in how to use it first but that's why it shouldn't have been introduced for this WC.Same in cricket, being able to hear the umpires conversation improved it immensely. Baffling that football hasn't taken the best bits from other sports that use it.
Yes and gave it. Some didn't think it was a penalty. It's a fucked up system
This will come in time in the various leagues.Same in cricket, being able to hear the umpires conversation improved it immensely. Baffling that football hasn't taken the best bits from other sports that use it.
Yes and gave it. Some didn't think it was a penalty. It's a fucked up system
Cos the only camera angle that makes it look suss is the camera angle all the media keep using for some reason.FIFA has already announced it's reviewing those: Fifa to analyse VAR failure to award Harry Kane penalties in England win
Don't see why Brazil's shouldn't get the same courtesy.
Normally people have argued that because financially decisions have so much weight we should introduce it. All I am saying is that with FIFA saying there would be zero tolerance for pulling in the box that there should have been a penalty for Kane last night - if it can't sort that out then I don't see the point. Would you be happy if the Ref chose to ignore a decision later shown to be a penalty if made the difference between winning a cup and not? As I say FIFA are now reviewing the KAne decisions.Say that incident happened in a game where a cup was won. Would you want it to be a free kick rather than a penalty, so we would walk out of the ground and say, it will even up?
Blame infantino for that.I guess they want refs confident in how to use it first but that's why it shouldn't have been introduced for this WC.
Cos the only camera angle that makes it look suss is the camera angle all the media keep using for some reason.
The camera from behind the goal and the camera from the corner show that it was nowt.
Totally agree - what was the game earlier when it was injury time and the ref was stopping the game and nobody knew why - it is quite farcical.its utter shite in the whole. just scrap it and forget it ever existed.
they've took the most exciting, spontaneous, romantically crazy and emotionally erratic game and turned it into a farce, for very little benefit
If FIFA are going over rule the on field and var officials, then I would agree to suspend.Normally people have argued that because financially decisions have so much weight we should introduce it. All I am saying is that with FIFA saying there would be zero tolerance for pulling in the box that there should have been a penalty for Kane last night - if it can't sort that out then I don't see the point. Would you be happy if the Ref chose to ignore a decision later shown to be a penalty if made the difference between winning a cup and not? As I say FIFA are now reviewing the KAne decisions.
In answer to your question I'd rather not use this technology because it is not and cannot be consistently applied. For every decision it get right like for Egypt there'll be plenty of other ignored.
Normally people have argued that because financially decisions have so much weight we should introduce it. All I am saying is that with FIFA saying there would be zero tolerance for pulling in the box that there should have been a penalty for Kane last night - if it can't sort that out then I don't see the point. Would you be happy if the Ref chose to ignore a decision later shown to be a penalty if made the difference between winning a cup and not? As I say FIFA are now reviewing the KAne decisions.
In answer to your question I'd rather not use this technology because it is not and cannot be consistently applied. For every decision it get right like for Egypt there'll be plenty of other ignored.
It's stayingits utter shite in the whole. just scrap it and forget it ever existed.
they've took the most exciting, spontaneous, romantically crazy and emotionally erratic game and turned it into a farce, for very little benefit
its utter shite in the whole. just scrap it and forget it ever existed.
they've took the most exciting, spontaneous, romantically crazy and emotionally erratic game and turned it into a farce, for very little benefit
It's staying
Are you watching the Russia game? The ref gives a free kick, var suggests he has made an error, reviewed and within a minute a penalty is confirmed.exactly, so pretty much what we already had, but without the confusion