This is a good point.The principle is flawed because you still have humans making the calls on a game with some subjective laws
This is typical of the type of complaints VAR is getting. It sounds sensible and reasoned but you need to think through what would actually occur in practise.But what is absolutely bullshit, is checking every goal when the ref doesn't think it needs to happen - or VAR intervening when neither the ref or players have asked for it. That's bullshit and they should scrap it.
This is indicative of the problem with VAR actually. All other sports that have successfully implemented technology-assisted adjudicating have quite explicitly not been aiming for perfection. There are still incorrect lbw decisions in cricket, for example, even though that one can pretty much be decided objectively.This is typical of the type of complaints VAR is getting. It sounds sensible and reasoned but you need to think through what would actually occur in practise.
Let's take the handball as an example. By your logic, next week we have a goal ruled out for handball, in very similar circumstances to Laporte although. The referee suspects there may have been a handball and VAR confirms it.
The week after there is a similar but slightly more subtle handball. The ref doesn't see it and neither do the players. As a result VAR leave it alone.
Later that day when SSN show the ball glancing the goal scorers hand, what do you think the reaction will be? What about the handball last week!? Total meltdown - team were robbed, where's the consistency? Referee will be slaughtered. People will slaughter the officials and there will be a clamour for a rematch and/or a reallocation of points.
Personally, my prediction is that on field decisions on interpretative decisions will very rarely be overturned. It will mainly be for offsides and attacking handball where no interpretation is necessary.
I think the problem arises with the mentality of football fans, managers and media. Before VAR the footballing public struggled to deal with a vital reality in football. The reality being a) most laws are interpretative in football and b) some poor sod has to make a decision. Managers on the receiving end of a 50/50 decision going against them would forever berate and crucify officials for their decision. The officiating bodies have buckled and relented to VAR and started to make rules that are non interpretative to satisfy demands for 'consistency'. By and large in other sports the public have accepted the reality that the man in the middle has to make a decision and you just get on with it, even when it doesn't go your way.This is indicative of the problem with VAR actually. All other sports that have successfully implemented technology-assisted adjudicating have quite explicitly not been aiming for perfection. There are still incorrect lbw decisions in cricket, for example, even though that one can pretty much be decided objectively.
Bad decisions are part of the game, part of all games and technology doesn't change that. Hasn't in rugby, hasn't in cricket, hasn't in American Football, hasn't in tennis. So the scenario you sketch out not only will happen, it should happen - and people will have to put up with it, as they have for years.
Besides, the handball issue isn't technically about VAR, it's about the handball law.
I’ve shown it, but then you already know that.Didn't ask you tit.
My god how hard is it? If Hudson shows his mates cash out and not random ones I'll square up until he stops lying fuck off