Mackem Attack
Central Defender
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
-
The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state with some features missing, normal posting/reading should now be possible.
Please read this thread for more details.
New user registrations are currently disabled.
Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.
VARguments
- Thread starter bernardbresslaw
- Start date
tunstallhill
Striker
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
Striker
It was Belgiums Disciplinary Council for Professional Football, which oversees domestic refereeing.
Mackem Attack
Central Defender
Suppose as a positive it doesn’t set a European wide precedent then at least
bernardbresslaw
Striker
I think that Coventry decision proves exactly what I said in my first post.
Vicham
Midfield
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
Winger
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
Striker
How did it work? He was offside by a toenail, how did they know the exact time it left the boot?
Redandwhitedust
Striker
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
Striker
It was offside.
bernardbresslaw
Striker
You don't understand how the technology works. You see a line drawn and you think that's always correct?
dangermows
Striker
Yes I do. It was clearly offside. You're wrong. No harm done. Night.
bernardbresslaw
Striker
I know you hate to be wrong, but you're wrong.
ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK
Winger
You must be logged on to see external links
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
Striker
That doesn't explain how they know when to draw the line. A tenth of a second earlier and he's onside.
MackneyHackem
Striker
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.
Should be a foot or a **** hair at least. Not a toenail.
That’s not a good argument at all Bernie mate.
bernardbresslaw
Striker
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
Striker
I don’t care about cricket or know anything about it.
