Jump to content

The other games today 2018/19


Recommended Posts

Guest firetotheworks

Fuck VAR in this format, like. Craig Pawson needn't have existed in that match. Either have a one way system from panel to ref, or fuck it off altogether with these shitcunt refs checking VAR for the weather.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It took 3 weeks KI, for VAR to be used for exactly what you assured me it wouldn’t :lol:

 

Not a pop at you btw, you’re clear how it should be used (which isn’t this), but it was always going to be wrongly utilised.

 

That's based on something that they THINK will happen with VAR, not what is actually in place for VAR. You hear it time and time again about these situations, but it's canny clear like. If there's any contentious grey area whatsoever, then VAR isn't used. It has to be absolutely clear cut that an error has been made.

 

In practice that's absolutely fine, but I don't think it'll work because they won't use it properly and people will continue to not understand its use.

 

But VAR will be used where there is doubt with a penalty. How many people disagreed over the penalty that Chelsea got at Arsenal? Quite a few did on here.

 

So that decision would have been reviewed by VAR and it would still be a contentious decision.

 

The referee wont say ‘sorry lads, I cant review that one cos it looks a bit dodgy’.

 

No it won't. Or it shouldn't anyway.

 

Why wouldn’t it? The referee would definitely review it as the Arsenal players would claim a dive and the Chelsea players would be totally the opposite.

 

The referee would go into it looking for issues around whether or not there was contact, when he’d then get sucked into whether or not the contact was sufficient for the player to go down - which is perception rather than clear cut.

 

Why wouldn’t the referee review it? Who or what would stop them?

 

For exactly the reason that I mentioned in the previous post - If there's any contentious grey area whatsoever, then VAR isn't used. It has to be absolutely clear cut that an error has been made. If the referee checks then it should be that they have serious doubts, or it should be because the VAR panel know that an obviously erroneous decision has been made. VAR isn't there for the reasons that you've mentioned, but it seems to be a misconception that everyone including pundits seems to have.

Link to post
Share on other sites

More VAR bashing...

 

Said it before, but is it not intrinsically unfair to have what's essentially one set of rules for some teams, and another for other teams? It's literally the same round of the same competition

 

Notts County scored a goal today which would have been disallowed by VAR but wasn’t because VAR wasn’t available so now Swansea have a replay to play. How is it fair? :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

More VAR bashing...

 

Said it before, but is it not intrinsically unfair to have what's essentially one set of rules for some teams, and another for other teams? It's literally the same round of the same competition

 

Notts County scored a goal today which would have been disallowed by VAR but wasn’t because VAR wasn’t available so now Swansea have a replay to play. How is it fair? :lol:

 

Not necessarily. The evidence is clearly inconclusive. Whole of the ball has to be over the line, it's not clear that's the case due to the camera angles.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest firetotheworks

It took 3 weeks KI, for VAR to be used for exactly what you assured me it wouldn’t [emoji38]

 

Not a pop at you btw, you’re clear how it should be used (which isn’t this), but it was always going to be wrongly utilised.

 

That's based on something that they THINK will happen with VAR, not what is actually in place for VAR. You hear it time and time again about these situations, but it's canny clear like. If there's any contentious grey area whatsoever, then VAR isn't used. It has to be absolutely clear cut that an error has been made.

 

In practice that's absolutely fine, but I don't think it'll work because they won't use it properly and people will continue to not understand its use.

 

But VAR will be used where there is doubt with a penalty. How many people disagreed over the penalty that Chelsea got at Arsenal? Quite a few did on here.

 

So that decision would have been reviewed by VAR and it would still be a contentious decision.

 

The referee wont say ‘sorry lads, I cant review that one cos it looks a bit dodgy’.

 

No it won't. Or it shouldn't anyway.

 

Why wouldn’t it? The referee would definitely review it as the Arsenal players would claim a dive and the Chelsea players would be totally the opposite.

 

The referee would go into it looking for issues around whether or not there was contact, when he’d then get sucked into whether or not the contact was sufficient for the player to go down - which is perception rather than clear cut.

 

Why wouldn’t the referee review it? Who or what would stop them?

 

For exactly the reason that I mentioned in the previous post - If there's any contentious grey area whatsoever, then VAR isn't used. It has to be absolutely clear cut that an error has been made. If the referee checks then it should be that they have serious doubts, or it should be because the VAR panel know that an obviously erroneous decision has been made. VAR isn't there for the reasons that you've mentioned, but it seems to be a misconception that everyone including pundits seems to have.

No one's got a clue, man. [emoji38] I watched two long interviews with Mike Riley and then Graeme Poll, who both described it at length as being exactly as in my post. Later Greg assured me that the ref couldn't check the monitor as well, despite having just watched a ref do it. [emoji38] I'd be all over it if it was how they described it, but it's not, so they either need to change it  or get rid of it. I'm already seething whenever I see that poncy VAR hand gesture.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It took 3 weeks KI, for VAR to be used for exactly what you assured me it wouldn’t [emoji38]

 

Not a pop at you btw, you’re clear how it should be used (which isn’t this), but it was always going to be wrongly utilised.

 

That's based on something that they THINK will happen with VAR, not what is actually in place for VAR. You hear it time and time again about these situations, but it's canny clear like. If there's any contentious grey area whatsoever, then VAR isn't used. It has to be absolutely clear cut that an error has been made.

 

In practice that's absolutely fine, but I don't think it'll work because they won't use it properly and people will continue to not understand its use.

 

But VAR will be used where there is doubt with a penalty. How many people disagreed over the penalty that Chelsea got at Arsenal? Quite a few did on here.

 

So that decision would have been reviewed by VAR and it would still be a contentious decision.

 

The referee wont say ‘sorry lads, I cant review that one cos it looks a bit dodgy’.

 

No it won't. Or it shouldn't anyway.

 

Why wouldn’t it? The referee would definitely review it as the Arsenal players would claim a dive and the Chelsea players would be totally the opposite.

 

The referee would go into it looking for issues around whether or not there was contact, when he’d then get sucked into whether or not the contact was sufficient for the player to go down - which is perception rather than clear cut.

 

Why wouldn’t the referee review it? Who or what would stop them?

 

For exactly the reason that I mentioned in the previous post - If there's any contentious grey area whatsoever, then VAR isn't used. It has to be absolutely clear cut that an error has been made. If the referee checks then it should be that they have serious doubts, or it should be because the VAR panel know that an obviously erroneous decision has been made. VAR isn't there for the reasons that you've mentioned, but it seems to be a misconception that everyone including pundits seems to have.

No one's got a clue, man. [emoji38] I watched two long interviews with Mike Riley and then Graeme Poll, who both described it at length as being exactly as in my post. Later Greg assured me that the ref couldn't check the monitor as well, despite having just watched a ref do it. [emoji38] I'd be all over it if it was how they described it, but it's not, so they either need to change it  or get rid of it. I'm already seething whenever I see that poncy VAR hand gesture.

 

 

Revisionist nonsense.  I assured you the referee cannot instigate the checking of something. He can't. The VAR does that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest firetotheworks

 

 

It took 3 weeks KI, for VAR to be used for exactly what you assured me it wouldn’t [emoji38]

 

Not a pop at you btw, you’re clear how it should be used (which isn’t this), but it was always going to be wrongly utilised.

 

That's based on something that they THINK will happen with VAR, not what is actually in place for VAR. You hear it time and time again about these situations, but it's canny clear like. If there's any contentious grey area whatsoever, then VAR isn't used. It has to be absolutely clear cut that an error has been made.

 

In practice that's absolutely fine, but I don't think it'll work because they won't use it properly and people will continue to not understand its use.

 

But VAR will be used where there is doubt with a penalty. How many people disagreed over the penalty that Chelsea got at Arsenal? Quite a few did on here.

 

So that decision would have been reviewed by VAR and it would still be a contentious decision.

 

The referee wont say ‘sorry lads, I cant review that one cos it looks a bit dodgy’.

 

No it won't. Or it shouldn't anyway.

 

Why wouldn’t it? The referee would definitely review it as the Arsenal players would claim a dive and the Chelsea players would be totally the opposite.

 

The referee would go into it looking for issues around whether or not there was contact, when he’d then get sucked into whether or not the contact was sufficient for the player to go down - which is perception rather than clear cut.

 

Why wouldn’t the referee review it? Who or what would stop them?

 

For exactly the reason that I mentioned in the previous post - If there's any contentious grey area whatsoever, then VAR isn't used. It has to be absolutely clear cut that an error has been made. If the referee checks then it should be that they have serious doubts, or it should be because the VAR panel know that an obviously erroneous decision has been made. VAR isn't there for the reasons that you've mentioned, but it seems to be a misconception that everyone including pundits seems to have.

No one's got a clue, man. [emoji38] I watched two long interviews with Mike Riley and then Graeme Poll, who both described it at length as being exactly as in my post. Later Greg assured me that the ref couldn't check the monitor as well, despite having just watched a ref do it. [emoji38] I'd be all over it if it was how they described it, but it's not, so they either need to change it  or get rid of it. I'm already seething whenever I see that poncy VAR hand gesture.

 

 

Revisionist nonsense.  I assured you the referee cannot instigate the checking of something. He can't. The VAR does that.

 

No need for that like Greg. Misunderstandings exist, daft shite.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...