Video Assistant Referees (VAR)

[Raconteur]

It's really f***ing simple.

 

Currently, if a team is winning by a single goal, but looking likely to concede because the opposition are dominating ("It's only a matter of time, surely"), then feigning injury is a commonly applied tactic, with the intention of taking the sting out of the game.

 

But as I have said The FA/SkY would not entertain the idea of using anything to afford the top teams an advantage, so it doesn't matter.

 

This sort of change would need to be implemented at FIFA level.  I've been saying for years that the rules of the game need updating.  Almost every other team sport reviews it's rules to keep pace with tactical developments, so why not football?

 

If I were King FIFA, my new rules would include:

 

1) 30 mins per half with clock stopped every time play stops - would completely eliminate time wasting overnight.

2) Scrap offsides completely - goalhanging (the reason offsides were brought in) was an archaic issue and won't be an issue in the modern game due to the need for all players to be involved in all phases of the game.  Would also open up more space on the pitch and get rid of contentious offside decisions completely.

3) Get rid of the penalty box.  Take a free kick from the point of foul instead - currently a penalty kick is way too valuable and leads to players preferring to take a tumble rather than try and shoot.  Also means that defending as an art is dying.

4) Goal line tech in all professional games.

5) TV Officials in all televised games.  Rather than VAR, have an official to give advice on all requested decisions.

6) Red card for simulation.  Simulation includes exaggerating contact - would encourage players to play the game and combined with TV officials, should all but eliminate diving.

 

However, the game flat refuses to evolve, and the fact that goal line technology took an age to bring in and VAR is somehow being implemented badly gives me no hope of change.  As a result, games will be one long diving fest, with timewasting, simulation and dodgy penalties continuing to win the day.

 

 

Have you thought of a name for this new sport you've invented?

[AsprillasShinPad]

It's really f***ing simple.

 

Currently, if a team is winning by a single goal, but looking likely to concede because the opposition are dominating ("It's only a matter of time, surely"), then feigning injury is a commonly applied tactic, with the intention of taking the sting out of the game.

 

But as I have said The FA/SkY would not entertain the idea of using anything to afford the top teams an advantage, so it doesn't matter.

 

This sort of change would need to be implemented at FIFA level.  I've been saying for years that the rules of the game need updating.  Almost every other team sport reviews it's rules to keep pace with tactical developments, so why not football?

 

If I were King FIFA, my new rules would include:

 

1) 30 mins per half with clock stopped every time play stops - would completely eliminate time wasting overnight.

2) Scrap offsides completely - goalhanging (the reason offsides were brought in) was an archaic issue and won't be an issue in the modern game due to the need for all players to be involved in all phases of the game.  Would also open up more space on the pitch and get rid of contentious offside decisions completely.

3) Get rid of the penalty box.  Take a free kick from the point of foul instead - currently a penalty kick is way too valuable and leads to players preferring to take a tumble rather than try and shoot.  Also means that defending as an art is dying.

4) Goal line tech in all professional games.

5) TV Officials in all televised games.  Rather than VAR, have an official to give advice on all requested decisions.

6) Red card for simulation.  Simulation includes exaggerating contact - would encourage players to play the game and combined with TV officials, should all but eliminate diving.

 

However, the game flat refuses to evolve, and the fact that goal line technology took an age to bring in and VAR is somehow being implemented badly gives me no hope of change.  As a result, games will be one long diving fest, with timewasting, simulation and dodgy penalties continuing to win the day.

 

 

Have you thought of a name for this new sport you've invented?

 

Football?  Without offsides or pels it would still be football...

 

Maybe we should just carry on what we're doing for no other reason than because it's what we've always done?  Tactics have changed massively and there are some seriously cynical ways to exploit the rules.  Either football changes or it continues to be the pathetic shitfest it has become.

[Happinesstan]

Players can still feign injury even when VAR is introduced. They cannot however make VAR come into action.

 

Are you completely pig ignorant? I have already stated that I'm not talking about players abusing it.

[Kaizero]

Players can still feign injury even when VAR is introduced. They cannot however make VAR come into action.

 

Are you completely pig ignorant? I have already stated that I'm not talking about players abusing it.

 

The FA preferring the big clubs aren't news, but saying they actively make refs give them decisions is a bit of a conspiracy theory. Rather, it's the refs bending over to the pressure of standing up against the big clubs, if anything, to create the perceived big club reffing bias - it will be incredibly harder to do after VAR is implemented as VAR isn't as subjective.

[triggs]

It's really f***ing simple.

 

Currently, if a team is winning by a single goal, but looking likely to concede because the opposition are dominating ("It's only a matter of time, surely"), then feigning injury is a commonly applied tactic, with the intention of taking the sting out of the game.

 

But as I have said The FA/SkY would not entertain the idea of using anything to afford the top teams an advantage, so it doesn't matter.

 

This sort of change would need to be implemented at FIFA level.  I've been saying for years that the rules of the game need updating.  Almost every other team sport reviews it's rules to keep pace with tactical developments, so why not football?

 

If I were King FIFA, my new rules would include:

 

1) 30 mins per half with clock stopped every time play stops - would completely eliminate time wasting overnight.

2) Scrap offsides completely - goalhanging (the reason offsides were brought in) was an archaic issue and won't be an issue in the modern game due to the need for all players to be involved in all phases of the game.  Would also open up more space on the pitch and get rid of contentious offside decisions completely.

3) Get rid of the penalty box.  Take a free kick from the point of foul instead - currently a penalty kick is way too valuable and leads to players preferring to take a tumble rather than try and shoot.  Also means that defending as an art is dying.

4) Goal line tech in all professional games.

5) TV Officials in all televised games.  Rather than VAR, have an official to give advice on all requested decisions.

6) Red card for simulation.  Simulation includes exaggerating contact - would encourage players to play the game and combined with TV officials, should all but eliminate diving.

 

However, the game flat refuses to evolve, and the fact that goal line technology took an age to bring in and VAR is somehow being implemented badly gives me no hope of change.  As a result, games will be one long diving fest, with timewasting, simulation and dodgy penalties continuing to win the day.

 

 

Have you thought of a name for this new sport you've invented?

 

Football?  Without offsides or pels it would still be football...

 

Maybe we should just carry on what we're doing for no other reason than because it's what we've always done?  Tactics have changed massively and there are some seriously cynical ways to exploit the rules.  Either football changes or it continues to be the pathetic shitfest it has become.

No offside makes the game a completely different sport. Its a ludicrous suggestion

[Bimpy474]

I'm not sure that chuckle brother actually died.

[Kaizero]

It's really f***ing simple.

 

Currently, if a team is winning by a single goal, but looking likely to concede because the opposition are dominating ("It's only a matter of time, surely"), then feigning injury is a commonly applied tactic, with the intention of taking the sting out of the game.

 

But as I have said The FA/SkY would not entertain the idea of using anything to afford the top teams an advantage, so it doesn't matter.

 

This sort of change would need to be implemented at FIFA level.  I've been saying for years that the rules of the game need updating.  Almost every other team sport reviews it's rules to keep pace with tactical developments, so why not football?

 

If I were King FIFA, my new rules would include:

 

1) 30 mins per half with clock stopped every time play stops - would completely eliminate time wasting overnight.

2) Scrap offsides completely - goalhanging (the reason offsides were brought in) was an archaic issue and won't be an issue in the modern game due to the need for all players to be involved in all phases of the game.  Would also open up more space on the pitch and get rid of contentious offside decisions completely.

3) Get rid of the penalty box.  Take a free kick from the point of foul instead - currently a penalty kick is way too valuable and leads to players preferring to take a tumble rather than try and shoot.  Also means that defending as an art is dying.

4) Goal line tech in all professional games.

5) TV Officials in all televised games.  Rather than VAR, have an official to give advice on all requested decisions.

6) Red card for simulation.  Simulation includes exaggerating contact - would encourage players to play the game and combined with TV officials, should all but eliminate diving.

 

However, the game flat refuses to evolve, and the fact that goal line technology took an age to bring in and VAR is somehow being implemented badly gives me no hope of change.  As a result, games will be one long diving fest, with timewasting, simulation and dodgy penalties continuing to win the day.

 

 

Have you thought of a name for this new sport you've invented?

 

Football?  Without offsides or pels it would still be football...

 

Maybe we should just carry on what we're doing for no other reason than because it's what we've always done?  Tactics have changed massively and there are some seriously cynical ways to exploit the rules.  Either football changes or it continues to be the pathetic shitfest it has become.

No offside makes the game a completely different sport. Its a ludicrous suggestion

 

Not to mention it's been a rule since the inception of association football.

[AsprillasShinPad]

It's really f***ing simple.

 

Currently, if a team is winning by a single goal, but looking likely to concede because the opposition are dominating ("It's only a matter of time, surely"), then feigning injury is a commonly applied tactic, with the intention of taking the sting out of the game.

 

But as I have said The FA/SkY would not entertain the idea of using anything to afford the top teams an advantage, so it doesn't matter.

 

This sort of change would need to be implemented at FIFA level.  I've been saying for years that the rules of the game need updating.  Almost every other team sport reviews it's rules to keep pace with tactical developments, so why not football?

 

If I were King FIFA, my new rules would include:

 

1) 30 mins per half with clock stopped every time play stops - would completely eliminate time wasting overnight.

2) Scrap offsides completely - goalhanging (the reason offsides were brought in) was an archaic issue and won't be an issue in the modern game due to the need for all players to be involved in all phases of the game.  Would also open up more space on the pitch and get rid of contentious offside decisions completely.

3) Get rid of the penalty box.  Take a free kick from the point of foul instead - currently a penalty kick is way too valuable and leads to players preferring to take a tumble rather than try and shoot.  Also means that defending as an art is dying.

4) Goal line tech in all professional games.

5) TV Officials in all televised games.  Rather than VAR, have an official to give advice on all requested decisions.

6) Red card for simulation.  Simulation includes exaggerating contact - would encourage players to play the game and combined with TV officials, should all but eliminate diving.

 

However, the game flat refuses to evolve, and the fact that goal line technology took an age to bring in and VAR is somehow being implemented badly gives me no hope of change.  As a result, games will be one long diving fest, with timewasting, simulation and dodgy penalties continuing to win the day.

 

 

Have you thought of a name for this new sport you've invented?

 

Football?  Without offsides or pels it would still be football...

 

Maybe we should just carry on what we're doing for no other reason than because it's what we've always done?  Tactics have changed massively and there are some seriously cynical ways to exploit the rules.  Either football changes or it continues to be the pathetic shitfest it has become.

No offside makes the game a completely different sport. Its a ludicrous suggestion

 

Not to mention it's been a rule since the inception of association football.

 

Very wrong.  Not only was it non-existent in the early days of football, it's been amended several times including notably recently with the inactive player rule.

 

http://www.sidelinesoccer.com/history-of-the-offside-rule

[AsprillasShinPad]

It's really f***ing simple.

 

Currently, if a team is winning by a single goal, but looking likely to concede because the opposition are dominating ("It's only a matter of time, surely"), then feigning injury is a commonly applied tactic, with the intention of taking the sting out of the game.

 

But as I have said The FA/SkY would not entertain the idea of using anything to afford the top teams an advantage, so it doesn't matter.

 

This sort of change would need to be implemented at FIFA level.  I've been saying for years that the rules of the game need updating.  Almost every other team sport reviews it's rules to keep pace with tactical developments, so why not football?

 

If I were King FIFA, my new rules would include:

 

1) 30 mins per half with clock stopped every time play stops - would completely eliminate time wasting overnight.

2) Scrap offsides completely - goalhanging (the reason offsides were brought in) was an archaic issue and won't be an issue in the modern game due to the need for all players to be involved in all phases of the game.  Would also open up more space on the pitch and get rid of contentious offside decisions completely.

3) Get rid of the penalty box.  Take a free kick from the point of foul instead - currently a penalty kick is way too valuable and leads to players preferring to take a tumble rather than try and shoot.  Also means that defending as an art is dying.

4) Goal line tech in all professional games.

5) TV Officials in all televised games.  Rather than VAR, have an official to give advice on all requested decisions.

6) Red card for simulation.  Simulation includes exaggerating contact - would encourage players to play the game and combined with TV officials, should all but eliminate diving.

 

However, the game flat refuses to evolve, and the fact that goal line technology took an age to bring in and VAR is somehow being implemented badly gives me no hope of change.  As a result, games will be one long diving fest, with timewasting, simulation and dodgy penalties continuing to win the day.

 

 

Have you thought of a name for this new sport you've invented?

 

Football?  Without offsides or pels it would still be football...

 

Maybe we should just carry on what we're doing for no other reason than because it's what we've always done?  Tactics have changed massively and there are some seriously cynical ways to exploit the rules.  Either football changes or it continues to be the pathetic shitfest it has become.

No offside makes the game a completely different sport. Its a ludicrous suggestion

 

No.  Changing one rule out of dozens doesn't make it a completely different sport.  This reminds me of that Peep Show scene where Callie asks what you would do if you had a chocolate bar that was half chocolate and half actual shit. Answer - snap of the shit half.  Why keep doing something bad?

[triggs]

It's really f***ing simple.

 

Currently, if a team is winning by a single goal, but looking likely to concede because the opposition are dominating ("It's only a matter of time, surely"), then feigning injury is a commonly applied tactic, with the intention of taking the sting out of the game.

 

But as I have said The FA/SkY would not entertain the idea of using anything to afford the top teams an advantage, so it doesn't matter.

 

This sort of change would need to be implemented at FIFA level.  I've been saying for years that the rules of the game need updating.  Almost every other team sport reviews it's rules to keep pace with tactical developments, so why not football?

 

If I were King FIFA, my new rules would include:

 

1) 30 mins per half with clock stopped every time play stops - would completely eliminate time wasting overnight.

2) Scrap offsides completely - goalhanging (the reason offsides were brought in) was an archaic issue and won't be an issue in the modern game due to the need for all players to be involved in all phases of the game.  Would also open up more space on the pitch and get rid of contentious offside decisions completely.

3) Get rid of the penalty box.  Take a free kick from the point of foul instead - currently a penalty kick is way too valuable and leads to players preferring to take a tumble rather than try and shoot.  Also means that defending as an art is dying.

4) Goal line tech in all professional games.

5) TV Officials in all televised games.  Rather than VAR, have an official to give advice on all requested decisions.

6) Red card for simulation.  Simulation includes exaggerating contact - would encourage players to play the game and combined with TV officials, should all but eliminate diving.

 

However, the game flat refuses to evolve, and the fact that goal line technology took an age to bring in and VAR is somehow being implemented badly gives me no hope of change.  As a result, games will be one long diving fest, with timewasting, simulation and dodgy penalties continuing to win the day.

 

 

Have you thought of a name for this new sport you've invented?

 

Football?  Without offsides or pels it would still be football...

 

Maybe we should just carry on what we're doing for no other reason than because it's what we've always done?  Tactics have changed massively and there are some seriously cynical ways to exploit the rules.  Either football changes or it continues to be the pathetic shitfest it has become.

No offside makes the game a completely different sport. Its a ludicrous suggestion

 

No.  Changing one rule out of dozens doesn't make it a completely different sport.  This reminds me of that Peep Show scene where Callie asks what you would do if you had a chocolate bar that was half chocolate and half actual s***. Answer - snap of the s*** half.  Why keep doing something bad?

Its not bad. Football would be completely unrecognisable without offside

[AsprillasShinPad]

It's really f***ing simple.

 

Currently, if a team is winning by a single goal, but looking likely to concede because the opposition are dominating ("It's only a matter of time, surely"), then feigning injury is a commonly applied tactic, with the intention of taking the sting out of the game.

 

But as I have said The FA/SkY would not entertain the idea of using anything to afford the top teams an advantage, so it doesn't matter.

 

This sort of change would need to be implemented at FIFA level.  I've been saying for years that the rules of the game need updating.  Almost every other team sport reviews it's rules to keep pace with tactical developments, so why not football?

 

If I were King FIFA, my new rules would include:

 

1) 30 mins per half with clock stopped every time play stops - would completely eliminate time wasting overnight.

2) Scrap offsides completely - goalhanging (the reason offsides were brought in) was an archaic issue and won't be an issue in the modern game due to the need for all players to be involved in all phases of the game.  Would also open up more space on the pitch and get rid of contentious offside decisions completely.

3) Get rid of the penalty box.  Take a free kick from the point of foul instead - currently a penalty kick is way too valuable and leads to players preferring to take a tumble rather than try and shoot.  Also means that defending as an art is dying.

4) Goal line tech in all professional games.

5) TV Officials in all televised games.  Rather than VAR, have an official to give advice on all requested decisions.

6) Red card for simulation.  Simulation includes exaggerating contact - would encourage players to play the game and combined with TV officials, should all but eliminate diving.

 

However, the game flat refuses to evolve, and the fact that goal line technology took an age to bring in and VAR is somehow being implemented badly gives me no hope of change.  As a result, games will be one long diving fest, with timewasting, simulation and dodgy penalties continuing to win the day.

 

 

Have you thought of a name for this new sport you've invented?

 

Football?  Without offsides or pels it would still be football...

 

Maybe we should just carry on what we're doing for no other reason than because it's what we've always done?  Tactics have changed massively and there are some seriously cynical ways to exploit the rules.  Either football changes or it continues to be the pathetic shitfest it has become.

No offside makes the game a completely different sport. Its a ludicrous suggestion

 

No.  Changing one rule out of dozens doesn't make it a completely different sport.  This reminds me of that Peep Show scene where Callie asks what you would do if you had a chocolate bar that was half chocolate and half actual s***. Answer - snap of the s*** half.  Why keep doing something bad?

Its not bad. Football would be completely unrecognisable without offside

 

I'm pretty sure if there was a game going without the offside rule, you'd be able to tell it was football.

[Fugazi]

Getting rid off offsides

[morpeth mag]

My rule change proposal:

 

Game (clock) isn't stopped for subs. All managed by 4th official.

Sub comes on when player leaves the pitch as at present but game is running as this happens as in various other sports.

[Happinesstan]

Players can still feign injury even when VAR is introduced. They cannot however make VAR come into action.

 

Are you completely pig ignorant? I have already stated that I'm not talking about players abusing it.

 

The FA preferring the big clubs aren't news, but saying they actively make refs give them decisions is a bit of a conspiracy theory. Rather, it's the refs bending over to the pressure of standing up against the big clubs, if anything, to create the perceived big club reffing bias - it will be incredibly harder to do after VAR is implemented as VAR isn't as subjective.

 

Again with the fantasist accusations. Where have I claimed that referees are doing anything at the behest of the FA?

 

 

[Kaizero]

It's really f***ing simple.

 

Currently, if a team is winning by a single goal, but looking likely to concede because the opposition are dominating ("It's only a matter of time, surely"), then feigning injury is a commonly applied tactic, with the intention of taking the sting out of the game.

 

But as I have said The FA/SkY would not entertain the idea of using anything to afford the top teams an advantage, so it doesn't matter.

 

This sort of change would need to be implemented at FIFA level.  I've been saying for years that the rules of the game need updating.  Almost every other team sport reviews it's rules to keep pace with tactical developments, so why not football?

 

If I were King FIFA, my new rules would include:

 

1) 30 mins per half with clock stopped every time play stops - would completely eliminate time wasting overnight.

2) Scrap offsides completely - goalhanging (the reason offsides were brought in) was an archaic issue and won't be an issue in the modern game due to the need for all players to be involved in all phases of the game.  Would also open up more space on the pitch and get rid of contentious offside decisions completely.

3) Get rid of the penalty box.  Take a free kick from the point of foul instead - currently a penalty kick is way too valuable and leads to players preferring to take a tumble rather than try and shoot.  Also means that defending as an art is dying.

4) Goal line tech in all professional games.

5) TV Officials in all televised games.  Rather than VAR, have an official to give advice on all requested decisions.

6) Red card for simulation.  Simulation includes exaggerating contact - would encourage players to play the game and combined with TV officials, should all but eliminate diving.

 

However, the game flat refuses to evolve, and the fact that goal line technology took an age to bring in and VAR is somehow being implemented badly gives me no hope of change.  As a result, games will be one long diving fest, with timewasting, simulation and dodgy penalties continuing to win the day.

 

 

Have you thought of a name for this new sport you've invented?

 

Football?  Without offsides or pels it would still be football...

 

Maybe we should just carry on what we're doing for no other reason than because it's what we've always done?  Tactics have changed massively and there are some seriously cynical ways to exploit the rules.  Either football changes or it continues to be the pathetic shitfest it has become.

No offside makes the game a completely different sport. Its a ludicrous suggestion

 

Not to mention it's been a rule since the inception of association football.

 

Very wrong.  Not only was it non-existent in the early days of football, it's been amended several times including notably recently with the inactive player rule.

 

http://www.sidelinesoccer.com/history-of-the-offside-rule

 

The link you used literally says it's been implemented since the esrly days of association football (1863) ffs Minor adjustments to a rule is not the same as removing the rule entirely. Before the FA made the "actual" rules of football, schools had their own version of the offside rule - bit they still had the offside rule.

[Kaizero]

Players can still feign injury even when VAR is introduced. They cannot however make VAR come into action.

 

Are you completely pig ignorant? I have already stated that I'm not talking about players abusing it.

 

The FA preferring the big clubs aren't news, but saying they actively make refs give them decisions is a bit of a conspiracy theory. Rather, it's the refs bending over to the pressure of standing up against the big clubs, if anything, to create the perceived big club reffing bias - it will be incredibly harder to do after VAR is implemented as VAR isn't as subjective.

 

Again with the fantasist accusations. Where have I claimed that referees are doing anything at the behest of the FA?

 

Great way to disrupt the game if somebody is getting close to an equaliser against one of the big clubs.

 

Favoring big clubs.

 

As for who can abuse it, I'm pretty sure those paying for the service will be able to do whatever they like.

 

The FA pays for the service, going by the above point, the FA favours big clubs and could, according to you, abise VAR to favour the big clubs.

 

Every post since then has been following up on these two standpoints, giving arguments why they cannot abuse VAR this way. Nobody's saying you've said anything other than what you've said, but the argument has moved forward to use examples of why the things you have said are dumb.

[xLiaaamx]

I wouldn't be getting rid of pens or offsides, but in the last couple years I've certainly started to agree with stopping the clock when the ball's out of play rather than using stoppage time.

[Happinesstan]

Players can still feign injury even when VAR is introduced. They cannot however make VAR come into action.

 

Are you completely pig ignorant? I have already stated that I'm not talking about players abusing it.

 

The FA preferring the big clubs aren't news, but saying they actively make refs give them decisions is a bit of a conspiracy theory. Rather, it's the refs bending over to the pressure of standing up against the big clubs, if anything, to create the perceived big club reffing bias - it will be incredibly harder to do after VAR is implemented as VAR isn't as subjective.

 

Again with the fantasist accusations. Where have I claimed that referees are doing anything at the behest of the FA?

 

Great way to disrupt the game if somebody is getting close to an equaliser against one of the big clubs.

 

Favoring big clubs.

 

As for who can abuse it, I'm pretty sure those paying for the service will be able to do whatever they like.

 

The FA pays for the service, going by the above point, the FA favours big clubs and could, according to you, abise VAR to favour the big clubs.

 

Every post since then has been following up on these two standpoints, giving arguments why they cannot abuse VAR this way. Nobody's saying you've said anything other than what you've said, but the argument has moved forward to use examples of why the things you have said are dumb.

 

 

You've just taken two comments and made an assumption. And a wrong assumption at that. My whole point is based around the fact that VAR gives them this opportunity.

 

[Kaizero]

Players can still feign injury even when VAR is introduced. They cannot however make VAR come into action.

 

Are you completely pig ignorant? I have already stated that I'm not talking about players abusing it.

 

The FA preferring the big clubs aren't news, but saying they actively make refs give them decisions is a bit of a conspiracy theory. Rather, it's the refs bending over to the pressure of standing up against the big clubs, if anything, to create the perceived big club reffing bias - it will be incredibly harder to do after VAR is implemented as VAR isn't as subjective.

 

Again with the fantasist accusations. Where have I claimed that referees are doing anything at the behest of the FA?

 

Great way to disrupt the game if somebody is getting close to an equaliser against one of the big clubs.

 

Favoring big clubs.

 

As for who can abuse it, I'm pretty sure those paying for the service will be able to do whatever they like.

 

The FA pays for the service, going by the above point, the FA favours big clubs and could, according to you, abise VAR to favour the big clubs.

 

Every post since then has been following up on these two standpoints, giving arguments why they cannot abuse VAR this way. Nobody's saying you've said anything other than what you've said, but the argument has moved forward to use examples of why the things you have said are dumb.

 

 

You've just taken two comments and made an assumption. And a wrong assumption at that. My whole point is based around the fact that VAR gives them this opportunity.

 

 

And we're arguing why that's not an opportunity that's realistic, or would be utilized by anyone even if it was. Whereas instead of engaging in the discussion you just keep saying you've not said the stuff that's led to the discussion, when you have. It's pointless.

[Happinesstan]

Players can still feign injury even when VAR is introduced. They cannot however make VAR come into action.

 

Are you completely pig ignorant? I have already stated that I'm not talking about players abusing it.

 

The FA preferring the big clubs aren't news, but saying they actively make refs give them decisions is a bit of a conspiracy theory. Rather, it's the refs bending over to the pressure of standing up against the big clubs, if anything, to create the perceived big club reffing bias - it will be incredibly harder to do after VAR is implemented as VAR isn't as subjective.

 

Again with the fantasist accusations. Where have I claimed that referees are doing anything at the behest of the FA?

 

Great way to disrupt the game if somebody is getting close to an equaliser against one of the big clubs.

 

Favoring big clubs.

 

As for who can abuse it, I'm pretty sure those paying for the service will be able to do whatever they like.

 

The FA pays for the service, going by the above point, the FA favours big clubs and could, according to you, abise VAR to favour the big clubs.

 

Every post since then has been following up on these two standpoints, giving arguments why they cannot abuse VAR this way. Nobody's saying you've said anything other than what you've said, but the argument has moved forward to use examples of why the things you have said are dumb.

 

 

You've just taken two comments and made an assumption. And a wrong assumption at that. My whole point is based around the fact that VAR gives them this opportunity.

 

 

And we're arguing why that's not an opportunity that's neither realitsic or would be utilized by anyone.

 

Double negative says you agree.

[Happinesstan]

Players can still feign injury even when VAR is introduced. They cannot however make VAR come into action.

 

Are you completely pig ignorant? I have already stated that I'm not talking about players abusing it.

 

The FA preferring the big clubs aren't news, but saying they actively make refs give them decisions is a bit of a conspiracy theory. Rather, it's the refs bending over to the pressure of standing up against the big clubs, if anything, to create the perceived big club reffing bias - it will be incredibly harder to do after VAR is implemented as VAR isn't as subjective.

 

Again with the fantasist accusations. Where have I claimed that referees are doing anything at the behest of the FA?

 

Great way to disrupt the game if somebody is getting close to an equaliser against one of the big clubs.

 

Favoring big clubs.

 

As for who can abuse it, I'm pretty sure those paying for the service will be able to do whatever they like.

 

The FA pays for the service, going by the above point, the FA favours big clubs and could, according to you, abise VAR to favour the big clubs.

 

Every post since then has been following up on these two standpoints, giving arguments why they cannot abuse VAR this way. Nobody's saying you've said anything other than what you've said, but the argument has moved forward to use examples of why the things you have said are dumb.

 

 

You've just taken two comments and made an assumption. And a wrong assumption at that. My whole point is based around the fact that VAR gives them this opportunity.

 

 

And we're arguing why that's not an opportunity that's neither realitsic or would be utilized by anyone. Whereas instead of engaging in the discussion you just keep saying you've not said the stuff that's led to the discussion, when you have. It's pointless.

 

What is pointless is you making claims about what I've said, when even your own evidence demonstrates  you're full of shit.

[Kaizero]

Players can still feign injury even when VAR is introduced. They cannot however make VAR come into action.

 

Are you completely pig ignorant? I have already stated that I'm not talking about players abusing it.

 

The FA preferring the big clubs aren't news, but saying they actively make refs give them decisions is a bit of a conspiracy theory. Rather, it's the refs bending over to the pressure of standing up against the big clubs, if anything, to create the perceived big club reffing bias - it will be incredibly harder to do after VAR is implemented as VAR isn't as subjective.

 

Again with the fantasist accusations. Where have I claimed that referees are doing anything at the behest of the FA?

 

Great way to disrupt the game if somebody is getting close to an equaliser against one of the big clubs.

 

Favoring big clubs.

 

As for who can abuse it, I'm pretty sure those paying for the service will be able to do whatever they like.

 

The FA pays for the service, going by the above point, the FA favours big clubs and could, according to you, abise VAR to favour the big clubs.

 

Every post since then has been following up on these two standpoints, giving arguments why they cannot abuse VAR this way. Nobody's saying you've said anything other than what you've said, but the argument has moved forward to use examples of why the things you have said are dumb.

 

 

You've just taken two comments and made an assumption. And a wrong assumption at that. My whole point is based around the fact that VAR gives them this opportunity.

 

 

And we're arguing why that's not an opportunity that's neither realitsic or would be utilized by anyone. Whereas instead of engaging in the discussion you just keep saying you've not said the stuff that's led to the discussion, when you have. It's pointless.

 

What is pointless is you making claims about what I've said, when even your own evidence demonstrates  you're full of shit.

 

The main issue here is that instead of specifying what you meant when faced with apparent misunderstanding, you just keep re-iterating you didn't mean what - everyone - assumes you meant. It's extremely non-contributive, not to mention disruptive for actual discussion in this thread.

[Happinesstan]

Players can still feign injury even when VAR is introduced. They cannot however make VAR come into action.

 

Are you completely pig ignorant? I have already stated that I'm not talking about players abusing it.

 

The FA preferring the big clubs aren't news, but saying they actively make refs give them decisions is a bit of a conspiracy theory. Rather, it's the refs bending over to the pressure of standing up against the big clubs, if anything, to create the perceived big club reffing bias - it will be incredibly harder to do after VAR is implemented as VAR isn't as subjective.

 

Again with the fantasist accusations. Where have I claimed that referees are doing anything at the behest of the FA?

 

Great way to disrupt the game if somebody is getting close to an equaliser against one of the big clubs.

 

Favoring big clubs.

 

As for who can abuse it, I'm pretty sure those paying for the service will be able to do whatever they like.

 

The FA pays for the service, going by the above point, the FA favours big clubs and could, according to you, abise VAR to favour the big clubs.

 

Every post since then has been following up on these two standpoints, giving arguments why they cannot abuse VAR this way. Nobody's saying you've said anything other than what you've said, but the argument has moved forward to use examples of why the things you have said are dumb.

 

 

You've just taken two comments and made an assumption. And a wrong assumption at that. My whole point is based around the fact that VAR gives them this opportunity.

 

 

And we're arguing why that's not an opportunity that's neither realitsic or would be utilized by anyone. Whereas instead of engaging in the discussion you just keep saying you've not said the stuff that's led to the discussion, when you have. It's pointless.

 

What is pointless is you making claims about what I've said, when even your own evidence demonstrates  you're full of shit.

 

The main issue here is that instead of specifying what you meant when faced with apparent misunderstanding, you just keep re-iterating you didn't mean what - everyone - assumes you meant. It's extremely non-contributive, not to mention disruptive for actual discussion in this thread.

 

 

Well if people's assumptions are wrong then I'm going to correct them. If they continue to persst with those assumptions that is on them.

 

[Kaizero]

Players can still feign injury even when VAR is introduced. They cannot however make VAR come into action.

 

Are you completely pig ignorant? I have already stated that I'm not talking about players abusing it.

 

The FA preferring the big clubs aren't news, but saying they actively make refs give them decisions is a bit of a conspiracy theory. Rather, it's the refs bending over to the pressure of standing up against the big clubs, if anything, to create the perceived big club reffing bias - it will be incredibly harder to do after VAR is implemented as VAR isn't as subjective.

 

Again with the fantasist accusations. Where have I claimed that referees are doing anything at the behest of the FA?

 

Great way to disrupt the game if somebody is getting close to an equaliser against one of the big clubs.

 

Favoring big clubs.

 

As for who can abuse it, I'm pretty sure those paying for the service will be able to do whatever they like.

 

The FA pays for the service, going by the above point, the FA favours big clubs and could, according to you, abise VAR to favour the big clubs.

 

Every post since then has been following up on these two standpoints, giving arguments why they cannot abuse VAR this way. Nobody's saying you've said anything other than what you've said, but the argument has moved forward to use examples of why the things you have said are dumb.

 

 

You've just taken two comments and made an assumption. And a wrong assumption at that. My whole point is based around the fact that VAR gives them this opportunity.

 

 

And we're arguing why that's not an opportunity that's neither realitsic or would be utilized by anyone. Whereas instead of engaging in the discussion you just keep saying you've not said the stuff that's led to the discussion, when you have. It's pointless.

 

What is pointless is you making claims about what I've said, when even your own evidence demonstrates  you're full of shit.

 

The main issue here is that instead of specifying what you meant when faced with apparent misunderstanding, you just keep re-iterating you didn't mean what - everyone - assumes you meant. It's extremely non-contributive, not to mention disruptive for actual discussion in this thread.

 

 

Well if people's assumptions are wrong then I'm going to correct them. If they continue to persst with those assumptions that is on them.

 

 

You haven't corrected them. You've just said they're wrong without giving any reason as to why, which makes it easy to assume you're more interested in being flippant rather than actually wanting to participate in discussing the subject at hand.

[Happinesstan]

And the reason I am forced to repeat those two standpoints, is precisely because they are the only two standpoints I have made.

 

1. That an advantage can be gained as a result of the game being interrupted in the dying minutes.

 

2. That VAR has the capability of stopping the game in the dying minutes.

 

1+2=3. Var presents an opportunity to afford an advantage to a team who is hanging on for a win. I know I said the big clubs, but it's not restricted to them. It could easily be used in a relegation battle. Just to keep things exciting for the final weekend of televisual spectacular.