How good though was the reaction by Vidal thoughQuote:
Originally Posted by Jetmaster
Bloke has Mongrel
I actually hope we get a few more of these glaring **** ups with it
It be the best course of events to actually kill the ****er for good
Printable View
How good though was the reaction by Vidal thoughQuote:
Originally Posted by Jetmaster
Bloke has Mongrel
I actually hope we get a few more of these glaring **** ups with it
It be the best course of events to actually kill the ****er for good
This is an absolute debacle of a product.
Should be dead and buried after the tournament.
Needs to be permanent, knts going spare, rofl
Alot of bad media over here about it. Most commentary is against it in the current format.Quote:
Originally Posted by parksey
Not shutting the door, but it needs to be drastically improved if it would prove viable.
Infantino says it's the future of football http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/40335718Quote:
Originally Posted by goaliepersempre
I can see a lot more offsides being let go. With the idea that if you pull it up, that's it, play over, if you are wrong, you cost a team a goal. If it's close, and you let it go, they either score and it'll get reviewed or they don't score.
How many pens are gonna be given for holding in the penalty area at corner kicks?
I think the outcome is good. You're gonna get correct decisions more often. We have eliminated goal/no goal decisions with goal line technology. That's been reasonably flawless right? (Haven't heard of any blunders anyway). Though this technology only relates to objective data, did the whole ball cross the line wholly? Yes or no.
VAR offsides will be ok to get an answer imo. But I'm not sure the rest will work. Can't wait to see a penalty overturned or given after a review. You're branching into reviewing subjective decisions. The sports Video technology works well in with minimal uproar relates to objective data. Tennis and Cricket use the technology well and can confirm or alter decisions.
I'm not sure there's many sports that use Video Technology to assess subjective decisions, is it a foul, is it not, the rules and open to interpretation and that's somewhat the beauty of the game. Some referees will let play flow, some
Will call up everything. One referees opinion of holding may be different to another.
I guess as a whole we want Minimal impact on the game, quick decisions and we want game consistent decisions.
In my opinion, offsides leading directly to a goal should be able to be overturned (though will we see the attacking team be given more of an advantage by Assistant Referees).
I guess we want the game to continue. Keep playing.
Review goals after they are scored and waiting to kick off. There's a 30 second window. If play continues but a goal should be scored or there's a penalty or something, play on until the decision is made.
The future of football is money - end of. Alot of this rubbish going on is to get another US World Cup payday.
For 1994 they pushed for the personalised shirts. No real reason for it - at the ground you are usually too far away to see the names and on TV you get commentary. Along with stupid squad numbers it has contributed to increased sales in kit though by the millions.
The problems with VAR are yet to blow out - without VAR Chile's goal would have been given and there would have been minimal argument as the offside rule is meant to favour the attacking side if there is doubt. It was a goal, end of. The whole thing wasted time, sucked the life out of the players celebrations which looked silly when they decided to do it again and was totally confusing.
I am so waiting for the time in a big game when a penalty is not given and the defending team goes up the other end and scores before the review can be done.
As The Goodies predicted in one of their episodes by the 21st century (2001 and a bit) there will only be Rollerball left.
the last time y'all let everyone involved in a subjective decision making you ended up with President Trump.
Be careful what you wish for.
Video ref OUT.
Simple fact is.
VAR doesn't get rid of the controversy surrounding dubious decision, it simply shifts it. It's what I've been saying to my mate all along. You only have to look at every other sport that has anything similar, the controversy is just shifted.
Let's just accepted that Referees make mistakes, sometimes it cost teams games. Players and Referees make mistakes every day, if any of these mistakes look like match fixing then launch an investigation into the incident.
Put VAR in the bin and lets move on, Goal line technology can stay.
Guardian Football Weekly podcast talks about VAR for the first 10 minutes or so. Not really in favour of it.
This is 100% correct and right and it's what I would write except the bit about telling my mate because I have no friends.Quote:
Originally Posted by Premy
I'm all for goal line technology but this VAR really gets to me. Yes a fractionally offside call might be picked up and a goal dissallowed, but is it worth the extra 20 minutes we just spent sitting twiddling our thumbs as players and spectators as reviews are made throughout the game? I'd rather cop the goal and get stuck in trying to equalise. Shit ref calls is all part of the passion and fun of football.
Should send you to tell that to Mark Bosnich and David Gallop!Quote:
Originally Posted by Premy
The thing has only been around a few months and there is turmoil already. How many times do we hear commentators disagreeing on what they see on the video replay (Cockerill/Harper Johnny K handball is a good example). You will never get it right. Sport is based on the good profiting on the mistakes of the not so good. Let it be.
Although there's controversy, is anybody complaining that correct calls are being made?
If it's the difference between losing a World Cup Final to an offside goal in the 90th minute, and having that goal overturned and on to extra time, would it be okay then?
The problem people have is the time it takes to get the decisions out and the stoppage to the game.
This is really the first competition worldwide that has had the technology being used, there's going to be teething issues but if we can find a way to improve it, without detracting from the game itself, then I don't think people would be opposed to it.
They said that there would be teething issues in every other sport that has anything similar when it's first introduced.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bremsstrahlung
Guess what... They still have issues.
You want to know why? Because a human is still making the decision and that means there is always a chance of human error.
OMG, I know right shock horror, humans make errors.
Edit:
I don't know why they are per$i$ting with thi$ when we have $o many example$ in other $port$ of it not working.
Wait... Of cour$e I know why they are per$i$ting.
We've already been through this very scenario.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bremsstrahlung
The Brisbane/Perth GF a few years back.
Berisha penalty in the 90th min.
First replays made it look like a dive, commentators lost their shit. if VAR was around prob would have been overturned.
Hour after the game another angle appears showing clear contact proving ref was right.
VAR would have cost Roar a win.
The tech is flawed.
The process is flawed.
Piss it off.
So then you want penalties reviewed, but a free kick 5 yards outside the box is or isn't reviewable? Because anywhere within 25 yards of goal Griff was 100% success rate they are just as important as penalties.
It's and endless list of decisions which can 'cost' a team a World Cup win. I just reackon the refs are overwhelmingly more accurate than people give them credit for. Let them do the damn job.
Imagine if the VAR was around when the Coasties thought they saw James Holland hand ball the corner.
Obviously it would have stood but there would hav ebeen nervous moments.
And Danny would have gone to Beijing.
I shudder at the thought
Yeah but Jedinak would have been sent by then for the 50 yellows he should have got.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeterpool
Endless conjecture, just what the game needs.
You only have to look at the Neill V Grosso penalty.Quote:
Originally Posted by plague
Just speaking with a bloke I work with, he says no penalty Grosso went down to easy, I say penalty Neill made contact with the trailing leg.
Well, that's it right?Quote:
Originally Posted by plague
You have people complaining that referees can't make decisions. Complaining that in the fast paced nature of the game, high risk games, a world of players trying to deceive the referee with diving, play acting and complaining. People complain that they are being tricked and making poor decisions. The world is quick to jump on referee decisions (jump on over and check out the gracious Membah in the NPL thread) and blame them for the games shortcomings. Technology has the ability to make a fool out of players who are making this somewhat neccessary.
And Griff would have been awarded the goal ....... The goal HE scored....Bridge pfffff!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeterpool
Who?Quote:
Originally Posted by lquiquer
the guy with weak ankles.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeterpool
But they aren't, that's the point. The wrong call was made for the Chile goal as it was called correctly on the field and was not an obvious error.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bremsstrahlung
You're saying he was onside?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetmaster
I assume he's saying that it was close enough to onside that it should be within the realm of benefit of the doubt to the attacking side. Perhaps for offsides they should establish a defined distance by which they need to be offside before an overrule is allowed, instead of hiding behind "obvious error/mistake". Its done for different reasons in cricket (precision of technology / margin of error) but its not dissimilar to the LBW review hawkeye system, where at least half the ball needs to be hitting the stumps to overrule an on-field decision that it was not hitting the stumps.
For arguments sake, say 0.5m of daylight between the last defender and the attacker.
Can anyone actually find a 'big game' that was decided by ref error?
We seem to be going through a hell of a lot of drama for something that doesn't ever really happen.
France vs Ireland. Henry handball not given. WC qualifier.Quote:
Originally Posted by plague
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLUxMRYJAso
Was literally just copying the URL....beat me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimario
Ok that's a good one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimario
So that's one.
Any others?
Classic moving the goal posts strategy. "I challenge you to find even one game that would have made a difference"... "Okay, now found two".Quote:
Originally Posted by plague
1966 World Cup Final - I always say it bounced on the line but technology "designed by EA Sports" : says otherwise....that's where this crap will head.
http://i2.mirror.co.uk/sport/footbal...-at-215851.jpg
http://i2.mirror.co.uk/sport/footbal...-at-215900.jpg
Far from it. I was actually giving people a chance to strengthen the case for me because as of right now the instances of video technology being right are far outweighed by the instances of video technology not being right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimario
So you guys go die on that hill if you want but your one example won't win many fans.
Yeah but I think we're all good with goalline tech. So this one doesn't count.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetmaster
Besides, the ref got it right yeah?
Oh, I am in favour of human error. As someone said earlier, all this does is move the human error from a guy in a fluro shirt on field to a guy in front of a screen.Quote:
Originally Posted by plague
Actually, back in Ye olden days when Aust drew (lost) the World Cup playoff at the MCG was it ever determined if the dude was (clearly) offside or were Aussie fans just crying?
Chelsea vs Liverpool 2005 UCL quarter finals ball never crosses the line replays back this up. Goal given to liverpool and they progress to the finalQuote:
Originally Posted by plague
First goal the bloke was offsideQuote:
Originally Posted by plague
The second that night he was onside clear as
Just shit defending
Disagree about other sports using it wellQuote:
Originally Posted by Bremsstrahlung
Cricket is a ****ing joke with Hawkeye
There are times the ball clearly missing or hitting stumps height or direction and this **** of a technology either shows it missing or hitting when to all and sundry it ain't
It amazing that the home side seems to get the benefit of arsey decisions
Guaranteed nailed on Aussies get the 50/50 calls in the Ashes this year
Let's not even go down the road of snicko and hot spot failing at times
Sure it may drag the occasional better decision out but it also fails at times
The only good use of technology in cricket was the 3rd umpire for runouts
After that it all ****ing down hill
Just as it going to be in football