Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Football] VAR at Shalke tonight







Machiavelli

Well-known member
Oct 11, 2013
16,542
Fiveways
Absolute joke. How not to do it. Incomptant ref and VAR monitors. Train the ****ers FFS.

I mean the amount of time taken was absurd. The credibility of the decision was therefore nil. And it was wrong (but that is arguable. Maybe).

I'm sure you'd agree that you meant incompetent. If you did, I disagree with your assessment of the decision, and also find it odd that you think it lacked credibility yet that it is arguable whether it was wrong.
But, apart from that, spot on :thumbsup:
 




Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patreon
Oct 8, 2003
49,331
Faversham
I'm sure you'd agree that you meant incompetent. If you did, I disagree with your assessment of the decision, and also find it odd that you think it lacked credibility yet that it is arguable whether it was wrong.
But, apart from that, spot on :thumbsup:

:lolol::thumbsup:
 




Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patreon
Oct 8, 2003
49,331
Faversham
He had the time, given that they have quick reactions, to tuck it in or slightly behind him. I think he used his arm simultaneously with his upper body, to make sure the shot didn’t hit the back of the net. Then falsely pleaded the opposite.

Yeah....you're right. I'll get my coat.
 




Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patreon
Oct 8, 2003
49,331
Faversham
In some respects this debacle is quite funny. Sheik, rattle and roll over.
 






Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patreon
Oct 8, 2003
49,331
Faversham
What a goal.
 


























Easy 10

Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Jul 5, 2003
61,673
Location Location
That first penalty decision, in a nutshell, is the problem with VAR. Even after the benefit of the replays, you've got 2 distinct camps, some who believe it was a handball and a pen, and some that don't. Despite the benefit of multiple replays, you're still asking people to make subjective decisions when its by no means black and white.

What I would say is that on first viewing in realtime, the ref decided it was no pen. VAR is only supposed to get involved when there has been a CLEAR AND OBVIOUS ERROR. Was the original decision (no pen) CLEARLY wrong ? The fact that it took 3-4 minutes of deliberation by the VAR official suggests not. And the ref didn't even go over for another look himself.

In my opinion, that was a borderline decision. Seen them given, seen them not. So the VAR should've left well alone. But, we are where we are and there's no stopping it now.
 



Paying the bills

Latest Discussions

Paying the bills

Paying the bills

Paying the bills

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here