This chap explains it nicely. VAR is still good overall and they do get the majority of decisions right.
https://twitter.com/SkySports/status/1585548819844005888?t=slheLO4PcY7iUIOWX-rnxw&s=19
comment by LukaBrasi COYS (U22178)
posted 1 minute ago
This chap explains it nicely. VAR is still good overall and they do get the majority of decisions right.
https://twitter.com/SkySports/status/1585548819844005888?t=slheLO4PcY7iUIOWX-rnxw&s=19
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They need to get every decision right. That is why it was brought in.
There's one major problem that I have with VAR - and it is with the people who say 'if it takes over X amount of time to make a decision, then scrap it and stick with the original decision'.
The problem I have with that is, is that it doesn't solve the issue, as the ref/linesman could have called it either way.
What if the linesman had put his flag up last night after Kane had scored, and then the goal goes to VAR - the lines are being drawn but as time ticks, it is decided that it is taking too long and isn't a 'clear and obvious error' by the linesman as its so tight, so play continues at 1-1. After the game when the lines are as accurate as can be, VAR calls it ONSIDE - we wouldn't be very happy as fans then would we?
This is my point - the whole notion of saying that if VAR is taking over X amount of time to decide whether the refs/linesman's decision is correct or not, then scrap it and go with their original decision, this could still lead the decision to happen either way, correct or incorrect!
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 47 seconds ago
comment by LukaBrasi COYS (U22178)
posted 1 minute ago
This chap explains it nicely. VAR is still good overall and they do get the majority of decisions right.
https://twitter.com/SkySports/status/1585548819844005888?t=slheLO4PcY7iUIOWX-rnxw&s=19
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They need to get every decision right. That is why it was brought in.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not possible to get every decision "right" because many decisions are referees interpretations that will not always get 100% agreement.
It was brought in to reduce errors which it does.
comment by SpursBoy101 (U21819)
posted 10 seconds ago
There's one major problem that I have with VAR - and it is with the people who say 'if it takes over X amount of time to make a decision, then scrap it and stick with the original decision'.
The problem I have with that is, is that it doesn't solve the issue, as the ref/linesman could have called it either way.
What if the linesman had put his flag up last night after Kane had scored, and then the goal goes to VAR - the lines are being drawn but as time ticks, it is decided that it is taking too long and isn't a 'clear and obvious error' by the linesman as its so tight, so play continues at 1-1. After the game when the lines are as accurate as can be, VAR calls it ONSIDE - we wouldn't be very happy as fans then would we?
This is my point - the whole notion of saying that if VAR is taking over X amount of time to decide whether the refs/linesman's decision is correct or not, then scrap it and go with their original decision, this could still lead the decision to happen either way, correct or incorrect!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Absolutely. Good point.
Also I have seen people saying if it takes 4 minutes then the VAR is clearly just guessing and it's too close to call, when I woild say the more likely explanation is VAR is taking time to ensure that the final decisions given is the correct one rather than rushing it and making a mistake.
comment by LukaBrasi COYS (U22178)
posted 7 minutes ago
This chap explains it nicely. VAR is still good overall and they do get the majority of decisions right.
https://twitter.com/SkySports/status/1585548819844005888?t=slheLO4PcY7iUIOWX-rnxw&s=19
----------------------------------------------------------------------
he doesn't explain either of my questions. The image he has on his screen the entire time has the exact issues I'm querying.
comment by SpursBoy101 (U21819)
posted 4 minutes ago
There's one major problem that I have with VAR - and it is with the people who say 'if it takes over X amount of time to make a decision, then scrap it and stick with the original decision'.
The problem I have with that is, is that it doesn't solve the issue, as the ref/linesman could have called it either way.
What if the linesman had put his flag up last night after Kane had scored, and then the goal goes to VAR - the lines are being drawn but as time ticks, it is decided that it is taking too long and isn't a 'clear and obvious error' by the linesman as its so tight, so play continues at 1-1. After the game when the lines are as accurate as can be, VAR calls it ONSIDE - we wouldn't be very happy as fans then would we?
This is my point - the whole notion of saying that if VAR is taking over X amount of time to decide whether the refs/linesman's decision is correct or not, then scrap it and go with their original decision, this could still lead the decision to happen either way, correct or incorrect!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd be happier with that. So for example last night, if the linesman had flagged offside and the goal ruled out, if VAR couldn't quickly and clearly demonstrate that the decision was incorrect, then the on field decision should stand.
It should be so simple but they've overcomplicated things to a ridiculous degree.
comment by SpursBoy101 (U21819)
posted 4 minutes ago
There's one major problem that I have with VAR - and it is with the people who say 'if it takes over X amount of time to make a decision, then scrap it and stick with the original decision'.
The problem I have with that is, is that it doesn't solve the issue, as the ref/linesman could have called it either way.
What if the linesman had put his flag up last night after Kane had scored, and then the goal goes to VAR - the lines are being drawn but as time ticks, it is decided that it is taking too long and isn't a 'clear and obvious error' by the linesman as its so tight, so play continues at 1-1. After the game when the lines are as accurate as can be, VAR calls it ONSIDE - we wouldn't be very happy as fans then would we?
This is my point - the whole notion of saying that if VAR is taking over X amount of time to decide whether the refs/linesman's decision is correct or not, then scrap it and go with their original decision, this could still lead the decision to happen either way, correct or incorrect!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If VAR didn't exist, no one would have batted an eye lid at that decision last night.
VAR is affecting the game in many ways but one thing it is doing is fixing 'problems' that don't need fixing.
No point crying about it lads. It's done. We move. Bournemouth next on Saturday. Lets try and win!
Correct decision. Well done experienced officials who know the rules. Be angry at yourself for not knowing the rules, not the officials for knowing them better than you.
Kane is ahead of the ball when it is played, ergo Kane is offside.
That's pretty much all there is to it, it's frustrating for Spurs fans sure, but not some grave injustice.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by SpursBoy101 (U21819)
posted 4 minutes ago
There's one major problem that I have with VAR - and it is with the people who say 'if it takes over X amount of time to make a decision, then scrap it and stick with the original decision'.
The problem I have with that is, is that it doesn't solve the issue, as the ref/linesman could have called it either way.
What if the linesman had put his flag up last night after Kane had scored, and then the goal goes to VAR - the lines are being drawn but as time ticks, it is decided that it is taking too long and isn't a 'clear and obvious error' by the linesman as its so tight, so play continues at 1-1. After the game when the lines are as accurate as can be, VAR calls it ONSIDE - we wouldn't be very happy as fans then would we?
This is my point - the whole notion of saying that if VAR is taking over X amount of time to decide whether the refs/linesman's decision is correct or not, then scrap it and go with their original decision, this could still lead the decision to happen either way, correct or incorrect!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If VAR didn't exist, no one would have batted an eye lid at that decision last night.
VAR is affecting the game in many ways but one thing it is doing is fixing 'problems' that don't need fixing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Except for all the fans of the team who were unfairly cost a point. I'm sure they would have been a bit upset that an offside goal in the last minute was allowed to stand.
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 21 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by SpursBoy101 (U21819)
posted 4 minutes ago
There's one major problem that I have with VAR - and it is with the people who say 'if it takes over X amount of time to make a decision, then scrap it and stick with the original decision'.
The problem I have with that is, is that it doesn't solve the issue, as the ref/linesman could have called it either way.
What if the linesman had put his flag up last night after Kane had scored, and then the goal goes to VAR - the lines are being drawn but as time ticks, it is decided that it is taking too long and isn't a 'clear and obvious error' by the linesman as its so tight, so play continues at 1-1. After the game when the lines are as accurate as can be, VAR calls it ONSIDE - we wouldn't be very happy as fans then would we?
This is my point - the whole notion of saying that if VAR is taking over X amount of time to decide whether the refs/linesman's decision is correct or not, then scrap it and go with their original decision, this could still lead the decision to happen either way, correct or incorrect!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If VAR didn't exist, no one would have batted an eye lid at that decision last night.
VAR is affecting the game in many ways but one thing it is doing is fixing 'problems' that don't need fixing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Except for all the fans of the team who were unfairly cost a point. I'm sure they would have been a bit upset that an offside goal in the last minute was allowed to stand.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh yes, they'd have watched that replay and immediately screamed at the obvious offside that has just cost their team.
comment by Stewart Greacen (U1734)
posted 4 minutes ago
Correct decision. Well done experienced officials who know the rules. Be angry at yourself for not knowing the rules, not the officials for knowing them better than you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
great, you seem to know your stuff - are you able to answer either of the two simple questions I created this article for? No one has so far.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 4 seconds ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 21 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by SpursBoy101 (U21819)
posted 4 minutes ago
There's one major problem that I have with VAR - and it is with the people who say 'if it takes over X amount of time to make a decision, then scrap it and stick with the original decision'.
The problem I have with that is, is that it doesn't solve the issue, as the ref/linesman could have called it either way.
What if the linesman had put his flag up last night after Kane had scored, and then the goal goes to VAR - the lines are being drawn but as time ticks, it is decided that it is taking too long and isn't a 'clear and obvious error' by the linesman as its so tight, so play continues at 1-1. After the game when the lines are as accurate as can be, VAR calls it ONSIDE - we wouldn't be very happy as fans then would we?
This is my point - the whole notion of saying that if VAR is taking over X amount of time to decide whether the refs/linesman's decision is correct or not, then scrap it and go with their original decision, this could still lead the decision to happen either way, correct or incorrect!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If VAR didn't exist, no one would have batted an eye lid at that decision last night.
VAR is affecting the game in many ways but one thing it is doing is fixing 'problems' that don't need fixing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Except for all the fans of the team who were unfairly cost a point. I'm sure they would have been a bit upset that an offside goal in the last minute was allowed to stand.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh yes, they'd have watched that replay and immediately screamed at the obvious offside that has just cost their team.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes. Fans being ignorant to the rules should definitely trump refs having more knowledge of them.
Like if you are building a rocket and 50 football fans look at it and think it looks fine. Then one rocket scientist finds an issue with it.
Should be allowed to take off cos the 50 ignorant people think it's fine.
Delete your account.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 21 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by SpursBoy101 (U21819)
posted 4 minutes ago
There's one major problem that I have with VAR - and it is with the people who say 'if it takes over X amount of time to make a decision, then scrap it and stick with the original decision'.
The problem I have with that is, is that it doesn't solve the issue, as the ref/linesman could have called it either way.
What if the linesman had put his flag up last night after Kane had scored, and then the goal goes to VAR - the lines are being drawn but as time ticks, it is decided that it is taking too long and isn't a 'clear and obvious error' by the linesman as its so tight, so play continues at 1-1. After the game when the lines are as accurate as can be, VAR calls it ONSIDE - we wouldn't be very happy as fans then would we?
This is my point - the whole notion of saying that if VAR is taking over X amount of time to decide whether the refs/linesman's decision is correct or not, then scrap it and go with their original decision, this could still lead the decision to happen either way, correct or incorrect!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If VAR didn't exist, no one would have batted an eye lid at that decision last night.
VAR is affecting the game in many ways but one thing it is doing is fixing 'problems' that don't need fixing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Except for all the fans of the team who were unfairly cost a point. I'm sure they would have been a bit upset that an offside goal in the last minute was allowed to stand.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh yes, they'd have watched that replay and immediately screamed at the obvious offside that has just cost their team.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes they absolutely would, and they woild have been correct to do so because it was definitely offside, as was apparent from the side-on freeze frame before the lines were even drawn.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by SpursBoy101 (U21819)
posted 4 minutes ago
There's one major problem that I have with VAR - and it is with the people who say 'if it takes over X amount of time to make a decision, then scrap it and stick with the original decision'.
The problem I have with that is, is that it doesn't solve the issue, as the ref/linesman could have called it either way.
What if the linesman had put his flag up last night after Kane had scored, and then the goal goes to VAR - the lines are being drawn but as time ticks, it is decided that it is taking too long and isn't a 'clear and obvious error' by the linesman as its so tight, so play continues at 1-1. After the game when the lines are as accurate as can be, VAR calls it ONSIDE - we wouldn't be very happy as fans then would we?
This is my point - the whole notion of saying that if VAR is taking over X amount of time to decide whether the refs/linesman's decision is correct or not, then scrap it and go with their original decision, this could still lead the decision to happen either way, correct or incorrect!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If VAR didn't exist, no one would have batted an eye lid at that decision last night.
VAR is affecting the game in many ways but one thing it is doing is fixing 'problems' that don't need fixing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That may be your opinion - who's to say the Sporting Manager wouldn't have brought it up post game, and people may have rolled their eyes, but no one could have denied how correct he was, could they?
Imagine if Sterling's goal stood vs us in 2019 - no one would have batted an eyelid then, either, but that incorrect call (if the goal stood) would have robbed us of the Ajax game and a CL final appearance!
You're two questions are very technical and would need a nerd from waffa to explain.
Move on and look forward to Saturday 👍🏻
comment by PhilspursFGR (U3278)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Stewart Greacen (U1734)
posted 4 minutes ago
Correct decision. Well done experienced officials who know the rules. Be angry at yourself for not knowing the rules, not the officials for knowing them better than you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
great, you seem to know your stuff - are you able to answer either of the two simple questions I created this article for? No one has so far.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The grey line is to determine whether Kane is ahead of the ball or not. It is drawn from the position of the ball when it was played, to Kane's most forward ball playing part of the body. It is to show that he is ahead of the ball when it was played by the attacking player.
Point 2. It's all about perspective . Don't study architecture.
Sorry OP, but a Spurs win wasn't the preferred result, therefore VAR found a way to steer the game towards the result they wanted.
Or is this quite a good wum?
welsh, that's absolute nonsense.
It took VAR 4 minutes - with lines on the screen - to conclude he was offside, but you think opposition fans would have been furious having watched a couple of replays, being sure he was off?
Ludicrous comment.
You really will say anything to defend VAR.
comment by SpursBoy101 (U21819)
posted 27 minutes ago
This is my point - the whole notion of saying that if VAR is taking over X amount of time to decide whether the refs/linesman's decision is correct or not, then scrap it and go with their original decision, this could still lead the decision to happen either way, correct or incorrect!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Or they could just toss a coin. Nobody will know they did that if the decision is that contentious.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 2 minutes ago
welsh, that's absolute nonsense.
It took VAR 4 minutes - with lines on the screen - to conclude he was offside, but you think opposition fans would have been furious having watched a couple of replays, being sure he was off?
Ludicrous comment.
You really will say anything to defend VAR.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Should never have investigated the Jimmy Saville stuff. People didn't bat an eyelid at the time. It took far too long as well, should have just been brushed aside.
comment by Stewart Greacen (U1734)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by PhilspursFGR (U3278)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Stewart Greacen (U1734)
posted 4 minutes ago
Correct decision. Well done experienced officials who know the rules. Be angry at yourself for not knowing the rules, not the officials for knowing them better than you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
great, you seem to know your stuff - are you able to answer either of the two simple questions I created this article for? No one has so far.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The grey line is to determine whether Kane is ahead of the ball or not. It is drawn from the position of the ball when it was played, to Kane's most forward ball playing part of the body. It is to show that he is ahead of the ball when it was played by the attacking player.
Point 2. It's all about perspective. Don't study architecture.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
your answer to point 1 makes perfect sense, although I've never seen it before. Do they usually draw a wobbly grey line to indicate the position of the ball?
Point 2 has nothing to do with perspective. But it's a good effort.
Sign in if you want to comment
Genuine VAR questions
Page 1 of 6
6
posted on 27/10/22
This chap explains it nicely. VAR is still good overall and they do get the majority of decisions right.
https://twitter.com/SkySports/status/1585548819844005888?t=slheLO4PcY7iUIOWX-rnxw&s=19
posted on 27/10/22
comment by LukaBrasi COYS (U22178)
posted 1 minute ago
This chap explains it nicely. VAR is still good overall and they do get the majority of decisions right.
https://twitter.com/SkySports/status/1585548819844005888?t=slheLO4PcY7iUIOWX-rnxw&s=19
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They need to get every decision right. That is why it was brought in.
posted on 27/10/22
There's one major problem that I have with VAR - and it is with the people who say 'if it takes over X amount of time to make a decision, then scrap it and stick with the original decision'.
The problem I have with that is, is that it doesn't solve the issue, as the ref/linesman could have called it either way.
What if the linesman had put his flag up last night after Kane had scored, and then the goal goes to VAR - the lines are being drawn but as time ticks, it is decided that it is taking too long and isn't a 'clear and obvious error' by the linesman as its so tight, so play continues at 1-1. After the game when the lines are as accurate as can be, VAR calls it ONSIDE - we wouldn't be very happy as fans then would we?
This is my point - the whole notion of saying that if VAR is taking over X amount of time to decide whether the refs/linesman's decision is correct or not, then scrap it and go with their original decision, this could still lead the decision to happen either way, correct or incorrect!
posted on 27/10/22
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 47 seconds ago
comment by LukaBrasi COYS (U22178)
posted 1 minute ago
This chap explains it nicely. VAR is still good overall and they do get the majority of decisions right.
https://twitter.com/SkySports/status/1585548819844005888?t=slheLO4PcY7iUIOWX-rnxw&s=19
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They need to get every decision right. That is why it was brought in.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not possible to get every decision "right" because many decisions are referees interpretations that will not always get 100% agreement.
It was brought in to reduce errors which it does.
posted on 27/10/22
comment by SpursBoy101 (U21819)
posted 10 seconds ago
There's one major problem that I have with VAR - and it is with the people who say 'if it takes over X amount of time to make a decision, then scrap it and stick with the original decision'.
The problem I have with that is, is that it doesn't solve the issue, as the ref/linesman could have called it either way.
What if the linesman had put his flag up last night after Kane had scored, and then the goal goes to VAR - the lines are being drawn but as time ticks, it is decided that it is taking too long and isn't a 'clear and obvious error' by the linesman as its so tight, so play continues at 1-1. After the game when the lines are as accurate as can be, VAR calls it ONSIDE - we wouldn't be very happy as fans then would we?
This is my point - the whole notion of saying that if VAR is taking over X amount of time to decide whether the refs/linesman's decision is correct or not, then scrap it and go with their original decision, this could still lead the decision to happen either way, correct or incorrect!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Absolutely. Good point.
Also I have seen people saying if it takes 4 minutes then the VAR is clearly just guessing and it's too close to call, when I woild say the more likely explanation is VAR is taking time to ensure that the final decisions given is the correct one rather than rushing it and making a mistake.
posted on 27/10/22
comment by LukaBrasi COYS (U22178)
posted 7 minutes ago
This chap explains it nicely. VAR is still good overall and they do get the majority of decisions right.
https://twitter.com/SkySports/status/1585548819844005888?t=slheLO4PcY7iUIOWX-rnxw&s=19
----------------------------------------------------------------------
he doesn't explain either of my questions. The image he has on his screen the entire time has the exact issues I'm querying.
posted on 27/10/22
comment by SpursBoy101 (U21819)
posted 4 minutes ago
There's one major problem that I have with VAR - and it is with the people who say 'if it takes over X amount of time to make a decision, then scrap it and stick with the original decision'.
The problem I have with that is, is that it doesn't solve the issue, as the ref/linesman could have called it either way.
What if the linesman had put his flag up last night after Kane had scored, and then the goal goes to VAR - the lines are being drawn but as time ticks, it is decided that it is taking too long and isn't a 'clear and obvious error' by the linesman as its so tight, so play continues at 1-1. After the game when the lines are as accurate as can be, VAR calls it ONSIDE - we wouldn't be very happy as fans then would we?
This is my point - the whole notion of saying that if VAR is taking over X amount of time to decide whether the refs/linesman's decision is correct or not, then scrap it and go with their original decision, this could still lead the decision to happen either way, correct or incorrect!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd be happier with that. So for example last night, if the linesman had flagged offside and the goal ruled out, if VAR couldn't quickly and clearly demonstrate that the decision was incorrect, then the on field decision should stand.
It should be so simple but they've overcomplicated things to a ridiculous degree.
posted on 27/10/22
comment by SpursBoy101 (U21819)
posted 4 minutes ago
There's one major problem that I have with VAR - and it is with the people who say 'if it takes over X amount of time to make a decision, then scrap it and stick with the original decision'.
The problem I have with that is, is that it doesn't solve the issue, as the ref/linesman could have called it either way.
What if the linesman had put his flag up last night after Kane had scored, and then the goal goes to VAR - the lines are being drawn but as time ticks, it is decided that it is taking too long and isn't a 'clear and obvious error' by the linesman as its so tight, so play continues at 1-1. After the game when the lines are as accurate as can be, VAR calls it ONSIDE - we wouldn't be very happy as fans then would we?
This is my point - the whole notion of saying that if VAR is taking over X amount of time to decide whether the refs/linesman's decision is correct or not, then scrap it and go with their original decision, this could still lead the decision to happen either way, correct or incorrect!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If VAR didn't exist, no one would have batted an eye lid at that decision last night.
VAR is affecting the game in many ways but one thing it is doing is fixing 'problems' that don't need fixing.
posted on 27/10/22
No point crying about it lads. It's done. We move. Bournemouth next on Saturday. Lets try and win!
posted on 27/10/22
Correct decision. Well done experienced officials who know the rules. Be angry at yourself for not knowing the rules, not the officials for knowing them better than you.
posted on 27/10/22
Kane is ahead of the ball when it is played, ergo Kane is offside.
That's pretty much all there is to it, it's frustrating for Spurs fans sure, but not some grave injustice.
posted on 27/10/22
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by SpursBoy101 (U21819)
posted 4 minutes ago
There's one major problem that I have with VAR - and it is with the people who say 'if it takes over X amount of time to make a decision, then scrap it and stick with the original decision'.
The problem I have with that is, is that it doesn't solve the issue, as the ref/linesman could have called it either way.
What if the linesman had put his flag up last night after Kane had scored, and then the goal goes to VAR - the lines are being drawn but as time ticks, it is decided that it is taking too long and isn't a 'clear and obvious error' by the linesman as its so tight, so play continues at 1-1. After the game when the lines are as accurate as can be, VAR calls it ONSIDE - we wouldn't be very happy as fans then would we?
This is my point - the whole notion of saying that if VAR is taking over X amount of time to decide whether the refs/linesman's decision is correct or not, then scrap it and go with their original decision, this could still lead the decision to happen either way, correct or incorrect!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If VAR didn't exist, no one would have batted an eye lid at that decision last night.
VAR is affecting the game in many ways but one thing it is doing is fixing 'problems' that don't need fixing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Except for all the fans of the team who were unfairly cost a point. I'm sure they would have been a bit upset that an offside goal in the last minute was allowed to stand.
posted on 27/10/22
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 21 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by SpursBoy101 (U21819)
posted 4 minutes ago
There's one major problem that I have with VAR - and it is with the people who say 'if it takes over X amount of time to make a decision, then scrap it and stick with the original decision'.
The problem I have with that is, is that it doesn't solve the issue, as the ref/linesman could have called it either way.
What if the linesman had put his flag up last night after Kane had scored, and then the goal goes to VAR - the lines are being drawn but as time ticks, it is decided that it is taking too long and isn't a 'clear and obvious error' by the linesman as its so tight, so play continues at 1-1. After the game when the lines are as accurate as can be, VAR calls it ONSIDE - we wouldn't be very happy as fans then would we?
This is my point - the whole notion of saying that if VAR is taking over X amount of time to decide whether the refs/linesman's decision is correct or not, then scrap it and go with their original decision, this could still lead the decision to happen either way, correct or incorrect!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If VAR didn't exist, no one would have batted an eye lid at that decision last night.
VAR is affecting the game in many ways but one thing it is doing is fixing 'problems' that don't need fixing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Except for all the fans of the team who were unfairly cost a point. I'm sure they would have been a bit upset that an offside goal in the last minute was allowed to stand.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh yes, they'd have watched that replay and immediately screamed at the obvious offside that has just cost their team.
posted on 27/10/22
comment by Stewart Greacen (U1734)
posted 4 minutes ago
Correct decision. Well done experienced officials who know the rules. Be angry at yourself for not knowing the rules, not the officials for knowing them better than you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
great, you seem to know your stuff - are you able to answer either of the two simple questions I created this article for? No one has so far.
posted on 27/10/22
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 4 seconds ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 21 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by SpursBoy101 (U21819)
posted 4 minutes ago
There's one major problem that I have with VAR - and it is with the people who say 'if it takes over X amount of time to make a decision, then scrap it and stick with the original decision'.
The problem I have with that is, is that it doesn't solve the issue, as the ref/linesman could have called it either way.
What if the linesman had put his flag up last night after Kane had scored, and then the goal goes to VAR - the lines are being drawn but as time ticks, it is decided that it is taking too long and isn't a 'clear and obvious error' by the linesman as its so tight, so play continues at 1-1. After the game when the lines are as accurate as can be, VAR calls it ONSIDE - we wouldn't be very happy as fans then would we?
This is my point - the whole notion of saying that if VAR is taking over X amount of time to decide whether the refs/linesman's decision is correct or not, then scrap it and go with their original decision, this could still lead the decision to happen either way, correct or incorrect!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If VAR didn't exist, no one would have batted an eye lid at that decision last night.
VAR is affecting the game in many ways but one thing it is doing is fixing 'problems' that don't need fixing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Except for all the fans of the team who were unfairly cost a point. I'm sure they would have been a bit upset that an offside goal in the last minute was allowed to stand.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh yes, they'd have watched that replay and immediately screamed at the obvious offside that has just cost their team.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes. Fans being ignorant to the rules should definitely trump refs having more knowledge of them.
Like if you are building a rocket and 50 football fans look at it and think it looks fine. Then one rocket scientist finds an issue with it.
Should be allowed to take off cos the 50 ignorant people think it's fine.
Delete your account.
posted on 27/10/22
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 21 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by SpursBoy101 (U21819)
posted 4 minutes ago
There's one major problem that I have with VAR - and it is with the people who say 'if it takes over X amount of time to make a decision, then scrap it and stick with the original decision'.
The problem I have with that is, is that it doesn't solve the issue, as the ref/linesman could have called it either way.
What if the linesman had put his flag up last night after Kane had scored, and then the goal goes to VAR - the lines are being drawn but as time ticks, it is decided that it is taking too long and isn't a 'clear and obvious error' by the linesman as its so tight, so play continues at 1-1. After the game when the lines are as accurate as can be, VAR calls it ONSIDE - we wouldn't be very happy as fans then would we?
This is my point - the whole notion of saying that if VAR is taking over X amount of time to decide whether the refs/linesman's decision is correct or not, then scrap it and go with their original decision, this could still lead the decision to happen either way, correct or incorrect!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If VAR didn't exist, no one would have batted an eye lid at that decision last night.
VAR is affecting the game in many ways but one thing it is doing is fixing 'problems' that don't need fixing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Except for all the fans of the team who were unfairly cost a point. I'm sure they would have been a bit upset that an offside goal in the last minute was allowed to stand.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh yes, they'd have watched that replay and immediately screamed at the obvious offside that has just cost their team.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes they absolutely would, and they woild have been correct to do so because it was definitely offside, as was apparent from the side-on freeze frame before the lines were even drawn.
posted on 27/10/22
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by SpursBoy101 (U21819)
posted 4 minutes ago
There's one major problem that I have with VAR - and it is with the people who say 'if it takes over X amount of time to make a decision, then scrap it and stick with the original decision'.
The problem I have with that is, is that it doesn't solve the issue, as the ref/linesman could have called it either way.
What if the linesman had put his flag up last night after Kane had scored, and then the goal goes to VAR - the lines are being drawn but as time ticks, it is decided that it is taking too long and isn't a 'clear and obvious error' by the linesman as its so tight, so play continues at 1-1. After the game when the lines are as accurate as can be, VAR calls it ONSIDE - we wouldn't be very happy as fans then would we?
This is my point - the whole notion of saying that if VAR is taking over X amount of time to decide whether the refs/linesman's decision is correct or not, then scrap it and go with their original decision, this could still lead the decision to happen either way, correct or incorrect!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If VAR didn't exist, no one would have batted an eye lid at that decision last night.
VAR is affecting the game in many ways but one thing it is doing is fixing 'problems' that don't need fixing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That may be your opinion - who's to say the Sporting Manager wouldn't have brought it up post game, and people may have rolled their eyes, but no one could have denied how correct he was, could they?
Imagine if Sterling's goal stood vs us in 2019 - no one would have batted an eyelid then, either, but that incorrect call (if the goal stood) would have robbed us of the Ajax game and a CL final appearance!
posted on 27/10/22
You're two questions are very technical and would need a nerd from waffa to explain.
Move on and look forward to Saturday 👍🏻
posted on 27/10/22
comment by PhilspursFGR (U3278)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Stewart Greacen (U1734)
posted 4 minutes ago
Correct decision. Well done experienced officials who know the rules. Be angry at yourself for not knowing the rules, not the officials for knowing them better than you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
great, you seem to know your stuff - are you able to answer either of the two simple questions I created this article for? No one has so far.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The grey line is to determine whether Kane is ahead of the ball or not. It is drawn from the position of the ball when it was played, to Kane's most forward ball playing part of the body. It is to show that he is ahead of the ball when it was played by the attacking player.
Point 2. It's all about perspective . Don't study architecture.
posted on 27/10/22
Sorry OP, but a Spurs win wasn't the preferred result, therefore VAR found a way to steer the game towards the result they wanted.
posted on 27/10/22
Or is this quite a good wum?
posted on 27/10/22
welsh, that's absolute nonsense.
It took VAR 4 minutes - with lines on the screen - to conclude he was offside, but you think opposition fans would have been furious having watched a couple of replays, being sure he was off?
Ludicrous comment.
You really will say anything to defend VAR.
posted on 27/10/22
comment by SpursBoy101 (U21819)
posted 27 minutes ago
This is my point - the whole notion of saying that if VAR is taking over X amount of time to decide whether the refs/linesman's decision is correct or not, then scrap it and go with their original decision, this could still lead the decision to happen either way, correct or incorrect!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Or they could just toss a coin. Nobody will know they did that if the decision is that contentious.
posted on 27/10/22
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 2 minutes ago
welsh, that's absolute nonsense.
It took VAR 4 minutes - with lines on the screen - to conclude he was offside, but you think opposition fans would have been furious having watched a couple of replays, being sure he was off?
Ludicrous comment.
You really will say anything to defend VAR.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Should never have investigated the Jimmy Saville stuff. People didn't bat an eyelid at the time. It took far too long as well, should have just been brushed aside.
posted on 27/10/22
comment by Stewart Greacen (U1734)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by PhilspursFGR (U3278)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Stewart Greacen (U1734)
posted 4 minutes ago
Correct decision. Well done experienced officials who know the rules. Be angry at yourself for not knowing the rules, not the officials for knowing them better than you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
great, you seem to know your stuff - are you able to answer either of the two simple questions I created this article for? No one has so far.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The grey line is to determine whether Kane is ahead of the ball or not. It is drawn from the position of the ball when it was played, to Kane's most forward ball playing part of the body. It is to show that he is ahead of the ball when it was played by the attacking player.
Point 2. It's all about perspective. Don't study architecture.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
your answer to point 1 makes perfect sense, although I've never seen it before. Do they usually draw a wobbly grey line to indicate the position of the ball?
Point 2 has nothing to do with perspective. But it's a good effort.
Page 1 of 6
6