VAR | Page 3 | Vital Football

VAR

Well, there you and I are going to disagree blueworm.

The decision for the first penalty took too long (and was incorrect anyway). Football is a flowing game and VAR is (as implemented) quite frankly is going to stop this.

The second incident didn't need VAR so why use it?
 
Haven’t seen the incident but based and what’s been said it shouldn’t have been used for a marginal decision as it was not a clear and obvious error not to give it.
 
It was a clear cut penalty for France. Though you can see why the referee couldn't have been sure about it first time there's no doubt about the reply.

Sadly, perhaps, because Australia have been unlucky.
 
Seen it now, look like he got a slight touch on the ball and then caught his rear leg on follow through. Very harsh to give, not surprised the French are the first to benefit from VAR.
 
Having argued firmly against VAR I've now decided that it's a good idea. This has nothing to do with the fact that I have money on Griezman to be top scorer in the tournament of course.:grinning:

Actually, it should inly be used in games involving France, to be fair.
 
blueworm said:
It was a clear cut penalty for France. Though you can see why the referee couldn't have been sure about it first time there's no doubt about the reply.

Sadly, perhaps, because Australia have been unlucky.
Click to expand...

Hmmm. Disagree there about being "no doubt".

Pretty much split all commentators, all pundits, and all discussion forums/fans.

So I'd say plenty of doubt. Agree that if VAR was implemented just to rid the obvious errors (not sure if that is the case) then it shouldn't have gone to VAR.

Besides, I don't need another reason to hate bleedin' French sporting teams...
 
First time I have seen VAR used and it seemed bizarre to go back to an incident once play has continued.

Still a bit like Gills58 it aided my accumulator so no concerns from me :-)
 
France pen not a foul and any contact outside anyway. Danny Baker on twitter:

VAR won't ever be repealed. Fifa and all the football bodies love it when supporters object to their mandates. It gives them a sense of ruling over the game. Outside of bribes it's what they enjoy most. #WorldCup


That about sums it up as football descends further into the jaws of TV and
WorldCup_2018.png
corrupt organisation. Soon there may well be more NFL games played at Wembley than football and the trajectory is clear. Football is a live game understood the world over and any deviation from that diminishes it.

France won,t win a sausage.
 
No surprise at all that the first time VAR is used at the World Cup, it is possible that it created an injustice. The ball does seem to change direction from the outstretched leg before Griezman goes over it.

Goal line technology is great. VAR is not IMHO.

I am still not sure whether the on field referee has a choice whether to use it after the video referee brings his attention to an incident. If so, I feel it puts pressure on the on field referee to change his verdict as the video referee is inferring that the cameras show that his original decision is wrong.

Therefore, if the referee sticks with his original verdict, it shows disagreement between officials, possibly making them look foolish.
 
Quite so Bluenose and the referee is constantly aware that 35 cameras watched by a panel are able to judge his every move. That sort of pressure does not make for good, independent decision making. Sir Alex would have had a field day. He,d have been inside the head of everyone and would have had a list of all the panels.
 
Think VAR has been implemented and used well in the World cup so far, much better than in the FA cup here, but IMO the one time its been used to change a decision they got it wrong.

Don't think it was a clear and obvious wrong decision not to give a penalty. Clearly the ref in the VAR booth had a different opinion to the one on the pitch, but there was nothing clear and obvious about it being a wrong decision to warrant the on field ref needing to review it. The ref on the pitch had a clear view of the incident and therefore if it was an obvious penalty, questions should be asked why the fuck he missed it.

IMHO he got it right in real time and VAR made it look worse.
 
Tweet from Guy Butters:

“What a load of old bollocks about the VAR system. Defender has no choice to go for the challenge and actually gets something on the ball. After that, he can’t stop his motion so any contact after HAS to be deemed as ACCIDENTAL. That’s a word that has gone out of modern football”
 
Did anyone else think that the there was a foul towards the end of the Argentina game. Ref didn't even bother looking at VAR but on replays it looked like the Iceland player made contact with the Argentine sub.

Really no point in having it if its not going to be used.

PS - This has everything to do with the above accumulator being lost now :-)
 
Last edited:
Well exactly, he accidentally caught his foot, which I don't think ought count as a penalty, but usually does these days. I'm glad it didn't, but I don't understand why iit didn't get referred. In that respect, VAR seems just as arbitrary as referees' decisions on their own. All it does is interrupt the flow of the game and take away the spontaneity.
 
And again!

What would have happened if after the Peru-Denmark incident, Denmark had punted the ball down the other end and scored?

It probably will happen.
 
I'm not even sure that was a foul. In real time I was sure it was, but on watching the replay it looked to me like he hooked his foot over the incoming Danish defender's leg. His weight certainly wasn't on it. You can't blame a ref for not spotting that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.