Reply With Quotei agree that was harsh af... in real time that will have stood, i suppose that is what var is for but c'mon
a foot, torso or head can be goal scoring body parts... but to be offside by cm of a arm or hand c'mon now
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
No...no..no....yesterday's decision against Norwich and now Wolves goal disallowed...by millimetres...this is just WRONG......the FEET must be offside to disallow.
i agree that was harsh af... in real time that will have stood, i suppose that is what var is for but c'mon
a foot, torso or head can be goal scoring body parts... but to be offside by cm of a arm or hand c'mon now
Originally Posted by bluemoon
Liverpool goal , fair enough, but the offside decisions are bordering on the ridiculous now.
I am waiting for an opposition manager to come out and say "that should have been a goal...."
unfortunately in this case it was the foot.
it wasn't...
my mistake then , thought they said his boot was the cause.
Yet ANOTHER rediculous VAr decision...SHeff Utd denied a good goal.....looked level at best...t
That's not the case though. Right? hopefully, it will be next year. It should be feet on the ground.
It’s here to stay. I wonder how far down the football pyramid it can go? Must cost a bit to implement it through the leagues.
As I understand it Law11, the offside law, states any part of the body except the hands and arms ie it doesn’t apply to them
So the Norwich decision def wrong, and not seen the wolves event but sounds similar.
Don't understand why they don't just go for clear and obvious. If we are taking it down to such fine margins as this then I doubt it would have effected the finish at all.
The game has never been ruled this way, and I'm not sure it should be.
It worked well with Liverpool's goal, but then we get yet another farcical offside ruling. VAR was introduced initially to rule on clear refereeing errors, but somewhere along the way, it's been transformed into something which, more often than not, comes down in favour of defending sides in situations where the decision to award a goal would not have been contested by the team that conceded. The huge majority of goals are scored either with a foot or a head and so, surely, they should be the criteria for offside decisions? If the part of the body the ball comes off is onside when contact is made then the goal should stand no matter where the "scorer's" armpit (!!!) is.
Also, it's taking far too long for the decisions to be made. Before VAR was introduced, the talk was that it would only take a few seconds to get the right decision, instead the game is losing its continuity as endless replays are viewed while VAR makes its mind up - if the technology does not exist yet that provides these decisions within seconds as originally claimed, I would prefer that VAR be shelved until it does.
This is just stupid...ref stops Sheff Utd player getting to teh ball....moves ahead Man City score....HAS to be a dropped ball at keast....Var says otherwise...
Referee clearly impeded Sheffield United player and ball rebounds to City who score ! Why haven’t they overruled that ?
Have to say...for a newly promoted team Sheff Utd are really having a go here....really refreshing.
Wolves' goal should have been allowed. Glad it wasn't though as I had bet the farm on a Liverpool win.
This is probably the only time I've celebrated a Liverpool victory with almost as much enthusiasm as a certain scoundrel who lingers at this message board.
#FansAgainstVAR
The main complaints about VAR are that these ridiculous armpit-offside nonsense decisions; and the fact that it takes minutes to decide.
Simple way to kill two birds with one stone: give the VAR ref 2 goes at re-watching the incident at full speed from two angles. An obvious mistake would be easily overturned, most other marginal stuff sticks with the on-pitch ref. And it would take seconds not minutes.
It will mean that some decisions are wrong, but that's fine with me. Even with VAR refs agonising over it for ages they are still getting some things wrong. And it might feel a bit like football again.
I reckon that alot of fans have got what they deserved, and managers and players alike. Listen to how some fans moan about decisions going against their team, managers and players who blame the officials in order to mask their own deficiencies. Add to that football fans worrying about Revenues and losing money due to a poor decision. Well, feck 'em, they wanted a game where human error at critical moments has been taken away from officials, i was fine with mistakes and big shouts going against teams, even our team. It's what football is about in my opinion.
Fair play, it takes balls to feck up the product of a global business that took years to build, so congratulations to all those who played a part
I detect that you're saying that things should've been left alone? If so, i agree.Fair play, it takes balls to feck up the product of a global business that took years to build, so congratulations to all those who played a part
As an entertainment product that attracts billions of viewers worlwide it was a bad move, but I agree with what you said about the ref being a part of the outcome equation, and now he's been taken out of it completely with these VAR decisions. I guessing it all seemed like a good idea on paper though
Was it UEFA that brought it in or the Premier League? I don't quite understand these things. Whoever it was, it seems that it's about appeasing those who shout loudest and a wink towards the new money in the game. Everyone knows that football is as much about mistakes as it is brilliance and acts of genius, and as important in my opinion.As an entertainment product that attracts billions of viewers it was a bad move, but I agree with what you said about the ref being a part of the outcome equation, and now he's been taken out of it completely with these VAR decisions. I guessing it all seemed like a good idea on paper though
I think the offside rule should be tweaked in as much as, if any part of the attackers body (yes even his little finger nail) is onside, then it is not offside. I was always under the impression that attackers were supposed to be given the benefit of the doubt in any borderline decisions, I was clearly wrong.
Posting Permissions
