Group C: Argentina, Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Poland

[TheBigIguana]

You have actually watched how VAR works in reality, right?

Or ever attended a game of football before you had to wait 5 minutes to see if you were allowed to enjoy a moment that's long since passed?

Again just be honest about what you're in it for

 

[Lee Smith]

If you're not bothered about accuracy from the refs that's fine. But you're looking for WWE not competition

You're dead weird

 

[4 Eyes Better Than 2]

Absolute parody account, surely to god.

Oil talking guff shocker.

He woke up at 4 or 5 am to be here watching this game and talking his talk.

Feel blessed Michael. Embrace it

 

[MikeH72]

You have actually watched how VAR works in reality, right?

Or ever attended a game of football before you had to wait 5 minutes to see if you were allowed to enjoy a moment that's long since passed?

Don’t be ridiculous, of course he hasn’t.

 

[TheBigIguana]

I'm fine with the right decisions being given

The problem isn't so much VAR as it is the way it is used

"Clear and obvious" is what it's supposed to be for, and if it was just used for that then I doubt there'd be as much consternation

There would though

 

[Wat Tyler]

 

[MikeH72]

Again just be honest about what you're in it for

What are you in it for? You started watching the sport in 2014 and all you witter on about on here is data and numbers, you aren’t a football fan.

 

[Lobster Johnson]

As opposed to some guy stationed on the side who can't possibly see it accurately every time? Yeah fine with me.

The calls usually aren't wrong, they just don't do what you want.

Leave aside if the calls are right or wrong under the laws. If anyone with eyes can see that goal would never have been offside for the last 50 years, like Richarlison's 2 against Arsenal last season, why on earth should they respect an attempt to make a call objective when 1) it's still subjective 2) It's officiated by the same people who meant it was introduced in the 1st place 3) You can't see or hear anything about how a decision is made as a match going fan and 4) YOU CAN STILL SEE IT'S NEVER OFFSIDE?

The law's an ass.

 

[MikeH72]

On no planet is that offside, his shoulder/armpit/whatever they’re trying to use to make him offside, is still onside. Level is onside.

Edit: LOOK AT THE LEFT BACK!!!!

 

[Lobster Johnson]

Who can honestly say they enjoy football more because a good goal is chalked off for that?

 

[TheBigIguana]

Leave aside if the calls are right or wrong. If anyone with eyes can see that goal would never have been offside for the last 50 years, like Richarlison's 2 against Arsenal last season, why on earth should they respect an attempt to make a call objective when 1) it's still subjective 2) It's officiated by the same people who meant it was introduced in the 1st place 3) You can't see or hear anything about how a decision is made as a match going fan and 4) YOU CAN STILL SEE IT'S NEVER OFFSIDE?

Is it subjective?

 

[Lobster Johnson]

Is it subjective?

Look at that photo above. Are you confident you can call that offside? Can you show me how it's offside?

 

[MikeH72]

Have they genuinely just completely missed the left back playing everyone onside? Because they drew the line from Martinez’s armpit to the guy’s toe stood next to him.

 

[TheBigIguana]

Look at that photo above. Are you confident you can call that offside? Can you show me how it's offside?

I'm not because that camera isn't looking down the line.

But then they used something that allows you to look and it was offside.

 

[Lobster Johnson]

I'm not because that camera isn't looking down the line.

But then they used something that allows you to look and it was offside.

Ah right. Where was I able to see that? Cos as @MikeH72 points out, the left back is playing him on there.

Incompetence is still subjective.

EDIT: And, again, if it's that close... Why are we chalking off a goal for something that the naked eye can't discern? It's a game of football, we're not trialling cancer drugs here.