Terriers boss Corberan questions VAR after defeat
Huddersfield's Carlos Corberan questions the purpose of VAR after decisions go against them in their play-off final defeat by Nottingham Forest.
www.bbc.co.uk
- Status
www.bbc.co.uk
Said this for a bit. The whole thing needs ripping up and starting again.
Captain has a couple of challenges a game. In all seriousness you are probs only really looking at 1 or 2 each. Penalties and serious foul play, and very obvious offside.
This whole toenail tip for offside needs to do one. But that whole law needs to be changed anyway. I like whole body has to be offside.
Nobody else gets to make a call on what goes to var. Only the captains and the ref, if he thinks he might have missed something.
Then it goes to an official in the stadium and be makes the call. All miked up so the whole stadium and TV audience can hear.
VAR isn't the problem. The officials are. It's either corruption or incompetence.
I'd like to see the managers given 3 challenges each, where they can force the officials to review a decision. It won't stop the official making the wrong decision, but it gives them fewer places to hide.
I'd like to see the managers given 3 challenges each, where they can force the officials to review a decision. It won't stop the official making the wrong decision, but it gives them fewer places to hide.
Three would be too many. It'd be like crack for time wasting. It'd also get unleashed every time the opposition team scored, in the hope some minor infraction earlier in the build-up leads to the goal being chalked off.
If something like this were to come in, I think it'd be no more than one challenge, that you keep it if your challenge is successful.
It would depend on how it's implemented. The manager could go through the 4th official and if there's no justification for the challenge, it gets rejected. Most of it could happen behind the scenes while the play continues.
Then we're back to square one with the officials deciding what's justified and what isn't.
VAR is just a way to manipulate a match. Nothing to do with improving decision making because it has made the standard of officiating much worse.
It's a farcical system and ruining the game.
It's a farcical system and ruining the game.
There should be challenges, so that officials MUST review when asked and it is taken out of their hands. We currently have them picking and choosing what to look at and it does not work and never will work.
Give each manager one challenge per half and if you waste it, then tough.
Yes, that's pretty much exactly what I said a couple of posts up. Except I think anything more than one per match and it'd be rife for abuse.
Death
I'll take down dat coal powered MG, I tel u Hwat
Imagine willingly admitting incompetence on some of them decisions. It's like an elite level surgeon (cause that's what they are supposed to be elite) coming into work and looking at his scalpel bemused wondering what it is used for.
OK fair enough hide behind a lie of incompetence. But you can't ever work again and probably get medical attention and get a quack Dr to diagnose you with dementia.
Atleast do that... but no its 'whoops I spent 5 mins reviewing a blatant handball from all angles in slow mo only to not give it. On the the next game. Sorry about that. Damn you incompetence.'
OK fair enough hide behind a lie of incompetence. But you can't ever work again and probably get medical attention and get a quack Dr to diagnose you with dementia.
Atleast do that... but no its 'whoops I spent 5 mins reviewing a blatant handball from all angles in slow mo only to not give it. On the the next game. Sorry about that. Damn you incompetence.'
I think one a half is probably ok, but anything more would definitely be too much. You would only challenge if you thought there was a definite chance of it being overturned in your favour.
You'd maybe also need to stop team challenges within the last 5 minutes of each half and let the VAR run those periods, like inside the 2 minute warning in the NFL. Otherwise, you would have people just using them as a time wasting mechanism.
I agree, but it would remove this bollocks about what is a "clear and obvious error". They would have to review the decision and then tell the manager they have rejected their challenge. It shines the spotlight on the integrity and competence of those making the decisions.
The last thing we want to do is introduce more bureaucracy, though - so the idea of some sort of pre-challenge screening by the fourth official doesn't cut it with me.
One challenge, use it wisely. Anything more and time wasting becomes a regular thing, I think.
The last thing I want is for Premier League football to be slowed down anymore. Leave the stop-start borefest to the NFL.
I didn't mean it would be pre-screened by 4th official alone. The example I was thinking of was in response to your point about managers taking the piss. If they went to the 4th official and said something like "there was a foul on my player in the build-up to that goal", they could do a quick review and if there was no foul at all they reject it without doing the more detailed review.
Yeah, but that's exactly the subjectivity we're all pissed off with, isn't it? And it's another layer of it we don't need.
- Status
Similar Threads
-
-
Points gained vs Points lost in the last 10 minutes- Started by BackRow PE6
- Replies: 16
-
