VAR

mrb85 · June 16, 2018

French penalty - proof if ever necessary that VAR is just as likely to make good decisions bad as put incorrect decisions right. A total farce. And whatever happened to the need to be absolutely sure when applying VAR to change a decision?

Marius57 · June 16, 2018

So the game carried on until it went out of play. What would have happened is Australia had scored in that time? Would they have disallowed it and gone back to the penalty? Does the time played before the decision is brought back not count or is it just a late decision that gets put in at the time they decide?

Azzurri · June 16, 2018

Marius57 said:
So the game carried on until it went out of play. What would have happened is Australia had scored in that time? Would they have disallowed it and gone back to the penalty? Does the time played before the decision is brought back not count or is it just a late decision that gets put in at the time they decide?

This is the point I always make.

I do think it was a pen, though.

TheBlueGibbon · June 16, 2018

mrb85 said:
French penalty - proof if ever necessary that VAR is just as likely to make good decisions bad as put incorrect decisions right. A total farce. And whatever happened to the need to be absolutely sure when applying VAR to change a decision?

It wasn't a clear and obvious mistake, so it should never have been used for the French penalty.

Marius57 · June 16, 2018

Azzurri said:
This is the point I always make.

I do think it was a pen, though.

When it’s really slowed down, there is a clear change of ball direction. However, I can see why it was given. I just think the rules aren’t clear and to be trying it out at the World Cup is a stupid idea. It needs to be working and perfect before being used on this stage. And if Australia had gone and scored straight away, then I just don’t get how it works. Surely the time played gets cancelled and added on at the end from when the decision does get made.

Walken · June 16, 2018

It's absolutely pointless or anything that can be objective, and takes away from the spectacle as it mutes celebration waiting for VAR confirmation, get rid and accept the odd bad decision

McBain · June 16, 2018

Epic Fail.

Bruce Wayne · June 16, 2018

No one wants to see refereeing decisions decide matches, so I support its use, but it does need ironing out. I'm surprised given the level of technology available to video refs in sports like cricket and tennis how low tech it is in football. With all the money that's sloshing about there has been no smart company able to develop anything to help a ref who just has to rely on watching television replays.

Ring master · June 16, 2018

Not been a fan since its been allowed,a few games in Italy the ref has give pens for fouls thats didnt even happen,and can not see it getting better no matter how many people say give it time

Azzurri · June 16, 2018

Marius57 said:
When it’s really slowed down, there is a clear change of ball direction. However, I can see why it was given. I just think the rules aren’t clear and to be trying it out at the World Cup is a stupid idea. It needs to be working and perfect before being used on this stage. And if Australia had gone and scored straight away, then I just don’t get how it works. Surely the time played gets cancelled and added on at the end from when the decision does get made.

He definitely got a touch on the ball, but I think Griezmann was running on to it for a shot when he was brought down.

McBain · June 16, 2018

I'm a fan of it, but that was just cheating.

Azzurri said:
He definitely got a touch on the ball, but I think Griezmann was running on to it for a shot when he was brought down.

You mean as it pinged off his foot straight to the keeper? Is he Inspector Gadget?

Azzurri · June 16, 2018

McBain said:
I'm a fan of it, but that was just cheating.

You mean as it pinged off his foot straight to the keeper? Is he Inspector Gadget?

There’s a chance he’d have got there. Maybe not, but it wasn’t in the keeper’s arms when he was fouled or anything.

McBain · June 16, 2018

Azzurri said:
There’s a chance he’d have got there. Maybe not, but it wasn’t in the keeper’s arms when he was fouled or anything.

I'm deffo biased as this was a massive game for us, but something in watching the original play, at speed; its a fantastic tackle.

Look at it this way - say the same challenge gets slightly more of the ball, and Risden cleans up Greaseman side on - No way anyone would call that a foul. That's a fantastic tackle.

Seamus Colemole · June 16, 2018

McBain said:
I'm deffo biased as this was a massive game for us, but something in watching the original play, at speed; its a fantastic tackle.

Look at it this way - say the same challenge gets slightly more of the ball, and Risden cleans up Greaseman side on - No way anyone would call that a foul. That's a fantastic tackle.

Completely agree. If Risden had wrapped his footround the ball and played it out for a throw in, but still tripped Griezeman i'm pretty sure the ref wouldn't have given a foul and it would have been a great tackle.

Because it wouldn't have been considered careless, it was would have been considered a well thought out and well executed tackle.

That's the difference.