Putting a limit on VAR

[mkhammer]

Var is Doing it's job as intended......to create incidences and Drama/Talking points for the Studio "Experts" and TV Audience....
So even a dull 0-0 will have some Drama potentially to Bang on about....
It's obviously still a judgement call...not for spotting clear cuts and errors...Souceks goal proved that beyond doubt...
and a judgement call by one bloke...that 95% of footie world says was wrong....how ridiculous can it get....

How any genuine Footie fan can want it beggars believe...less of course you have something to gain from it...Sky/BT..Pundits
etc.. of course....

You can't cheer a goal anymore,you just gotta wait....TV or at the ground...you get up to cheer,but straight away
stop...waiting to see if the refs holding his fuckin ear...

Only way it can work,is on an appeal basis...each team has 2...

We leave it up to the Ref,he's just gonna get hounded Constantly.....REF REF take a look he was off...blah blah blah...
a Cheats Arse game would take about 5 hours.....

[Dwayne Pipes]

As an aside this drink break shit is also a load of fucking bollocks.

[Newmarket]

Cricket has an appeal system for a 'Clear and Obvious error'. Otherwise the decision stays with the umpire.

Four minutes to rule on a decision is farcical. And it's one of the reasons football has become a laughing stock.

I watched a re-run of the Arse against us in 1977 yesterday. A 3-2 win at Highbury full of excitement and passion. Alan Taylor scored twice. Each of them now would have been met with minutes of scrutiny, one for possible offside, one for a foul in the build-up.

Of course it's nice getting the correct decision but never at the expense of surgically removing the passion.

Immediately a goal's scored, look at still pictures. If a slide-rule has to be used to look at lines, that's bollocks. If the naked eye can't over-rule whatever decision the ref has made then stick with that decision.

Simples.

As the furry fucker says.

Surely you mean 1975.? I remember that game. The F A Cup Quarter Final as I recall. It pissed down nearly all day and the pitch was like a paddy field. Of course if you do really mean 1977 it probably didn't piss down, but as I don't remember it I can't really comment.

Agree with your "naked eye" assessment. I think that is covered by the clear & obvious clause and would stop a lot of the present nonsense.

It was 1977.

The 75 Qf was 2-0.

[palerider]

Cricket has an appeal system for a 'Clear and Obvious error'. Otherwise the decision stays with the umpire.

Four minutes to rule on a decision is farcical. And it's one of the reasons football has become a laughing stock.

I watched a re-run of the Arse against us in 1977 yesterday. A 3-2 win at Highbury full of excitement and passion. Alan Taylor scored twice. Each of them now would have been met with minutes of scrutiny, one for possible offside, one for a foul in the build-up.

Of course it's nice getting the correct decision but never at the expense of surgically removing the passion.

Immediately a goal's scored, look at still pictures. If a slide-rule has to be used to look at lines, that's bollocks. If the naked eye can't over-rule whatever decision the ref has made then stick with that decision.

Simples.

As the furry fucker says.

Surely you mean 1975.? I remember that game. The F A Cup Quarter Final as I recall. It pissed down nearly all day and the pitch was like a paddy field. Of course if you do really mean 1977 it probably didn't piss down, but as I don't remember it I can't really comment.

Agree with your "naked eye" assessment. I think that is covered by the clear & obvious clause and would stop a lot of the present nonsense.

February 1977 Whisky, so it said on ITV 4. Goals by Taylor (2) and Billy Jennings.

I didn't go for some reason as it was around that time I went all over the country.

[Whiskyman]

Surely you mean 1975.? I remember that game. The F A Cup Quarter Final as I recall. It pissed down nearly all day and the pitch was like a paddy field. Of course if you do really mean 1977 it probably didn't piss down, but as I don't remember it I can't really comment.

Agree with your "naked eye" assessment. I think that is covered by the clear & obvious clause and would stop a lot of the present nonsense.

It was 1977.

The 75 Qf was 2-0.

Course it was. That Alzheimer's must be taking effect again.

[ToneLoc]

For a start....put a "time" limit on VAR decisions.
10, maybe 20 seconds? If they can't decide then it stays as the ref's original call.

Also, as the original poster said, make it an appeal system where the captain of each team has X number of calls each half?

[eskimo joe]

Offside rule is a joke, the original reason for its introduction has been lost and forgotten, instead being replaced by VAR and its slide rules.

As for the away team getting one extra appeal, Why?! makes no sense.

VAR isnt doing away with the problems, its just causing new ones. Kanes disallowed goal is an example, Surely the hand ball that came because of a foul left to advantage though disallowed, should then have reverted to a free kick to spuds not a goal kick to the opposition.

It isnt VAR that is wrong, and i have said it in the past, its the people operating it, so all VAR has done is to make idiotic decisions done by the ref without it seem ten times worse by using it.

[Towie]

Agree with the time limit, if it takes over a minute to decide stick with original decision.
Needs to be at least a minute for those tight offside calls, like the Sun one for Spuds against us, tight call but correct decision. They need at least a minute to draw those lines.

Don’t agree with appeals system, if it wrong it is wrong.

[ToneLoc]

Offside rule is a joke, the original reason for its introduction has been lost and forgotten, instead being replaced by VAR and its slide rules.

As for the away team getting one extra appeal, Why?! makes no sense.

VAR isnt doing away with the problems, its just causing new ones. Kanes disallowed goal is an example, Surely the hand ball that came because of a foul left to advantage though disallowed, should then have reverted to a free kick to spuds not a goal kick to the opposition.

It isnt VAR that is wrong, and i have said it in the past, its the people operating it, so all VAR has done is to make idiotic decisions done by the ref without it seem ten times worse by using it.

Technology should be used to assist officials with making correct decisions. All it's doing in it's current incarnation is making the officials even more the centre-point of the game and attention.
In today's celebrity-obsessed world this is perfect for the masquerading little thespians in black.

[terrya1965]

For a start....put a "time" limit on VAR decisions.
10, maybe 20 seconds? If they can't decide then it stays as the ref's original call.

Also, as the original poster said, make it an appeal system where the captain of each team has X number of calls each half?

The 20 second thing is good enough.

It just makes the whole thing complicated with an appeal system and stops the game.