Football 17/18

[pink_triangle]

2 hours ago, WS_Jack_III said:

Agree to disagree with you all, I'd rather see the game fair than having to talk about how my team (or any team) was cheated of a point/all three.

So an attacking team are narrowly offside, the forward goes through and hits it over the bar. Do we need to then correct this and give a free kick rather than a goal kick?

[WS_Jack_III]

2 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

So an attacking team are narrowly offside, the forward goes through and hits it over the bar. Do we need to then correct this and give a free kick rather than a goal kick?

If you had someone instantly available to make this call, then yes. That isn't how the system is being used.

[eastynh]

13 hours ago, eFestivals said:

I disagree.

Not spoiling the game called football is the most important thing.

No its not. Getting the correct decisions is the most important thing.

I am more in favour of a review type system. Each teams gets one review per half. 

[ThomThomDrum]

On 1/28/2018 at 9:04 AM, eFestivals said:

VAR is for w*nkers, who think football should or can be perfect. It's a game. The clue is in the word.

Every suspect decision will stop the game, and as last night proved it's not for a minute or two. It's like giving the ref-surrounding w*nkers at Chelsea a final victory.

If VAR had existed since the dawn of football, football anything like we know it wouldn't exist. It would not be a game that tens of thousands of fans attend for excitement.

Seems a bit OTT.

I watch plenty of other sports were VAR is used and dont feel it affects the game in an overly negative way. I just believe that football, if bringing it in, need to eventually get a balance between using it to aid officials and relying on it too heavily to the detriment of the game and its over all flow and atmosphere. I would suggest there is a balance that can be found in this regard, but it may take time and a fair bit of tweaking. 

[zahidf]

12 hours ago, kaosmark2 said:

I have no problem with automated technology (has the ball crossed the line, and potentially offside), but the ref wasting time in a game to check a decision ruins the flow of the game. Fuck video technology, particularly regarding any issues which involve potentially different interpretations of the rules.

I think it will get faster the more its used. Its in its infancy after all.

The decisions made were right. If it wants to be seen as a legitimate sport, the rules have to be adhered to. And if it means it discourages dives e.t.c, thats for the good.

[TheGayTent]

Just now, zahidf said:

I think it will get faster the more its used. Its in its infancy after all.

The decisions made were right. If it wants to be seen as a legitimate sport, the rules have to be adhered to. And if it means it discourages dives e.t.c, thats for the good.

VAR should never ever be used for diving. Or anything else that can be subjective for that matter.

Something black and white like whether a ball has crossed the line, as long as the decision can be made almost instantaneously then fine. 

[eFestivals]

1 hour ago, eastynh said:

No its not. Getting the correct decisions is the most important thing.

yeah, let's have a shit boring game of football that no one wants to watch, but at least none of the decisions are wrong or can be talked about until the next game.

The fans will go on home, and football is dead.

It didn't get to be the most popular game in the world because the rules were always called right, in case you've failed to notice.

Edited January 29, 2018 by eFestivals

[eastynh]

12 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

yeah, let's have a shit boring game of football that no one wants to watch, but at least none of the decisions are wrong or can be talked about until the next game.

The fans will go on home, and football is dead.

It didn't get to be the most popular game in the world because the rules were always called right, in case you've failed to notice.

More time is wasted on throw ins, lining up a wall for a free kick, goal keeper wasting time on dead balls and so on. I would rather they address those issues than not address the issues with getting decisions correct.

Yesterday was a perfect illustration of why it needs bringing in. Bernardos goal was legitimate. It took longer for them to mess about and untimately get the decision wrong than it would have done for VAR to get it correct. As for the dirty bastard who toom Sane out, that was a clear red card.

[eFestivals]

5 minutes ago, eastynh said:

More time is wasted on throw ins, lining up a wall for a free kick, goal keeper wasting time on dead balls and so on.

not true.

and anyway, if it's so very important that other decisions are right, it won't be long before they're all under review too - cos every single thing which happens on the pitch affects how the rest of the game pans out.

The players are already demanding reviews from the ref, so it's just added a further layer of delay, and often for no better a decision than the ref could have given.

Edited January 29, 2018 by eFestivals

[zahidf]

17 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

not true.

and anyway, if it's so very important that other decisions are right, it won't be long before they're all under review too - cos every single thing which happens on the pitch affects how the rest of the game pans out.

The players are already demanding reviews from the ref, so it's just added a further layer of delay, and often for no better a decision than the ref could have given.

should be like cricket: a team has 2 reviews, and they lose one if the reviews go against them

[pink_triangle]

2 hours ago, WS_Jack_III said:

If you had someone instantly available to make this call, then yes. That isn't how the system is being used.

If its marginal we then have to let someone look at it a few times to make a decision. I dont see what is gained from adding breaks in the games to correct minor decisions. There are so many decisions in a game of football, aiming for perfection would have a huge impact on the flow of the game. 

[pink_triangle]

54 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

VAR should never ever be used for diving. Or anything else that can be subjective for that matter.

Something black and white like whether a ball has crossed the line, as long as the decision can be made almost instantaneously then fine. 

I agree with that, the trouble is as time goes on I think its only going to creep in more with subjective matters.

[pink_triangle]

10 minutes ago, zahidf said:

should be like cricket: a team has 2 reviews, and they lose one if the reviews go against them

In a system like that, what do you think a team 1-0 up with 2 reviews left are going to do as the game nears a close? Its an invitation for legitimizing time wasting. 

[jyoung]

In other news... A great move for Ulloa and Brighton. Scored plenty in his previous stint in the Championship and was particularly underrated during his time at Leicester. I reckon he'll deliver the goals that Brighton have been missing and possibly help keep them up.

[eastynh]

39 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

not true.

and anyway, if it's so very important that other decisions are right, it won't be long before they're all under review too - cos every single thing which happens on the pitch affects how the rest of the game pans out.

The players are already demanding reviews from the ref, so it's just added a further layer of delay, and often for no better a decision than the ref could have given.

The ball is in play for around 60 minutes out of the 90. We already lose 30 mins for breaks in play.

 

[WS_Jack_III]

Also, after a goal it takes about 2 mins until the game gets back underway so it has zero effect in terms of stoppage if a goal has to be reviewed.

[TheGayTent]

1 hour ago, zahidf said:

should be like cricket: a team has 2 reviews, and they lose one if the reviews go against them

Using it in cricket has not removed controversial decisions. 

[Wooderson]

Sexist Phil's interview was grim viewing.

[eFestivals]

2 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

I agree with that, the trouble is as time goes on I think its only going to creep in more with subjective matters.

it'll creep in more and more for over-the-line stuff too, as there's more than just a goal-line on the pitch, and even a wrongly-given throw-in can cause the game to pan out differently to what "the rules" would have happen.

[eFestivals]

1 hour ago, WS_Jack_III said:

Also, after a goal it takes about 2 mins until the game gets back underway so it has zero effect in terms of stoppage if a goal has to be reviewed.

that's certainly not been the case so far.

[eFestivals]

2 hours ago, eastynh said:

The ball is in play for around 60 minutes out of the 90. We already lose 30 mins for breaks in play.

 

so get ready to lose even more, as well as the flow of the game.

Edited January 29, 2018 by eFestivals

[Hugh Jass]

Looks like Daniel Sturridge is coming to us on loan. Hopefully it’ll be a move to suit all parties - he scores the goals to keep us up and get himself into the England squad.

[WS_Jack_III]

5 minutes ago, Hugh Jass said:

Looks like Daniel Sturridge is coming to us on loan. Hopefully it’ll be a move to suit all parties - he scores the goals to keep us up and get himself into the England squad.

Newcastle fans have been on a right roller coaster today. 

Someone I really wanted, looked like he was on his way to us then WBA have turned his head at the last minute. 

 

Getting pretty depressing for us now.

[mjsell]

23 hours ago, eFestivals said:

Nope, they're what create the talking points which make the game interesting.

I get the valid arguments about it slowing the game down and killing the flow of football matches, but this bullshit strikes me as classic media spin fodder that has no substance to back it up. 

Many of the decisions that var will have a say on (such as the Liveroool penalty) are still subjective decisions that people will debate no matter what is given.

[eFestivals]

4 minutes ago, mjsell said:

I get the valid arguments about it slowing the game down and killing the flow of football matches, but this bullshit strikes me as classic media spin fodder that has no substance to back it up. 

Many of the decisions that var will have a say on (such as the Liveroool penalty) are still subjective decisions that people will debate no matter what is given.

It's not bullshit. 

If there's fewer decisions to be argued over, then there's less to say about the game, less reason for people to get passionate ... and ultimately less reason for people to have an interest in the game.

As i pointed out, it got to be the most popular game in the world without rule/ref perfection. Can you *really* be sure that interest levels will be maintained when there's less to be interested about?

Edited January 29, 2018 by eFestivals