zuricity wrote:mr_nool wrote:Beefymcfc wrote:When we were told about VAR I was all for it but concerned that it could be used as a tool to manipulate games. Now, from what I've seen in the WC, I know it's a tool to manipulate games. Not for certain clubs, that may come later, but to keep the groups interesting until the final game.
Early on they gave a penalty for arms around and dragging a player down yet on a few further occasions we see nothing. We have also seen the VAR tell the referee to review an incident, which was highly contentious, yet we have not seen it on obvious ones like tonight.
VAR is being utilised to manipulate games to make the whole thing more interesting, therefore to keep the viewing public interested, making the owner more money.
I'd be interested to know if anybody thinks different because this really concerns me.
See my ramblings in the World Cup thread. I think it should be done by appeal. Give each team a fixed number of appeals per game, just like hawk eye challenges in tennis.
Oh dear , Oh dear
Don't mix the two .What does Hawkeye do ?
Think about it ?
It is a simple black or white scenario
Ball in or ball out , that is it . How often does a ball get hit so finitely close to a line ?
Now apply that simple logic to whether a handball is a handball or not . You have no chance . Then there are loads of other scenarios that are contentious in football . Particularly the fcuking Diving !
You oversimplify the referees job comparing Tennis (ffs) to Football.
There's no need to be condescending.
I don't mix the two, you are. The discussion in the other thread was about keeping the VAR from being yet another tool for the powers that be to influence games the way they want to. An appeal system is one way to do that. I drew to comparison to tennis simply because Hawkeye is employed on an appeal basis – I am fully aware that it works totally different than VAR and that the technology is more like the goal line technology.
I'm also aware that a lot of situations that are being reviewed (or will be challenged) are not black and white. That problem is evident already in this WC. My suggestion to deal with that is that the referee's decision should stand unless it's blatantly clet that it is wrong. Of course, there are bigger issues to solve for this to work well: make the handball and offside rule easier and less open to interpretation, set clearer standards for which tackles are classed as red or yellow card offences, etc.)
Beefy brings up a good argument against is, i.e. that it can be used by teams to break up play. That's a valid point, and there would have to be rules to prevent such things (very limited number of appeals, penalties for frivolous appeals, etc.).
Feel free to disagree, but at least bring up valid arguments and cut out the patronising shit.