@Uncle_T said:
This video is a good example of how a referee and his assistants interact, including in relation to a goal versus offside decision that is reviewed by VAR:
You need referees with some rapport with the players to referee like that though. Unfortunately I could count the amount of times I've seen that live on one hand (both playing and watching).
For some reason I remember this game, I thought he was reffing his last game over there because he was coming over here, might be wrong
@DevC said:
I think we might be on this one @micra. prob my fault.
@Twizz said:
Can anyone explain to me why, if it has to be a clear and obvious error for VAR to become involved, they need to take nearly 3 minutes to decide if a player was offside? It's patently not clear and obvious!
Whoever is responsible for the implementation of VAR in the PL is not applying the laws of the game as written by the IFAB and should be held to account.for ruining the spectacle that is live football.
Offside is offside. As the rules stand if any part of the body (apart from arm and hand) is ahead, you are offside. End of. Unlike many football refereeing decisions it is a matter of fact. Are you arguing with VAR implementing the rule or the rule itself?
Essentially without VAR todays method on really close offside decisions is that some bloke holding a flag essentially guesses. That until recently was the best we could do. Now we can get those decisions right. Lets pretend it was the other way around. We have had Video for years for offside but some bright spark suggests we abandon it and switch instead to some guy trying to judge split second movements with a naked eye and raising a flag. Do you think we would switch?
"some bloke holding a flag essentially guesses" - could be male or female and no they don't, that is a ridiculous statement
Your views as ever are completely hamstrung by your complete emotional detachment from the experience of watching football. That won't change, it's just the way it is. But the number of people agreeing with you is dwindling by the week, as more and more games are completely ruined. I'm hopeful that at some point sense will be seen and we'll be rid of it forever.
Lets pretend it was the other way around. We have had Video for years for offside but some bright spark suggests we abandon it and switch instead to some guy trying to judge split second movements with a naked eye and raising a flag. Do you think we would switch?
@DevC aaah that brings back memories of El Tel singing the praises of astroturf - people in the future say 2019 - would apparently look back and laugh at the thought of playing on grass. ho ho ho!
Someone on the wing being penalised for having his nose over an imaginary line when someone in the middle scores a goal is no fun. A referee in an office miles away taking three minutes to decide on that also no fun. I'm glad we don't have it.
@Wendoverman said:
VAR, sin-bins and the ref mic'd up? Anyone else feel the excitement of live sport being sucked out of football...all we'll have left is limbs.
Yep, if they take away our right to clatter kids, women and oldies into railings and then taunt them with "well, you know it happens", then it won't be worth going anymore.
@Uncle_T said:
This video is a good example of how a referee and his assistants interact, including in relation to a goal versus offside decision that is reviewed by VAR:
You need referees with some rapport with the players to referee like that though. Unfortunately I could count the amount of times I've seen that live on one hand (both playing and watching).
For some reason I remember this game, I thought he was reffing his last game over there because he was coming over here, might be wrong
Yep, highly rated young ref, who from that clip is the type of referee that players do respect.
On the offside rule, that's the one area I think that the rules need adjusting for VAR (if we are to persist with it). Need to reintroduce the daylight rule or a DRS style umpires call zone to stop the ridiculous 1 mm calls being made right now. Offside is one rule, if implemented sensibly could be improved by VAR as it should be objective.
@Wendoverman said:
VAR, sin-bins and the ref mic'd up? Anyone else feel the excitement of live sport being sucked out of football...all we'll have left is limbs.
Yep, if they take away our right to clatter kids, women and oldies into railings and then taunt them with "well, you know it happens", then it won't be worth going anymore.
At least we can still confront players in local shops or at ATMS for controversial twitter posts!
@Wendoverman said:
VAR, sin-bins and the ref mic'd up? Anyone else feel the excitement of live sport being sucked out of football...all we'll have left is limbs.
Yep, if they take away our right to clatter kids, women and oldies into railings and then taunt them with "well, you know it happens", then it won't be worth going anymore.
At least we can still confront players in local shops or at ATMS for controversial twitter posts!
Of course!
All good "banter" until you realise a super built beast of a player may react like anyone else in the world, to some gimp taunting them from close range
"some bloke holding a flag essentially guesses" - could be male or female and no they don't, that is a ridiculous statement
Your views as ever are completely hamstrung by your complete emotional detachment from the experience of watching football. That won't change, it's just the way it is. But the number of people agreeing with you is dwindling by the week, as more and more games are completely ruined. I'm hopeful that at some point sense will be seen and we'll be rid of it forever.
No human eye can reliably judge a really tight offside where the linesman (or as you say very occasionally in the mens game lineswoman) has to look at both the ball being kicked and judge the precise position of a guy often running at full speed towards the goal and a defender often running away from goal. Its impossible. And so I am afraid on the really tight ones, all they can do is essentially guess. simple reality.
Now as it happens I would agree with @Username that the latest wording of the offside rule is probably wrong and it would be better if it was redrafted as level being onside but the rule is the rule as it is and wherever the line is drawn there will always be marginal decisions.
A VAR style system will always make better decisions than the human eye for offside calls. That surely is obvious. You may judge that getting them right is not worth the time delay and I understand that argument. It is hard to argue though surely that APART from the time delay issue some bloke (or woman) with a flag is an intrinsically better system.
As I said above, there is a hysteria about VAR at present and in that environment it will be blamed for all ills. I will look at a randomly chosen game in a fortnight (Bournemouth- Wolves) to see if VAR improves, detracts or makes no difference to that game.
@Wendoverman said:
VAR, sin-bins and the ref mic'd up? Anyone else feel the excitement of live sport being sucked out of football...all we'll have left is limbs.
Yep, if they take away our right to clatter kids, women and oldies into railings and then taunt them with "well, you know it happens", then it won't be worth going anymore.
At least we can still confront players in local shops or at ATMS for controversial twitter posts!
Of course!
All good "banter" until you realise a super built beast of a player may react like anyone else in the world, to some gimp taunting them from close range
All I said was 'Hey Pierre the team was somewhat under par today and your contribution though generally good was not up to your usual high standards...' and he ****ing nutted me!
Well @Wendoverman that is the judgement call we have to make. Are you suggesting then that IF perfect offside decisions could be made instantly, you would nonetheless prefer them to be guessed. Perhaps we should introduce blind linesmen to increase that chance element (some would say we already do.....)
Indeed and I've made it. A nose offside will never be interfering with play even if it crosses the robotic rubicon in my opinion, so yes, I prefer human beings driving things, flying things, manning telephones, serving me in shops and waddling up and down the touchline making decisions at a live sporting event. I did not realise it was a stark choice between VAR and disabled officials though...
@DevC said:
Well @Wendoverman that is the judgement call we have to make. Are you suggesting then that IF perfect offside decisions could be made instantly, you would nonetheless prefer them to be guessed. Perhaps we should introduce blind linesmen to increase that chance element (some would say we already do.....)
@DevC said:
Offside is offside. As the rules stand if any part of the body (apart from arm and hand) is ahead, you are offside. End of. [...] Essentially without VAR todays method on really close offside decisions is that some bloke holding a flag essentially guesses. That until recently was the best we could do. Now we can get those decisions right.
But we can't can we. They're still having to guess at what point between two frames the ball touched a player, and then they're drawing the lines on a frame to one side of that, and quite often they're also having to guess where parts of players are that are obscured by other players. It's not black and white, it's pure guesswork still.
@Wendoverman and @drcongo have summed up the current climate better than I could.
For @Wendoverman, both making the existing way of judging offside better or worse detracts from his excitement. Only the existing method will do. Only the best technology available when he was a lad can possibly be the right solution. I am afraid it is pure luddism (ludditeism)?
For @drcongo, he appears to be arguing that the human eye at normal speed is more likely to get an offside call right than technology. While recognising that no system is ever perfect, that is surely patent nonsense. His case seems to be based on reaching his desired conclusion first and then fitting the facts to suit rather than seeing where reality takes him.
If either f them had argued that while clearly technology is more likely to get the decision right but in their view the time delay is simply not worth it, i would understand their point of view. As we are currently using it, it sometimes is taking far too long. That needs to improve. The evidence from other countries suggests it does as referees get more used to it.
I will look again iwth fresh eyes starting with my randomly chosen game at the next round of fixtures - Bournemouth v Wolves. it may be controversial, it may not be, lets see.
For @Wendoverman, both making the existing way of judging offside better or worse detracts from his excitement. Only the existing method will do. Only the best technology available when he was a lad can possibly be the right solution. I am afraid it is pure luddism (ludditeism)?
Yes that's right El Dev, I want blind linesmen like we had in my youth. I was quite happy for goal-line technology to be introduced and I will even put up with a ticket app I suppose, but VAR technology has been introduced to stop multi-million pound foreign owned businesses losing money on marginal decisions and it's present incarnation as such is destroying the game I like to watch. If it squirts down to our level I would be very unhappy. But rest assured you can smile smugly as you observe the soccer on the tellybox safe in the knowledge every decision is perfect (oh...even though it isn't) and human error and possible bias has been removed (which...er...it hasn't) and laugh at the thought people used to play on grass...
Also for the record I don't give a big fat flying **** if you can or cannot understand my point of view or what you think about the next game you watch on the telly.
FFS @DevC. There are plenty of us here who attend games regularly, VAR is without doubt a pain in the harris to those of us that have the "joy/rage of the momentary decision", depending on which way the flag goes. Also, the rules of football should be applied no matter the level of the pyramid to every game. The one constant, without VAR, is the human element of those who are charged with applying them. So how can you possibly have WWFC v Tranmere Rovers @ AP, Liverpool v Man City @ Anfield & Holy Trinity Kites v Meerkats @ Hazelmere recreation ground with the same application of those rules if you have VAR at only one venue? It's the human element that gives us the opportunity to rage or enjoy as we see it and gives fuel for these forums. I know I am old school, but get rid of the bloody thing and lets argue if it was an offside ad infinitum as we have about the Maradonna handball, the Ainsworth goal that never was v Shrewsbury & the handball goal at Col U. In the end, the bad decisions are few compared to those that are right and as the old saying goes, it all evens out in the end.
On top of the technical limitations, time issues, anti -fan friendliness and sheer pettiness of it at times, I think another problem is that almost every decision the refs get wrong is at least partially debatable, especially by extremely biased football fans. Without VAR everyone could just blame the ref and move on rather than admit they were wrong. Now rather than blaming the refs, it's a continuous question about stupidly technical rules and regulations and VAR itself, and people get even more pissed off when they're essentially being told that even after review the decision was wrong, that your understanding of the rules is wrong or that the game is being changed by the FA because of VAR.
I have been only seen six games of football live this season @EwanHoosaami , a few less perhaps than you. None of those live games have had VAR, the same perhaps as you.
In each of those live games, I have enjoyed the spectacle of 22 players trying to kick a ball into a net. Not once in the 540 minutes, pretty much every one of which I have enjoyed have I thought to myself “what this really needs to make this enjoyable is the referee to make some mistakes.
As I say I understand the time delay arguments against VAR. Actively wanting refereeing errors I find perverse. I suppose we will just have to disagree.
@DevC said:
I have been only seen six games of football live this season @EwanHoosaami , a few less perhaps than you. None of those live games have had VAR, the same perhaps as you.
In each of those live games, I have enjoyed the spectacle of 22 players trying to kick a ball into a net. Not once in the 540 minutes, pretty much every one of which I have enjoyed have I thought to myself “what this really needs to make this enjoyable is the referee to make some mistakes.
As I say I understand the time delay arguments against VAR. Actively wanting refereeing errors I find perverse. I suppose we will just have to disagree.
You wouldn't even notice a huge percentage of the "mistakes" being called by VAR, and most of the times you thought it was a mistake, it wouldn't be still.
Not once in the 540 minutes, pretty much every one of which I have enjoyed have I thought to myself “what this really needs to make this enjoyable is the referee to make some mistakes.
Sweet Jesus
Actively wanting refereeing errors I find perverse.
It is. Which is why no-one is actually advocating it.
Read the posts a couple of times before you respond mate or it just looks like shit stirring.
@DevC said:
I have been only seen six games of football live this season @EwanHoosaami , a few less perhaps than you. None of those live games have had VAR, the same perhaps as you.
In each of those live games, I have enjoyed the spectacle of 22 players trying to kick a ball into a net. Not once in the 540 minutes, pretty much every one of which I have enjoyed have I thought to myself “what this really needs to make this enjoyable is the referee to make some mistakes.
As I say I understand the time delay arguments against VAR. Actively wanting refereeing errors I find perverse. I suppose we will just have to disagree.
This is such a disingenuous argument. No one on earth has ever thought that. The point is, did you at any point think "we could do with a couple of minutes to check the video to see if that goal was offside"?
@DevC said:
For @drcongo, he appears to be arguing that the human eye at normal speed is more likely to get an offside call right than technology. While recognising that no system is ever perfect, that is surely patent nonsense. His case seems to be based on reaching his desired conclusion first and then fitting the facts to suit rather than seeing where reality takes him.
You’re being wilfully thick again, pretending to misunderstand people’s posts just because they prove your “facts” wrong. You claimed that VAR is infallible in offside decisions, removes guesswork and therefore guaranteed to provide us with the correct decision. As is blatantly obvious to everyone except you, all I pointed out was the actual fact that it still involves guesswork. It’s just a different person guessing now with the added benefit (to just you apparently) that it holds up the game and ruins the atmosphere.
Now point out where any of my posts have claimed the human eye is more likely to get the correct guess. Obviously you can’t because you’re doing a Dev again.
It seems pretty simple to me, VAR gets more decisions right, but at the cost of some disruption to the flow. Is it worth that cost? With the current technology and system probably not.
Actually, if you really want your mind blown, watch the starting gun experiment on David Eagleman's The Brain. Our brains process sound faster than they're able to process vision, your brain then delays the processing of the sound so that it re-synchronises the two into something that your brain can make sense of. So, everything you see, even if it's your own hands clapping, actually happened in the past. Paradoxically, a lino who can hear the moment that the ball is kicked may actually be able to judge it better than a video where key information happens between frames.
Utter Sh1t @DevC. In no way am I wishing the the referee to make a mistake and seriously can't see how you've read that in my post?
How about replying to the bit that asks how the laws of the game can be applied evenly throughout the whole of the football pyramid, (bearing in mind that the laws of the game are the same), if the systems in place, are not the same?
@DevC said:
In each of those live games, I have enjoyed the spectacle of 22 players trying to kick a ball into a net. Not once in the 540 minutes, pretty much every one of which I have enjoyed have I thought to myself “what this really needs to make this enjoyable is the referee to make some mistakes.
How many of those games have you thought to yourself, what this game really needs is a big break in play after every offside or goal while some people in another city guess what happened between two frames of video?
Which really begs the question, why the hell do you care about VAR so much when a) you've never been to a game with it, and b) it's never made a difference one way or the other to your life? One can only assume it's contrarianism for the sake of it.
@Chris said:
It seems pretty simple to me, VAR gets more decisions right, but at the cost of some disruption to the flow. Is it worth that cost? With the current technology and system probably not.
It's also disrupting the game to get decisions "right" that no one cares about getting right. Such as the sheff utd disallowed goal on Saturday. If VAR did not exist no one in the history of the game would have raised a complaint
Anyone who thinks that using video replays to disallow that is entitled to their opinion, but I will never agree with them.
I knew VAR would be shit, and it's a million times worse than I thought it would be
Comments
For some reason I remember this game, I thought he was reffing his last game over there because he was coming over here, might be wrong
"some bloke holding a flag essentially guesses" - could be male or female and no they don't, that is a ridiculous statement
Your views as ever are completely hamstrung by your complete emotional detachment from the experience of watching football. That won't change, it's just the way it is. But the number of people agreeing with you is dwindling by the week, as more and more games are completely ruined. I'm hopeful that at some point sense will be seen and we'll be rid of it forever.
Lets pretend it was the other way around. We have had Video for years for offside but some bright spark suggests we abandon it and switch instead to some guy trying to judge split second movements with a naked eye and raising a flag. Do you think we would switch?
@DevC aaah that brings back memories of El Tel singing the praises of astroturf - people in the future say 2019 - would apparently look back and laugh at the thought of playing on grass. ho ho ho!
Someone on the wing being penalised for having his nose over an imaginary line when someone in the middle scores a goal is no fun. A referee in an office miles away taking three minutes to decide on that also no fun. I'm glad we don't have it.
Yep, if they take away our right to clatter kids, women and oldies into railings and then taunt them with "well, you know it happens", then it won't be worth going anymore.
Yep, highly rated young ref, who from that clip is the type of referee that players do respect.
On the offside rule, that's the one area I think that the rules need adjusting for VAR (if we are to persist with it). Need to reintroduce the daylight rule or a DRS style umpires call zone to stop the ridiculous 1 mm calls being made right now. Offside is one rule, if implemented sensibly could be improved by VAR as it should be objective.
At least we can still confront players in local shops or at ATMS for controversial twitter posts!
Of course!
All good "banter" until you realise a super built beast of a player may react like anyone else in the world, to some gimp taunting them from close range
No human eye can reliably judge a really tight offside where the linesman (or as you say very occasionally in the mens game lineswoman) has to look at both the ball being kicked and judge the precise position of a guy often running at full speed towards the goal and a defender often running away from goal. Its impossible. And so I am afraid on the really tight ones, all they can do is essentially guess. simple reality.
Now as it happens I would agree with @Username that the latest wording of the offside rule is probably wrong and it would be better if it was redrafted as level being onside but the rule is the rule as it is and wherever the line is drawn there will always be marginal decisions.
A VAR style system will always make better decisions than the human eye for offside calls. That surely is obvious. You may judge that getting them right is not worth the time delay and I understand that argument. It is hard to argue though surely that APART from the time delay issue some bloke (or woman) with a flag is an intrinsically better system.
As I said above, there is a hysteria about VAR at present and in that environment it will be blamed for all ills. I will look at a randomly chosen game in a fortnight (Bournemouth- Wolves) to see if VAR improves, detracts or makes no difference to that game.
All I said was 'Hey Pierre the team was somewhat under par today and your contribution though generally good was not up to your usual high standards...' and he ****ing nutted me!
@DevC the lino makes a decision one way or the other and the referee has the final say. Sometimes wrong sometimes right. Exciting. Like life.
Well @Wendoverman that is the judgement call we have to make. Are you suggesting then that IF perfect offside decisions could be made instantly, you would nonetheless prefer them to be guessed. Perhaps we should introduce blind linesmen to increase that chance element (some would say we already do.....)
Indeed and I've made it. A nose offside will never be interfering with play even if it crosses the robotic rubicon in my opinion, so yes, I prefer human beings driving things, flying things, manning telephones, serving me in shops and waddling up and down the touchline making decisions at a live sporting event. I did not realise it was a stark choice between VAR and disabled officials though...
desperate stuff
But we can't can we. They're still having to guess at what point between two frames the ball touched a player, and then they're drawing the lines on a frame to one side of that, and quite often they're also having to guess where parts of players are that are obscured by other players. It's not black and white, it's pure guesswork still.
@Wendoverman and @drcongo have summed up the current climate better than I could.
For @Wendoverman, both making the existing way of judging offside better or worse detracts from his excitement. Only the existing method will do. Only the best technology available when he was a lad can possibly be the right solution. I am afraid it is pure luddism (ludditeism)?
For @drcongo, he appears to be arguing that the human eye at normal speed is more likely to get an offside call right than technology. While recognising that no system is ever perfect, that is surely patent nonsense. His case seems to be based on reaching his desired conclusion first and then fitting the facts to suit rather than seeing where reality takes him.
If either f them had argued that while clearly technology is more likely to get the decision right but in their view the time delay is simply not worth it, i would understand their point of view. As we are currently using it, it sometimes is taking far too long. That needs to improve. The evidence from other countries suggests it does as referees get more used to it.
I will look again iwth fresh eyes starting with my randomly chosen game at the next round of fixtures - Bournemouth v Wolves. it may be controversial, it may not be, lets see.
Yes that's right El Dev, I want blind linesmen like we had in my youth. I was quite happy for goal-line technology to be introduced and I will even put up with a ticket app I suppose, but VAR technology has been introduced to stop multi-million pound foreign owned businesses losing money on marginal decisions and it's present incarnation as such is destroying the game I like to watch. If it squirts down to our level I would be very unhappy. But rest assured you can smile smugly as you observe the soccer on the tellybox safe in the knowledge every decision is perfect (oh...even though it isn't) and human error and possible bias has been removed (which...er...it hasn't) and laugh at the thought people used to play on grass...
Also for the record I don't give a big fat flying **** if you can or cannot understand my point of view or what you think about the next game you watch on the telly.
FFS @DevC. There are plenty of us here who attend games regularly, VAR is without doubt a pain in the harris to those of us that have the "joy/rage of the momentary decision", depending on which way the flag goes. Also, the rules of football should be applied no matter the level of the pyramid to every game. The one constant, without VAR, is the human element of those who are charged with applying them. So how can you possibly have WWFC v Tranmere Rovers @ AP, Liverpool v Man City @ Anfield & Holy Trinity Kites v Meerkats @ Hazelmere recreation ground with the same application of those rules if you have VAR at only one venue? It's the human element that gives us the opportunity to rage or enjoy as we see it and gives fuel for these forums. I know I am old school, but get rid of the bloody thing and lets argue if it was an offside ad infinitum as we have about the Maradonna handball, the Ainsworth goal that never was v Shrewsbury & the handball goal at Col U. In the end, the bad decisions are few compared to those that are right and as the old saying goes, it all evens out in the end.
On top of the technical limitations, time issues, anti -fan friendliness and sheer pettiness of it at times, I think another problem is that almost every decision the refs get wrong is at least partially debatable, especially by extremely biased football fans. Without VAR everyone could just blame the ref and move on rather than admit they were wrong. Now rather than blaming the refs, it's a continuous question about stupidly technical rules and regulations and VAR itself, and people get even more pissed off when they're essentially being told that even after review the decision was wrong, that your understanding of the rules is wrong or that the game is being changed by the FA because of VAR.
I know which I preferred.
I have been only seen six games of football live this season @EwanHoosaami , a few less perhaps than you. None of those live games have had VAR, the same perhaps as you.
In each of those live games, I have enjoyed the spectacle of 22 players trying to kick a ball into a net. Not once in the 540 minutes, pretty much every one of which I have enjoyed have I thought to myself “what this really needs to make this enjoyable is the referee to make some mistakes.
As I say I understand the time delay arguments against VAR. Actively wanting refereeing errors I find perverse. I suppose we will just have to disagree.
You wouldn't even notice a huge percentage of the "mistakes" being called by VAR, and most of the times you thought it was a mistake, it wouldn't be still.
Not once in the 540 minutes, pretty much every one of which I have enjoyed have I thought to myself “what this really needs to make this enjoyable is the referee to make some mistakes.
Sweet Jesus
It is. Which is why no-one is actually advocating it.
Read the posts a couple of times before you respond mate or it just looks like shit stirring.
but that seems to be exactly what @EwanHoosaami was arguing, @Wendoverman .
This is such a disingenuous argument. No one on earth has ever thought that. The point is, did you at any point think "we could do with a couple of minutes to check the video to see if that goal was offside"?
You’re being wilfully thick again, pretending to misunderstand people’s posts just because they prove your “facts” wrong. You claimed that VAR is infallible in offside decisions, removes guesswork and therefore guaranteed to provide us with the correct decision. As is blatantly obvious to everyone except you, all I pointed out was the actual fact that it still involves guesswork. It’s just a different person guessing now with the added benefit (to just you apparently) that it holds up the game and ruins the atmosphere.
Now point out where any of my posts have claimed the human eye is more likely to get the correct guess. Obviously you can’t because you’re doing a Dev again.
It seems pretty simple to me, VAR gets more decisions right, but at the cost of some disruption to the flow. Is it worth that cost? With the current technology and system probably not.
Textbook behaviour from a few regulars on here...
We need some @wendoverman light hearted stuff to ease the tension
Actually, if you really want your mind blown, watch the starting gun experiment on David Eagleman's The Brain. Our brains process sound faster than they're able to process vision, your brain then delays the processing of the sound so that it re-synchronises the two into something that your brain can make sense of. So, everything you see, even if it's your own hands clapping, actually happened in the past. Paradoxically, a lino who can hear the moment that the ball is kicked may actually be able to judge it better than a video where key information happens between frames.
Utter Sh1t @DevC. In no way am I wishing the the referee to make a mistake and seriously can't see how you've read that in my post?
How about replying to the bit that asks how the laws of the game can be applied evenly throughout the whole of the football pyramid, (bearing in mind that the laws of the game are the same), if the systems in place, are not the same?
How many of those games have you thought to yourself, what this game really needs is a big break in play after every offside or goal while some people in another city guess what happened between two frames of video?
Which really begs the question, why the hell do you care about VAR so much when a) you've never been to a game with it, and b) it's never made a difference one way or the other to your life? One can only assume it's contrarianism for the sake of it.
It's also disrupting the game to get decisions "right" that no one cares about getting right. Such as the sheff utd disallowed goal on Saturday. If VAR did not exist no one in the history of the game would have raised a complaint
Anyone who thinks that using video replays to disallow that is entitled to their opinion, but I will never agree with them.
I knew VAR would be shit, and it's a million times worse than I thought it would be