ok, lads, let's get serious now.
so what's the deal with the VAR if a team is not heard when asking the referee to double-check a foul?
is it compulsory for the referee to use the VAR if he's asked to do so?
if both answers are "no", football is actually dead.
please do not deny that what happened today was an utter and disgusting robbery
I was mad when that happened.
As far as I know the referees watching the game in that room can tell the central referee if he was wrong in a play and then he decides to check it and change his inititial decision if he sees that he committed an error. Why are they there if they can't tell the referee about an obvious penalty?
I tried to warn you. Video review is only a smoke and mirror trick to fool normies into thinking things can't be rigged. Since video review has been implemented, NHL NBA and NFL games have been more influenced by shitty "human error" from refs than ever.
>NHL NBA and NFL games
what's the VAR policy there? can they stop the game if the ref is wrong?
Welcome to the technology club
Here we have a problem where there is only 10 second window for the video booth to make a decision whether they want to interrupt play or not. Once the ball is put into play again, there is nothing you can do, you can't stop and go back and see if there was a foul
this is precisely what happened. As soon as there wasn't a call made, the Patricio kicked the ball into play as fast as possible so they couldn't go back to check.
Of course, it's the ref's fault to blame because he didn't even want to get VAR involved. Typical muslim wanting Ronaldo in the final.
>is it compulsory for the referee to use the VAR if he's asked to do so?
If VAR flags an error the ref is given a choice, either change his decision or review the footage himself. He can only decide against it after he's done that.
It depends on the league. In the NBA for example they can look at a 3 pointer and see that a toe was on the line and change it to a 2 pointer, even 10 minutes later during a timeout.
In the NFL I think the referee still makes a judgement call after viewing the replay himself.
NHL hasa centralized "replay center" at theirheadquarters where a team makes the decision, but they always make mistakes and it is really embarrassing.
In all cases I think a ref can be wrong and they won't really challenge it, a lot of the reviews are dependant on the ref himself doing the right thing during the play itself. Sometimes they blow a whistle too early and don't let it play out and the insane rules then say a play can't be reviewed.
Brah, that is complete bullshit. The NFL without video review would be such a shitshow.
>NHL hasa centralized "replay center" at their headquarters where a team makes the decision, but they always make mistakes and it is really embarrassing.
this shit needs to be crowd-sourced, but among a crowd of proven hockey-expert geek fans.
Whoa slow down guys, you all make good points but we have another angle
Did he drag his toe? It's really close man. I don't know
Maybe if we can get another few angles we can break it down
Oh wow it's really hard to tell
Now it looks like they are checking the play clock. They are going to have to reset the play clock. and the game clock. This is very controversial
>TV timeout
Prove me wrong. Every decision is still a judgement call, the rules are getting more and more complex, they don't even know what a catch is. It's a joke.
Teams should be allowed 2 VAR challenges a game. That's the way cricket works. It could still be a shitshow though. At corners, you can always find a shirt pull somewhere.
Only the refree decides when to use the VAR, no one else can ask for it.
>is it compulsory for the referee to use the VAR if he's asked to do so?
No. It is up to the ref to decide whether to use the VAR. He can be encouraged by the VAR and assistant to check but the ultimate decision lies with the ref.
I think a problem is that some refs might be hesitant to go to the VAR because they want to show that they are certain with their original decisions and asking for help would make them seem less capable
I think VAR is being implemented only on offsides and situations like player altercations where most of the time videos can reveal exactly what happened. Which is I think understandable, there are many penalty situations where even the replays don't form a clear picture, so even after referee review the decision would be based on his subjective feel of the situation (like it is today).
Not that I'm saying your pic related isn't a penalty, but too much time would be wasted reviewing wether there was contact and was the intensity enough to call a penalty.
>Every decision is still a judgement call
That's a thing about having the VAR is that you could show the same incident to 3 people and they could all have a different opinion of it and what is to say whos opinion matters more?
It's an obvious penalty. And I have no idea why the VAR didn't call it.
Everyone in Portugal agrees and is ashamed.
t. Alberto Barbosa
not true. every goal, penalty and card is looked at and if the referee was obviously wrong he has to stop the game. it would undermine the whole system if referees could freely choose when to use it
a bit of shirt pulling will probably be overlooked, will stop players climbing on each other though.
It would be a good thing then, so those faggots would stop clinching at every corner or free kicks
The whole VAR BS should be only used it tightly defined cases and not excusing the ref from not doing his fucking job.
And no team-side appeals about whatever crap supposedly happened or not to verify by video. Why? Because you'd have more stoppage time than play time very soon.
>Once the ball is put into play again, there is nothing you can do
What's the deal with "withheld" yellow cards for fouls with the fouled team still being able to pull advantage?
A cricket game lasts a whole fucking day, matey. I don't have enough time to waste it on foot-TVTIMEOUT-ball.
Just like awarding yellow for diving stopped diving, right?
If you let teams do VAR appeals, you open yourself up for them being used tactically
Say a team has a corner, it's cleared away and the defending team has a great counter attack on, the attacking team could ask for a VAR appeal on a random minor thing to stop it and give them time to get set up defensively again
you can only go full var is you have the posession
REMOVE VAR
>la var ball
it was not just for the outcome
ITT. gringos talking about nhl,nba and nfl .
ERA PENAL
kek
So you're waiting for fifa examples of VAR implementation?
Memes aside we should be emulating rugby, grass hockey and handball systems for challenging and reviewing plays. I watch a lot of rugby and although there's mistakes in minor plays, key plays are always correct. Same goes for grass hockey, those footage refs are accurate as fuck.
If VAR is supposed to be assisting the referee then they should be automatically reviewing each incident and informing the ref that there was or wasn't a clear penalty case.
Should the referee have doubts, he can then proceed to review the footage.
Instead of waiting for the referee to contact VAR
When boreball had video review implemented, it was a shit show. Things will change.