That. If you need endless replays in slow mo from different angles, then it's not a clear mistakegenome wrote:Could they put a timer on VAR decisions? Like a minute or so. And if they can't make their minds up within that time limit then it wasn't clear and obvious enough.
It was suggested on the radio just now that a hierarchy applies for VAR decisions-presumably what they are saying is that if a more senior VAR ref has a different view from a ref like Rob Jones who is relatively junior then the junior ref won't stand his ground (as in the Chelsea game).Sanguine wrote:VAR audio released for the decision at Chelsea. Referee got it 100% spot on in real time. Weak to change his mind.
https://x.com/SkySportsPL/status/1963155112244765116

It won't come in as it is a rugby thing and FIFA seem to think that people who don't follow rugby won't understand the rule i.e. the 10 yard penalty for dissent at a freekick but I think it is worth bringing in.katweslowski wrote: ↑24 Apr 2026 08:57 I would really like a sinbin style thing now. I know it's often mentioned and is almost a cliche now, but yellow cards sometimes just aren't enough.
A great example, is a player deliberately tripping a player during a counter attack and charge towards the goal. They trip them or pull them down by the shirt at the half way line and get a yellow card. Even commentators say "he had no choice" and "took one for the team" - but as a fan, I detest that. It's anti-football and is cheating. It's not clever and shouldn't be tolerated.
There are other incidents too, where I think a 10 minute sending off would be justified
One of the main reasons they didn't go ahead with this was that during the experiments they found out that it was generating deliberate intent from defending teams in order to get deliberate free-kicks moved forward from the optimum distance (a kicker needs enough distance to get the ball up over the wall and then down again). In rugby moving forward is always an advantage because it's all about territory - not so in football.
If the dissent happens within 25 yards of the goal award a penalty instead of moving the free kick forward.Dirk Gently wrote: ↑24 Apr 2026 10:22One of the main reasons they didn't go ahead with this was that during the experiments they found out that it was generating deliberate intent from defending teams in order to get deliberate free-kicks moved forward from the optimum distance (a kicker needs enough distance to get the ball up over the wall and then down again). In rugby moving forward is always an advantage because it's all about territory - not so in football.
Even though it was suggested that they give the attacking team the option whether to move forward or not, that didn't stop the extra dissent and was a level of complexity they decided not to go ahead with.
Similar to review systems in cricket tennis and rugby, getting to the correct decision is paramount, refs and umpires are human beings and human beings are prone to errors.Winston Biscuit wrote: ↑18 May 2026 12:51 Just to say I read something interesting the other day about VAR in Japan, and the problems they have with VAR basically creating a 'loss of face' for a referee, and in Japanese culture that is a huge thing as it brings shame to people, so there is a reluctance for a referee to be shown as wrong. It's lead to the Japanese FA having to try and run PR campaigns around it to shape the public's perception on it, and to stop people thinking it's for catching referee decision as being wrong, and instead they want people to think its an extra referee tool that has been introduced, and he is empowered by this, and the ref is just free to use this new tool as and when he likes, and has some other referee friends there on his headset to help him with it!![]()
Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 14 guests