World Cup 2018 thread

[JoetheRam]

Thing is, it's not 15 or 20 seconds is it? It's a good two minutes. And even then the calls aren't always correct. Waste of time.

[TigerTedd]

5 minutes ago, JoetheRam said:

Thing is, it's not 15 or 20 seconds is it? It's a good two minutes. And even then the calls aren't always correct. Waste of time.

They’re not correct in your opinion. But a team of professional referees have seen the same footage as you and they have a diffferent opinion.  It’s only their opinion that matters, at the end of the day. 

[BBG83]

1 hour ago, David said:

I’m with you. 

The most annoying thing about VAR is people moaning about VAR, and ITV telling you how the system works throughout the 90 minutes. Stop drawing so much attention towards it, 2 or 3 checks which take 15 seconds is nothing at all, I’ve seen South American/Spanish players waste more time rolling around the pitch with a tap on the laces.

Sports evolve, embrace technology, I wonder what Steve Bloomer would make if these balls and boots today. 

The only thing I'm confused about is when the game continues and the commentators are telling us its still being reviewed.

Is that just for cards?

[jackhasler23]

 

[ariotofmyown]

I've never really seen VAR in action but have been pleasantly surprised in how it's working so far. Seems to be just for really obvious errors and not been called upon all the time as I feared.

[GermanRam]

Germany with a really poor performance yesterday. Löw was outcoached, ridicolous he didn't change anything in half time.

Sané, Özil, Gündogan - preparation wasn't easy, selection neither. Could be a hard WC with Brazil possibly waiting in the round of 16.

Whatever, let's wait and see.

I'm looking forward to watching England tonight.

I would prefer that line up:

Pickford -- Trippier - Cahill - Stones - Rose -- Dier -- Alli - Henderson -- Sterling - Rashford -- Kane.

RLC as an possible alternative to Henderson.

Come on England!

[RadioactiveWaste]

I prefer the mistakes still in. It's just a bone headed view of mine. Sporting injustice and unpunished cheating are part of how the game reflects the human condition.

Highlights how silly it is to be so invested in what's ultimately just a game.

I'm probably wrong which is why VAR exists.

VAR, huh, what is it good for?

[GermanRam]

4 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

I prefer the mistakes still in. It's just a bone headed view of mine. Sporting injustice and unpunished cheating are part of how the game reflects the human condition.

 

 

? That the point.

But to be fair the WC's VAR worked quite well till now. The Bundesliga's VAR was annoying and made everything more complicated and difficult, for players, refs and for the crowd.

[Gaspode]

I'd rather VAR was applied as it is in Rugby - leave it to the Ref to request a review if he's uncertain or thinks he may have made a mistake - it's the 'big brother' looking over the ref's shoulder all the time bit that niggles me - use the technology when it's needed, not all the time....

[Spanish]

22 minutes ago, Gaspode said:

I'd rather VAR was applied as it is in Rugby - leave it to the Ref to request a review if he's uncertain or thinks he may have made a mistake - it's the 'big brother' looking over the ref's shoulder all the time bit that niggles me - use the technology when it's needed, not all the time....

from what I have seen the rugby refs never make a decision unless it is supported by video

[Gaspode]

7 minutes ago, Spanish said:

from what I have seen the rugby refs never make a decision unless it is supported by video

The point is that the ref requests the review - it isn't being reviewed in the background where there's a possibility that play can be pulled back (for example to award a penalty) when the ref has previously been happy to allow play to continue. The World Cup implementation is undermining the authority of the refs and causing unnecessary delays - how long until we get a situation where something (unseen by the ref) happens right at the end of the 1st half, the players leave the field and then reappear at the start of the 2nd half whereby the ref is instructed to award a retrospective penalty before they can get underway?

They are damaging the spontaneity of the game - not through use of technology, but through the poor implementation....

[Spanish]

2 minutes ago, Gaspode said:

The point is that the ref requests the review - it isn't being reviewed in the background where there's a possibility that play can be pulled back (for example to award a penalty) when the ref has previously been happy to allow play to continue. The World Cup implementation is undermining the authority of the refs and causing unnecessary delays - how long until we get a situation where something (unseen by the ref) happens right at the end of the 1st half, the players leave the field and then reappear at the start of the 2nd half whereby the ref is instructed to award a retrospective penalty before they can get underway?

They are damaging the spontaneity of the game - not through use of technology, but through the poor implementation....

maybe they should do away with the ref's presence on the pitch altogether.  then there will be nobody to moan at if they disagree with a decision

[Sexydadbod]

I might not be the brainiest box in the world but what I don’t understand is how people- pundits, fans and ex players are saying that there is no pressure on the England team so they are expecting England to reach at least the quarter finals. Joe Cole said that England will go all the way because there is no pressure or expectations on the team.

Correct me if I’m wrong but wouldnt that indirectly put pressure on the players because people think and some are even expecting England to do well because of the lack of “expectation” if that makes sense?

 

[RadioactiveWaste]

20 minutes ago, McLovin said:

I might not be the brainiest box in the world but what I don’t understand is how people- pundits, fans and ex players are saying that there is no pressure on the England team so they are expecting England to reach at least the quarter finals. Joe Cole said that England will go all the way because there is no pressure or expectations on the team.

Correct me if I’m wrong but wouldnt that indirectly put pressure on the players because people think and some are even expecting England to do well because of the lack of “expectation” if that makes sense?

 

It's totally ass backwards.

I think they struggle with the concept Ty hat England are ok and perhaps capable of reaching a QF but really good enough to be contenders meaning just that. It's either "best thing ever" or "diabolical". Just OK I see hardly a big story but probably what's accurate.

[Sexydadbod]

16 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

It's totally ass backwards.

I think they struggle with the concept Ty hat England are ok and perhaps capable of reaching a QF but really good enough to be contenders meaning just that. It's either "best thing ever" or "diabolical". Just OK I see hardly a big story but probably what's accurate.

I’m glad that not the only one. I find it really baffling to be honest, ‘no-one expects us to do well so I expect us to do well.’

As for this “positive vibe” that they keep stating at every opportunity, of course there’s going to be a good vibe when there’s been no controversy yet.

Roy Keane said that he doesn’t buy his nonsense of there being a positive vibe as players are bound to be positive when they haven’t played a game yet, let’s see if the media keep talking about this positive vibe if England lose.

My view is just to let the players get on with it and do their talking on the pitch. 

[Bris Vegas]

I don’t understand VAR. Why have it if refs can decide when to use it or not?

At the end of the day in most cases it just comes down to opinions.

A lot of the time fouls aren’t clearcut. One ref might give it, another might not.

So far we’ve already had moments that divide opinion. The Ronaldo peno looked a dive for me, and others, but some in here felt it was a clear penalty.

The France one was controversial.

And yesterday with Chicharito, that’s another which you’ve seen given. Incidentally, it was given as offside which he wasn’t, so I wonder if they’d have used VAR if he had scored.

 

[SaintRam]

19 minutes ago, Bris Vegas said:

I don’t understand VAR. Why have it if refs can decide when to use it or not?

At the end of the day in most cases it just comes down to opinions.

A lot of the time fouls aren’t clearcut. One ref might give it, another might not.

So far we’ve already had moments that divide opinion. The Ronaldo peno looked a dive for me, and others, but some in here felt it was a clear penalty.

The France one was controversial.

And yesterday with Chicharito, that’s another which you’ve seen given. Incidentally, it was given as offside which he wasn’t, so I wonder if they’d have used VAR if he had scored.

 

The refs don't choose when to use it.

Its always being used - if, after the review, the VAR refs think something needs to be looked at by the on-field refs then they tell them. They then stop the play and look, like the one did with the France decision.

If it doesn't require the on-field referee, such as a review for offside following a goal being scored, the on-field referee is just told that its not a goal, and he then disallows it.

 

I still don't know if its good or bad for the game, but its not particularly complex. It basically works the same as in the NFL - except in the NFL the on-field officials dont get to have an opinion and in football, managers can't "challenge" decisions. 

[Bris Vegas]

14 minutes ago, SaintRam said:

The refs don't choose when to use it.

Its always being used - if, after the review, the VAR refs think something needs to be looked at by the on-field refs then they tell them. They then stop the play and look, like the one did with the France decision.

If it doesn't require the on-field referee, such as a review for offside following a goal being scored, the on-field referee is just told that its not a goal, and he then disallows it.

 

I still don't know if its good or bad for the game, but its not particularly complex. It basically works the same as in the NFL - except in the NFL the on-field officials dont get to have an opinion and in football, managers can't "challenge" decisions. 

The offside one is tricky though. I can understand if play is called back to disallow a goal for offside, but offside calls are made immediately and play is halted.

Again, if a player is played through on goal but is flagged for offside, then the ref blows and the attacking player stops. But what if the attacking player is actually onside? How would you counter this? VAR could show he’s clearly onside, but play has already been stopped and the chance gone. In most cases the linesman gets it right, but like with Chicharito, he didn’t. 

[SaintRam]

2 minutes ago, Bris Vegas said:

The offside one is tricky though. I can understand if play is called back to disallow a goal for offside, but offside calls are made immediately and play is halted.

Again, if a player is played through on goal but is flagged for offside, then the ref blows and the attacking player stops. But what if the attacking player is actually onside? How would you counter this? VAR could show he’s clearly onside, but play has already been stopped and the chance gone. In most cases the linesman gets it right, but like with Chicharito, he didn’t. 

Thats why they've been told to increase the threshold that they flag for offside - so they dont stop play unless its obvious to the assistant. They let it continue, and then its reviewed when the ball goes out of play for a goal or corner.

If someone flags for offside and they're wrong, it is not reviewed. 

The assistant for the Mexico game didn't follow that instruction, he flagged when it was close. That's just inexperience with the system. Flagging for offside when its a close call will cease to happen after they've gained experience using VAR.

[Bris Vegas]

Sweden 1-0 South Korea.

S Korea look awful. I’m hoping this ends up a draw, as then Mexico would only need two more points to qualify assuming Germany beat them both.

But a Sweden win heaps more pressure on Germany. Mexico should beat S Korea next weekend, meaning that if Sweden can hold Germany to a draw, a last-game draw agreement between Mexico and Sweden sees them both go through and Germany would go out.