Im am not really educated in football rules, and stuff, but if there are so many controversial choices made by referees, why VAR is not the standard and overruling factor in a game. With a standard referee, I feel like he has ultimate power, and can decide however he wants, even if not seeing the given event fully. I know that using var for the entire match would be slow, but still many choices seems completely the referees will.
In: 0
Speed of play the game needs to flow for the spectators the difference between a legal tackle and a foul are a judgement call for the official.
Not enough time to reply every call or every close call and It ruins the pace of play and would make it horrible to watch. Also, anu replay would still be human judgment or not enough evidence (camera angle).
[removed]
Even with VAR it is “up to” the referee.
In many instances, errors were made just the same as before it was introduced, only minutes were taken to do so.
I feel that if there is going to be a screwup, lets just get on with it. Having a system that will “eliminate” them that doesn’t is even more frustrating.
I don’t want to spend four hours watching the same sporting event.
A referee always has to deal with discussions that one way or another boil down to “I cannot act on what I cannot see” or maybe “from this distance, it looked like…”
Happens in all competitive sports where the referee is there to draw hard lines based on input of arguable quality.
A player, the coach and the audience can all have different opinions on the referees decision, but ultimately it’s the referees decision that goes.
You need to remember what the video system is there for;
It’s there because the sport has grown in popularity to the point where it has been commercialised into professional teams. Their whole being depends on winning and getting good income from their audience. It’s a PR machine.
And since it is, the games are broadcasted. offering the home couch audience plenty better viewing angles and more detail and slow motion features that makes THEM more equipped to decide on a situation than the referee that is technically speaking so qualified that (s)he is actually salaried to do it.
Not wanting to giving the same tools to the referee is a pretty brain dead stance.
Money depends on the CORRECT decision. Give the ref the tools to form a correct decision.
That said, I’m not exactly a fan of the lawn sport. How do they organise refereeing? Is is just the three on the field that are active, or is there a radio link to a video referee as well? Who has decision power over who? Is there a way to formally change a referee decision after the fact?
Latest Answers