Search results

Part of the reason no one knows what C&O is is because people start bringing nonsense like fan polls and unreasonably high bars into it when trying to work it out. :rolleyes:

I mean, regardless of any other discussion, I'm not sure how much value a refereeing forum should really be putting on a poll of non-referees, any undeclared number of which may have been United fans (or for that matter, fans of clubs delighted to see Fernandes punished). The standard of proof...

This is still not and never will be the required burden of proof for VAR, and it's becoming a regular incorrect myth on here. One/a small number of dissenting referees doesn't mean a decision isn't automatically "not-C&O" - it can often just mean those referees are wrong.

This is exactly my stance. Once he slips, he's never getting the ball and there's a conscious decision to still make sure he kicks the opponent. On a forum where I've been the minority arguing against the idea that any SPA that is a kick and has no chance of getting the ball should be upgraded...

If the double-touch was in the area and the ball was then carried outside the area, I'd be a pretty annoyed opposition player to find out that the referee chose to blow for an IFK offence rather than playing a 0.2 second advantage and then blowing for a red card and DFK offence.

I don't even think the earlier "missed" one is particularly clear-cut. He's only just off the pitch chasing a ball he's been trying to keep in and there was no possibility of a quick restart. Yes the restart is slower because of his actions - but it's gone from a restart that could have at...

You can have "consistency" or you can have "common sense". Pundits who are bleating about needing both in the same game is the most nonsensical of all the nonsense that's come out of people complaining about this obviously correct decision.

I'm a big fan of deliberately running in to any manager who's outside his box down my end ;)

It's tactics rather than refereeing, but 4-4-2 have a really good video on YouTube about why they think it was a necessary change that I think I agree with. It's about the first quarter of this: Essentially, 3 at the back against Spain's attack means you either put a CB 1-on-1 against each of...

We surely can't expect the keeper to deliberately dive into an opponent in the PA, probably giving a penalty away, on the vague assumption that he might get a favourable subjective offside?

Keeper would have to have dived through the attacker to make a save. Certainly "feels" offside to me for that reason.

Someone needs to tell Jenas to open his eyes and notice the flag was up on field.

The ref absolutely can. A review can't be initiated purely to recommend a card for simulation, but if it's initiated for some other valid reason (such as overturning a penalty decision), the referee can decide on any sanction/restart once he's at the monitor. But as you say, in this case, it...

Maybe? It's hard to tell, but I feel like as a ref, if the system existed to formally challenge and a player just chose to shout at me instead, I'd be far more willing to start throwing out dissent cautions. That might change once reviews are wasted (although I would hope pundits at least...

I mean, I obviously think it's a really good idea. There's no real detail in Dale's tweet so far, so there are still obviously lots of opportunities for them to make a mess of the system in the fine print, but I'm excited to see how this goes.

PGMOL don't get the say unfortunately as I do think there are modernisers in that organisation (again, now, perhaps not when VAR was first introduced and they insisted on making the same mistake with offside Germany had already done). But this extent of progress would have to be carried out by...

If we ignore the idea of a challenge system completely (which I do think is a legitimate option, but will drag the thread off the rails). The next most obvious set of improvements is in the way TMO is applied in rugby (Or at least, was applied pre-bunker review, I think that's a backwards...

But as we've said elsewhere, I don't see why that means we can't learn and borrow from those other sports. It's not the case that any borrowed system needs to be a 100% perfect match that fixes every single problem in football on day 1, and your repeated insistence that no other system is...

Ah, so it's a case of money triumphing over player welfare then? Mystery solved....

Fair, but again, it was ballsed up by a complete misunderstanding from the people implementing them as to what the point of doing this is. Fans and managers don't want two immobile additional referees/ARs secretly boosting the correct decisions by a few %, they want actual evidence of useful...