I thought we weren't trying to remove all errors? Most of the errors that we have seen all potentially still exist in a challenge world so HW may still have to apologise.
Eh? We're trying to remove as many errors as we can, but we know it will never ever be 100%.
My feeling is that C&O introduces additional ways for errors to occur. Not only does the VAR have the possibility of making the wrong decision, but they also have the possibility of making the wrong call on C&O - which might prevent them from intervening when they should, or cause them to intervene when other VARs haven't for comparable incidents.
This is what it says on the FA website:
Then there's no help
Then there's no help
Isn't that because we only have one look at it at match speed ? In real time CK was happy with it. It was only when VAR sent him to the screen that he saw how high the foot was and switched it to a red. We don't have that benefit in grassroots
There was a reason I only captured the "I can't see a foul."
I don't understand this reasoning. Surely, they should be sending for a review if the ref gave a yellow card and a free kick. My understanding is that SFP is a red card, if a yellow is given then that is not the correct decision and should be reviewed.
Because it's less a clear and obvious error.
True, because at least the ref has acknowledged he's seen it (and thinks it's reckless as opposed to excessive force). Whereas in this situation it looks like he didn't realise the height of the boot until shown the slo mo
Luton have a scoreboard but not sure it can show replays
15% then
forgot Luton would be unlikely to have a screen.Rugby is way less subjective than football. Most of the decisions are factual, like forward pass, try over line, foot out of play before try. The only real one that isn't is dangerous tackling, but even that has very strict guidelines that the referees have to follow. "Spike tackles", where they pick someone up and drop them on their head are pretty obvious to see, and even the new "no arms tackling" is pretty obvious, if you tackle without using your arms and there is head to head contact you are sent off even if you haven't initiated the contact. Yes, there was controversy over the Tom Curry WC red card, but it was correct as for all the opponent pretty much landed on his head Curry had gone into a tackle without his arms.
This exists in Australian rugby league and has done for a few seasons
So if football is way more subjective, what's the point in having VAR at all? Technically the VAR is challenging the onfield referees decision anyway.
Also seen places say it allows them to give referees with little to none VAR experience at it. Potentially broadening the scope
Because players, managers, commentators, pundits, spectators, etc, spent decades demanding technology because they were unhappy with decisions. FIFA and IFAB didn't rollout VAR off their own initiative, it had been demanded. Now the same people don't want it because it hasn't been as perfect as they hoped it would be and, without wanting to blow my trumpet, I said from the day they started talking about VAR that this would happen.
