|
Son of Cod |
November 21, 2023, 8:51am |
|
Champagne Drinker
Posts: 2,074
Posts Per Day: 0.93
Reputation: 89.2%
Rep Score: +8 / 0
Approval: +5,331
Gold Stars: 196
|
Just sailed through another qualifying campaign unbeaten, current world #3, probably the most exciting young player in the world in our ranks, a captain who is absolutely obilterating Bundesliga, Euro finalists last time round and clear progression being made under a manager that's harnessed a togetherness in the squad we've not seen since 1990. But yes let's focus on drawing with North Macedonia in a dead rubber.
|
|
|
|
|
tashee69 |
November 21, 2023, 11:28am |
|
Cocktail Drinker
Posts: 1,756
Posts Per Day: 0.32
Reputation: 85.78%
Rep Score: +28 / -4
Approval: +971
Gold Stars: 23
|
It's called keeping possession, if you think England are bad doing it, then watch Spain.
I understand keeping possession, but then there’s what you do with it. We’ve just played 2 teams we should be beating, one of them comfortably. We didn’t have a shot on target against Malta until the 63rd minute. So what’s the point in keeping possession if there’s no end product, play for a 0-0 draw ??
|
| Baldrick ! The only impression you can do is that of a man with no talent !! GTFC team 09/10 - Baldrick, Baldrick, Baldrick, Baldrick, Baldrick, Baldrick, Baldrick, Baldrick, Baldrick, Baldrick, Baldrick. |
|
Logged |
|
|
|
|
RonMariner |
November 21, 2023, 11:02pm |
|
Posts: 7,859
Posts Per Day: 1.42
Reputation: 84.78%
Rep Score: +42 / -7
Approval: +13,814
Gold Stars: 226
|
I think VAR should be used sparingly not for every sodding decision. Why not adopt the system in cricket where each team is allowed a set number of appeals, say one each half. Then we would get a maximum four var checks a game.
|
|
|
|
|
lew chaterleys lover |
November 22, 2023, 1:04pm |
|
Vodka Drinker
Posts: 5,016
Posts Per Day: 1.07
Reputation: 75.9%
Rep Score: +30 / -10
Approval: +10,752
Gold Stars: 237
|
I think VAR should be used sparingly not for every sodding decision. Why not adopt the system in cricket where each team is allowed a set number of appeals, say one each half. Then we would get a maximum four var checks a game.
Great point Ron. I would prefer it to be scrapped but that won't happen, so we have to find a sensible way forward. Like a lot of well meaning interventions VAR has unleashed unintended consequences which is starting to ruin the game as a spectacle. The people on VAR duty seem desperate to find something to give them a purpose; refs don't seem to have the courage to apply common sense and you have to wonder about the integrity of the game when you see some decisions. For those who say it is not VAR which is at fault it is the people who run it, that will never end will it? Decisions in football are just too subjective to have a definitive correct decision in far too many cases.
|
|
Logged |
|
|
|
|
Abdul19 |
November 22, 2023, 2:20pm |
|
Season Ticket Holder
Posts: 20,429
Posts Per Day: 3.41
Reputation: 73.77%
Rep Score: +71 / -26
Location: Scarborough
Approval: +17,591
Gold Stars: 219
|
Cricket has a natural stop/start nature though. With football, when would the appeal go in? When the ball goes out of play? But then the ball might not go out of play for 5 minutes.
|
| |
|
Logged |
|
|
|
|
RonMariner |
November 23, 2023, 9:56am |
|
Posts: 7,859
Posts Per Day: 1.42
Reputation: 84.78%
Rep Score: +42 / -7
Approval: +13,814
Gold Stars: 226
|
Cricket has a natural stop/start nature though. With football, when would the appeal go in? When the ball goes out of play? But then the ball might not go out of play for 5 minutes.
Many var incidents concern whether or not a player is offside when the game is stopped as the ball is in the net. It’s true that the game continues for a while concerning penalty checks, but that is true under the current system too, and the game is brought back if a penalty is awarded. Not perfect I know, but less disruptive than the situation we have now.
|
|
|
|
|
Mariner_09 |
November 23, 2023, 10:14am |
|
Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 3,549
Posts Per Day: 1.09
Reputation: 63.94%
Rep Score: +19 / -13
Approval: +1,194
Gold Stars: 55
|
Cricket has a natural stop/start nature though. With football, when would the appeal go in? When the ball goes out of play? But then the ball might not go out of play for 5 minutes.
It could lead to all sorts of skulduggery.
|
| I've wasted my life in black and white, a pathetic act for a worthless cause |
|
Logged |
|
|
|
|
grimsby pete |
November 23, 2023, 10:33am |
|
Exile
Posts: 55,749
Posts Per Day: 9.79
Reputation: 81.7%
Rep Score: +126 / -28
Location: Suffolk
Approval: +17,834
Gold Stars: 222
|
The only problem with VAR. is the time it takes to make a decision not the amount of times it is used in a game.
Clear and obvious mistake is the term they say but don't use that when looking at the offside and then come up with decision that puts a players toe or elbow offside.
Just take one look at the move and if it's not clear and obvious play on. It's not rocket science.
|
| Over 36 years living in Suffolk but always a mariner. 68 Years following the Town
Life member of Trust
First game April 1955 |
|
|
|
|
RonMariner |
November 23, 2023, 10:36am |
|
Posts: 7,859
Posts Per Day: 1.42
Reputation: 84.78%
Rep Score: +42 / -7
Approval: +13,814
Gold Stars: 226
|
Thinking on this a bit more, the point of VAR was supposed to be the elimination of major mistakes such as the Lampard ‘goal’ against Germany.
Given that it’s pretty unusual to have two errors of that magnitude in a single game, the number of appeals could be limited to one per game for each team. Then we would have a maximum of 2 VAR delays per game. If teams used their appeal frivolously, it would be their loss if they then were not able to challenge a truly dodgy decision later on. It’s why in cricket teams often decide not to review decisions if they don’t think it’s likely to succeed. They don’t want to waste their limited appeals.
|
|
|
|
|
Les Brechin |
November 24, 2023, 12:03pm |
|
Moderator
Posts: 23,802
Posts Per Day: 4.17
Reputation: 82.43%
Rep Score: +114 / -24
Location: Grimsby
Approval: +12,717
Gold Stars: 174
|
Thinking on this a bit more, the point of VAR was supposed to be the elimination of major mistakes such as the Lampard ‘goal’ against Germany.
Given that it’s pretty unusual to have two errors of that magnitude in a single game, the number of appeals could be limited to one per game for each team. Then we would have a maximum of 2 VAR delays per game. If teams used their appeal frivolously, it would be their loss if they then were not able to challenge a truly dodgy decision later on. It’s why in cricket teams often decide not to review decisions if they don’t think it’s likely to succeed. They don’t want to waste their limited appeals.
All you needed for that was goalline technology.
|
| OFFICIAL FUNDRAISER FOR THE BRAIN TUMOUR CHARITY TOTAL AMOUNT RAISED SINCE AUGUST 2008 £16613.24LATEST DONATION - FROM DONATION FROM THE FISHY FORUM - AUG 2023 AMOUNT RAISED £170.00 |
|
|
|
|