Staff should know the rules

[alanharper]

9 hours ago, roaminowl said:

https://resources.fifa.com/image/upload/laws-of-the-game-2018-19.pdf?cloudid=khhloe2xoigyna8juxw3

 

Law No. 8

 

2. Dropped ball Procedure The referee drops the ball at the position where it was when play was stopped, unless play was stopped inside the goal area in which case the ball is dropped on the goal area line which is parallel to the goal line at the point nearest to where the ball was when play was stopped. The ball is in play when it touches the ground. Any number of players may contest a dropped ball (including the goalkeepers); the referee cannot decide who may contest a dropped ball or its outcome.

 

I'll tell you what really grinds my gears about drop balls - when play gets stopped for an injury. No real issue with that, but it seems that the team who had possession of the ball loses out every time, even if they were in an attacking position the ref always drops it to the team who didn't have the ball to hoof back to the keeper or sometimes straight out for a goal kick or deep throw in which means a high chance of them instantly losing possession. Why they don't just drop the ball uncontested to the team who had the ball when play was stopped I'll never know.

[Buxtongent]

16 hours ago, McRightSide said:

 

 

I grant you that VAR isn’t perfect yet

 

That's like asking a computer what is 1+1 and expecting the answer to be 3

        

All VAR does is provide slow motion replays of 'dubious' decisions and allow a second or even a third look  It does not make decisions. Only ONE man can do that - THE REFEREE. He is simply asking other people's opinions, and sees the replay. The decision is still his and his alone. 

[oh_weds_we_love_you]

17 hours ago, Mycroft said:

 

That's partly the beauty of the game, taking the human element out of the game will make it sterile in my humble opinion, but time will tell who is right I guess. 

 

The players and the game is too quick for officials these days. They need help. Gone are the days like yesteryear when there would be a mistake or 2 a game - there is tonnes each game now because the game has moved on. VAR isn't great, but it will get better.

[Buxtongent]

5 minutes ago, oh_weds_we_love_you said:

 

The players and the game is too quick for officials these days. They need help. Gone are the days like yesteryear when there would be a mistake or 2 a game - there is tonnes each game now because the game has moved on. VAR isn't great, but it will get better.

Certainly think the game is becoming much faster, and has definitely moved on. Tnere is nowhere like the sportsmanship there used to be, and much more showboating (a different name for cheating) One thing however. VAR is as good as it will be. It's its use by officials that will improve. 

Has anyone thought of the other option - two linesmen on either side.?

One thing is certain about the VAR 'Decision IT WAS UNCONTESTED BY THE WEDNESDAY PLAYERS  

[HIGHERSTATE]

How about the Burnley match the other week when the ref changed his mind when the player was just about to run up to take the penalty

 

Or when Derby scored vs Southampton and the player was said to be about an inch offside and and after watching it in the studio the 'pundits' still couldn't decide it was correct or not.  The ref stopped the game for about 3 or 4 minutes and neither of the fans knew what was going on/whether to celebrate.

 

Imagine that every 10 or 15 minutes.

 

How long can they call it teething problems.?

Edited January 29, 2019 by HIGHERSTATE

[billyblack]

17 hours ago, Mycroft said:

Get rid of VAR not needed it for 150 years, so why now?

Seems to work in cricket and tennis etc

[alanharper]

47 minutes ago, Buxtongent said:

 

That's like asking a computer what is 1+1 and expecting the answer to be 3

        

All VAR does is provide slow motion replays of 'dubious' decisions and allow a second or even a third look  It does not make decisions. Only ONE man can do that - THE REFEREE. He is simply asking other people's opinions, and sees the replay. The decision is still his and his alone. 

 

The ref didn't see a replay on Sunday, he was told to overturn the penalty decision.

[Musn't Grumble]

Why not go the whole hog and take refs and assistants off the pitch altogether. Just have four referees in the stands watching TV monitors? 

 

Then they they can just argue with each other and call in Mark Lawrenson if they can't agree after, say, fifteen minutes.

 

On a serious note, VAR (or Hawkeye or whatever other names they use) works in cricket and tennis because the ball is in play for only a few seconds and they only review that last point or the last bowl. There are no consequences of playing on and bringing play back as there is in football.

[millo]

2 hours ago, alanharper said:

 

The ref didn't see a replay on Sunday, he was told to overturn the penalty decision.

I think you will find that the referee DID see a replay and decided to change his original decision.

[alanharper]

21 minutes ago, millo said:

I think you will find that the referee DID see a replay and decided to change his original decision.

 

No he didn't, he remained on the pitch the whole time, got the message on his radio and said "drop ball". He didn't see a video replay at any point. 

[s73owl]

19 hours ago, Rhubarb n Custard said:

Var from the madding crowd isn't any better  

Got to better than a bridge too var 

[millo]

27 minutes ago, alanharper said:

 

No he didn't, he remained on the pitch the whole time, got the message on his radio and said "drop ball". He didn't see a video replay at any point. 

I stand corrected. I saw him indicate 'TV replay' and assumed he watched the replay.

[Hookowl]

4 minutes ago, s73owl said:

Got to better than a bridge too var 

 

You're not var off there.

[Inspector Lestrade]

7 hours ago, billyblack said:

Seems to work in cricket and tennis etc

 

Cricket it should work well as they stand around enough as it is and who cares about tennis anyway?

 

Willing to give it a try but they need to speed up the decisions for me. 

[Inspector Lestrade]

7 hours ago, oh_weds_we_love_you said:

 

The players and the game is too quick for officials these days. They need help. Gone are the days like yesteryear when there would be a mistake or 2 a game - there is tonnes each game now because the game has moved on. VAR isn't great, but it will get better.

 

Hope you right, the game isn't that much quicker they just fall down and prat about more instead of getting on with the game

[billyblack]

1 hour ago, Mycroft said:

 

Cricket it should work well as they stand around enough as it is and who cares about tennis anyway?

 

Willing to give it a try but they need to speed up the decisions for me. 

I like watching tennis. Works in rugby ok as well. I agree they need to get to grips with the process though. They need to mike the linesman and refs for me so its easier to understand whats going on.

[Inspector Lestrade]

1 minute ago, billyblack said:

I like watching tennis. Works in rugby ok as well. I agree they need to get to grips with the process though. They need to mike the linesman and refs for me so its easier to understand whats going on.

 

I'm sure you could crowbar in a few more gimmicks if you think about it.   

[Spondon Owl]

On 28/01/2019 at 19:39, McRightSide said:

 

Because there’s huge stakes on the results 

 

I grant you that VAR isn’t perfect yet

Modern football summed up in a single post.

 

Money >>> Trophies/ Glory.

 

Sad really.

[billyblack]

3 minutes ago, Mycroft said:

 

I'm sure you could crowbar in a few more gimmicks if you think about it.   

Well ome think i like about rugby is that there is no ambiguity. Everyone knows what the ref is thinking as its all there to hear, irrespective of hes wrong or right. None of this what is he thinking etc etc. Its all explained clear as day. In that respect, despite being a football all my life, i prefer the way rugby goes about its business.

[Inspector Lestrade]

Just now, billyblack said:

Well ome think i like about rugby is that there is no ambiguity. Everyone knows what the ref is thinking as its all there to hear, irrespective of hes wrong or right. None of this what is he thinking etc etc. Its all explained clear as day. In that respect, despite being a football all my life, i prefer the way rugby goes about its business.

 

I prefer the controversy discussing/arguing the referee's decisions.  But I suppose I'm a dinosaur and must move aside for the Sky geneartion. Instant gratification and everything sanitised.