No VAR and 2 wrong decisiond. Is that better for the game?

[bingo70]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yes.

There will be teething problems, just as there were at the world cup and the FA cup, but it will settle down.

You'll still have a few months to whinge about it though, so it's a win win.

If you’re expecting my whinging to stop after a few months you’re sadly mistaken.

[Hibbyradge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If you’re expecting my whinging to stop after a few months you’re sadly mistaken.

I'm an optimist!

[JimBHibees]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't crave perfection. I want obviously wrong decisions to be corrected.

Football has not been fine.

Colin Campbell not being awarded a penalty after being brought down in the box in the 1979 final, was not fine.

The Dundee United goal which hit the back stantion before being handed to a Partick Thistle player in the box, only for the ref to say "play on" was not fine.

The penalty awarded against us in 2012, was not fine.

Etc etc etc.

That's a flawed game at best, corrupt at worst.

I agree anything which makes better decisions can only be good especially in Scotland where it appears certain officials can make mistake after mistake without consequence. Would rather a minor delay than obvious errors being allowed like the Swansea game.

[Eyrie]

If the main objection to getting decisions right using VAR is that it stops the game, then that is easily resolved.

Have a very limited list of circumstances where VAR can be used. Put a time limit of 60 seconds on how long the referee can review an incident for. If he has to look for longer than that then it isn't clear and obvious, so stick with the original call.

We'd have maybe half a dozen incidents in our entire season, and I'm more than willing to wait for 60 seconds on two or three occasions at Easter Road whilst the referee gets the decision right.

On the other hand, if the main objection is that human error has always been part of the game, then I'm fed up with "errors" by the likes of Craig Henry Edward Albert Thomson or Muir that have a massive effect on our entire season.

[Caversham Green]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If the main objection to getting decisions right using VAR is that it stops the game, then that is easily resolved.

Have a very limited list of circumstances where VAR can be used. Put a time limit of 60 seconds on how long the referee can review an incident for. If he has to look for longer than that then it isn't clear and obvious, so stick with the original call.

We'd have maybe half a dozen incidents in our entire season, and I'm more than willing to wait for 60 seconds on two or three occasions at Easter Road whilst the referee gets the decision right.

On the other hand, if the main objection is that human error has always been part of the game, then I'm fed up with "errors" by the likes of Craig Henry Edward Albert Thomson or Muir that have a massive effect on our entire season.

This is where I am with VAR. I was originally all for it, but a few decisions this season have changed my mind a bit - particularly the Derby v Southampton cup game. Derby scored what looked like a good goal but after around two minutes and a lot of line drawing the VAR decided that Waghorn's shoulder was in an offside position. Later in the same game what looked like an offside Derby goal was ruled legitimate because a defender's heel was playing the scorer onside. The decisions were (probably) technically correct but they destroyed the moment and took away a lot of what makes football enjoyable to watch. IMO this was overuse of the facility.

Another drawback is that linesmen are now advised not to flag for marginal offsides, so there's likely to be more disallowed goals if we continue in this vein. As for last night's red card, I think it was debatable whether it should have been a red or not, but the linesman who flagged was in a better position to judge than someone watching it on a screen.

I agree that 'clear and obvious' should be the criteria as well as off the ball incidents or other things that the ref/linesmen didn't see.