• cbarksLFC@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Apart from offsides, since there’s no input from the on-field ref for deciding that.

    The only thing VAR officials should say to the on-field ref is “go to the monitor to review” and then play the offence at full speed from various angles. Cut the slowing down and still frame images when the refs at the monitor. Give the ref the views they need to determine their own call.

    Less is more.

    • nuggetsgalore21@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s as though the PGMOL want things be as complicated and as controversial as possible.

      Imagine, under what you’re proposing, within 2 mins, the on field refs can make an educated call and then defend that call post match should there be an issue.

    • NemesisRouge@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Doesn’t work, you need slow motion and freeze frames to properly assess a lot of these things.

      • cbarksLFC@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Can’t even explain how much I disagree with this. You show freeze frame of impacts or slowing down challenges, it makes everything look 10x worse than it does in real speed.

        There’s numerous times this season where the ref goes to the monitor and a still image shows them the challenge giving them a biased opinion before showing them anything else. A tackle will always look way worse when you slow it down or show a still image. Look at big hits in the NFL or NHL, in realtime they look bad but when you slow it down and see the impact it typically always looks way worse then real speed.

        By using various angles in real speed you can see everything you need. You see the impact from various angles to assess how dangerous the play really was.

        • Business_Ad561@alien.topB
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I disagree.

          The referee sees both when they go to the monitor - they see a slow mo and the tackle in real time.

          If a tackle is bad, it’s going to look bad in real time and in slow mo.

        • OkAnnual4585@alien.topB
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m with you 100% slow mo needs to go for the on field referee! The Var officials can view in slow mo if they want & send him to look but it must be real time for him so many decisions in slow motion look clear and obvious but in real time they’re not half as bad as they look.

        • NemesisRouge@alien.topB
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah, you need both. I think a lot of people misunderstand what the pitchside review is for, though.

          The point of the image the referee sees on the pitch side monitor is that it’s the VAR’s best attempt to convince him he made a mistake on the initial call. It’s the case for the prosecution, so to speak.

          If you want to give him a neutral perspective it will take a lot longer as he reviews from several angles. He’ll still need slow motion so he can see where a player’s foot is, whether he got the ball first, when exactly contact was made etc.

          • harrybarracuda@alien.topB
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah, you need both. I think a lot of people misunderstand what the pitchside review is for, though.

            Including the referees.