clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,876
For the var to overrule a goal given on the pitch it should not be open to debate. That is the point. If it is a clear handball then disallow. If it is debatable whether it hits his hand then this means there is not proof it did so therefore the goal has to stand. Unless they show us angles that we have not seen yet then no proof exists. They have guessed it hits hand and are overturning based on that. It should not be debatable. That is the point.
Agreed, but we haven't seen all angles. I was just responding to the "referees union" responses on here.
The disallowed goals I can somewhat live with, albeit without getting into a "non proven" debate.
The penalty shouts ? Blimey. What the f@@@ is VAR there for ?
I think we can agree that you might as well get rid of it if it can't step in and give them. It's a confused nonsense bullshit, commentators calling out things live at the game with the same replays VAR has.
No grey area, why should anyone give a @@@@ if the referee made a clear and obvious error ? They have extra eyes on the game, use them.
PL needs to take a grip and challenge the self protection that appears to be influencing VAR decisions.