totally agreedas I wrote to f365 last month:
Sad.
I fear we are becoming rule chasers, forgetting the game we used to love.
Really, did the 'handball' that gave Liverpool the Champions League deserve
to be punished with a goal? It was a maybe cross that touched his arm. Give
them a free
Yes I don't understand why they just don't use the clear and obvious error
factor. Cameroon's goal being ruled out against England was ridiculous, as was
England's being ruled out yesterday. The penalty we got was also very soft to
be honest, I'm not sure the US defender could do much about
4 year deal ,with first season on loan - worth £15m in total
IF he can rediscover his Wolves Championship form it will be a decisive signing
Dave
___
Leedslist mailing list
Info and options: https://mailman.gn.apc.org/mailman/listinfo/leedslist
To
I think they should adopt a cricket-like approach. If the VAR shows that they
are only just offside, like the "big toe" scenario, then it should go with the
officials' original decision. Only if it is clearly offside (above a certain
margin - maybe 20cm?) should they use VAR to overrule the
Absolutely agree with you Dave.
Offside needs clarifying/redefining. As you say 'clear daylight' and not a toe
or part of a foot ahead.
Equally why they need to refer to VAR when a decision is quite clear and
obvious. I've seen quite clear and
blatant penalties yet the ref felt she had to refer
Watching the womens semi final last night it made me even more convinced that
if they are going to use VAR for offside decisions they need to tweak the
offside rule
Both v Cameroon when it went for England and last night when it went against
them the decision to overrule a goal due to the
