ednesday, 11 November 2020 2:41 AM
> To: guy.thorn...@inter.nl.net
> Cc: leedslist@gn.apc.org
> Subject: Re: [LU] VAR for offside
>
> I feel like the footballing authorities have missed out on a crucial
> element of how video reviews work in cricket: umpire’s call. In cricket,
> y
Agreed completely.
From: Leedslist on behalf of Ed Morrish
Sent: Wednesday, 11 November 2020 2:41 AM
To: guy.thorn...@inter.nl.net
Cc: leedslist@gn.apc.org
Subject: Re: [LU] VAR for offside
I feel like the footballing authorities have missed out on a crucial
They have the goal line technology for the Lampard scenario (not VAR). That
was all that was required. The rest has become a hot mess.
Nick
On Tuesday, November 10, 2020, 01:51:27 PM EST, n...@6haroldplace.co.uk
wrote:
I’m not a fan of VAR. I always thought it a sledgehammer to crack
I’m not a fan of VAR. I always thought it a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
English commentariat got itself all excited after Lampard’s ‘goal’ against
Germany and demanded ‘something be done’. But across a season decisions evened
out, pre-VAR...now we’ve actually legislated ‘in’ interference.
I feel like the footballing authorities have missed out on a crucial element of
how video reviews work in cricket: umpire’s call. In cricket, you have to be
100% the umpire got it wrong, not 1% sure they weren’t right. If Bamford’s goal
had been disallowed by the ref, the video would have
Oh mighty King of Tonga, I agree with you and I did say I didn't blame the ref
who was 'only following
orders'.
Okay, he was following the latest interpretation of those who must be obeyed on
on deciding what is
and what is not offside with VAR. Whether it was Lineker and friends who helped
I'm actually pro VAR, but just can't believe what a pigs ear the officials make
of applying it. Firstly they don't have to use the lines. They are not used
in Rugby replays to determine forward passes.
If they must use the lines then Offside is offside, whether by a foot or a yard
(Or a few
