England

[rigger]

26 minutes ago, Stuart said:

Watch again. The player falls in a heap vertically when he should have been pulled forward. Any contact will now be seized upon.

I revert to my earlier post . Do you think it was a foul, yes or no?

[Husky]

Finished just in time to turn over for the real competition.

Though it's about time England had their own national anthem.

[roverandout]

Never seen a worse team than Switzerland. Falling over at every touch. No ambition. Dreadful side. That said, England's midfield is awful. Dier and Delph are dreadful. Until we sort that out we will win nothing. Arnold is a class act though best right back in the world. Why are the likes of Madison and winks being overlooked for these two plonkers 

[AllRoverAsia]

Just now, Husky said:

Finished just in time to turn over for the real competition.

Though it's about time England had their own national anthem.

I agree on the Anthem, we need one like Bangladesh that goes on for 5 minutes and not 20 seconds

[Husky]

Just now, AllRoverAsia said:

I agree on the Anthem, we need one like Bangladesh that goes on for 5 minutes and not 20 seconds

Also. The Scots weren't singing "God save the Queen!". Why not?

Isn't she the Queen of The United Kingdom?

[Husky]

VAR Penalty!

[Stuart]

Just now, rigger said:

I revert to my earlier post . Do you think it was a foul, yes or no?

No

[matt83]

Just now, Husky said:

Finished just in time to turn over for the real competition.

Though it's about time England had their own national anthem.

Bit of land of hope and glory, Jerusalem, I vow to thee my country. Just the ticket. 

[AllRoverAsia]

Just now, Husky said:

Also. The Scots weren't singing "God save the Queen!". Why not?

Isn't she the Queen of The United Kingdom?

The Welsh have their own anthem at football matches too.

Ours is like a dirge, and I'm a Royalist!

[Proudtobeblue&white]

It's catching. England women just gone ahead in their WC match v Scotland with a very well struck pen, courtesy of VAR.

[Husky]

At least you can still celebrate a penalty ?

[rigger]

Just now, Stuart said:

No

OK we will have to agree to differ, as I think that is a foul.

[joey_big_nose]

19 minutes ago, roverandout said:

Never seen a worse team than Switzerland. Falling over at every touch. No ambition. Dreadful side. That said, England's midfield is awful. Dier and Delph are dreadful. Until we sort that out we will win nothing. Arnold is a class act though best right back in the world. Why are the likes of Madison and winks being overlooked for these two plonkers 

Harsh I think Dier is very good. Agree Delph offers little. Lacks technical quality and physicality. I've been a bit confused why Delph has played so much.

Midfield three of Dier, Henderson, Barkley is our best setup. Alli, Lingard roam around too much to play that deep, Delph lacks the right quality. Im open to winks getting a shot.

[arbitro]

Just now, rigger said:

OK we will have to agree to differ, as I think that is a foul.

The VAR will only advise a review if they believe there was a clear and obvious. I think if a poll was taken amongst 100 people I reckon it would come in as 50/50. That in my book isn't clear and obvious.

And this is where VAR will fall down for me. For factual incidents there is no matter of opinion. Everything else will be subjective and not the exact science some believe it will be.

[roverandout]

Just now, joey_big_nose said:

Harsh I think Dier is very good. Agree Delph offers little. Lacks technical quality and physicality. I've been a bit confused why Delph has played so much.

Midfield three of Dier, Henderson, Barkley is our best setup. Alli, Lingard roam around too much to play that deep, Delph lacks the right quality. Im open to winks getting a shot.

What about pushing Trent into midfield. He has great technical quality. Can pass a ball like a midfielder, great engine and a world class deliverer of the ball

[Stuart]

Just now, arbitro said:

The VAR will only advise a review if they believe there was a clear and obvious. I think if a poll was taken amongst 100 people I reckon it would come in as 50/50. That in my book isn't clear and obvious.

And this is where VAR will fall down for me. For factual incidents there is no matter of opinion. Everything else will be subjective and not the exact science some believe it will be.

And it will be made worse by slow motion and analysis to death.

They have just given a very very harsh penalty against a player in the Scottish women’s team.

Players will always raise their arms for movement and balance and will always put a hand on another player.

If a player exaggerates a fall on feeling a hand and goes down, the only consideration from a VAR perspective will be “was there contact?”. There is a danger of it making the game unwatchable. Especially if you have a fussy referee anyway. Today’s England match was a bore for the first 70 minutes.

[HowieFive0]

Just now, roverandout said:

What about pushing Trent into midfield. He has great technical quality. Can pass a ball like a midfielder, great engine and a world class deliverer of the ball

I hope you don't call TM for playing players out of their gifted position ...

[roverandout]

Just now, HowieFive0 said:

I hope you don't call TM for playing players out of their gifted position ...

I do

[Exiled_Rover]

2 hours ago, Stuart said:

If that was a foul then England should have been awarded a penalty. Very very easy to manipulate matches.

It's the problem with Rugby League - consistency.

Rather than keep it simple - onside / offside / crossed the line etc - they're opening it up to interpretation. No two video referees will be the same - so I'm sure most wouldn't have chalked off that goal. 

[Exiled_Rover]

1 hour ago, roverandout said:

Never seen a worse team than Switzerland. Falling over at every touch. No ambition. Dreadful side. That said, England's midfield is awful. Dier and Delph are dreadful. Until we sort that out we will win nothing. Arnold is a class act though best right back in the world. Why are the likes of Madison and winks being overlooked for these two plonkers 

Neither one starts for their club side for a reason. 

[Stuart]

8 minutes ago, Exiled_Rover said:

It's the problem with Rugby League - consistency.

Rather than keep it simple - onside / offside / crossed the line etc - they're opening it up to interpretation. No two video referees will be the same - so I'm sure most wouldn't have chalked off that goal. 

Agreed. The problem with foul in the build up is that six or seven passes could have taken place afterwards. Who decides where the line is because it can’t be a discretionary one, we all need to know what the rules are.

[rigger]

1 hour ago, arbitro said:

The VAR will only advise a review if they believe there was a clear and obvious. I think if a poll was taken amongst 100 people I reckon it would come in as 50/50. That in my book isn't clear and obvious.

And this is where VAR will fall down for me. For factual incidents there is no matter of opinion. Everything else will be subjective and not the exact science some believe it will be.

so do you think that was a foul?

[arbitro]

Just now, rigger said:

so do you think that was a foul?

In my opinion it wasn't. 

[DaveyB]

But in the opinion of the ref on the field it was - he was the one who went over to watch it and it was his decision. 

Had he seen the incident as it happened he would have blown his whistle before the ball ever got put in the net - and we might have moaned a bit, but then the ref can never please everyone.

It is the same as it ever was - some they’ll get right, some they’ll get wrong (all in our subjective opinion of course). All VAR does is allow the ref to have eyes in the back of his head, so to speak, and see more of what happens on the field 

[Stuart]

Just now, DaveyB said:

But in the opinion of the ref on the field it was - he was the one who went over to watch it and it was his decision. 

Had he seen the incident as it happened he would have blown his whistle before the ball ever got put in the net - and we might have moaned a bit, but then the ref can never please everyone.

It is the same as it ever was - some they’ll get right, some they’ll get wrong (all in our subjective opinion of course). All VAR does is allow the ref to have eyes in the back of his head, so to speak, and see more of what happens on the field 

Bit of a worry that the ref couldn’t spot the infringement without needing a full minute to watch a replay. Sounds like he wasn’t up to the task and shouldn’t be refereeing international fixtures.

Or he did see it and thought it was fine but felt obliged when someone had a word in his ear to change his mind. I’ve not studied it in detail but I’d wager that VAR has “changed a referee’s mind” more often than he has stuck to his guns.

If referees are going to start using VAR as a crutch instead of doing their jobs then we can expect lots more poor decisions and lots more frustration in the stands.

Edited June 9, 2019 by Stuart