2019 Women's World Cup

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/soccer...accuracy-to-99-3-percent-20180630-p4zoqc.html

 

Pre video assistance they would likely get missed, however, if they were commited against the team the broadcaster is supporting I.E BBC for England, that * would be debated in the studio and then the fourth refs would have been brought into question.

Now that such technology is widely accepted and used it will highlight these incidents as you've now got a small team behind the scenes watching it all back helping the referee.

It's always down to the ref to make the call VAR doesn't run the show the ref does, grabbing someone with both hands and throwing them to ground that leads to goal should always be stopped.

The Scotland today, regardless of the rule is upto the ref to decide, some will give it, some won't I don't think it was the right decision by the ref to give it but in the end VAR will make for a fairer game in those critical, game changing moments.

 

There's been a few instances of this I'm sure..

Let's be honest. Some of the game's are good and it's a decent standard but I'd fancy my old * or school side's to win the women's world cup. Physically they wouldn't compete and to be fair that's why it's woman's football. It's slower and less physical..

It's like putting a male boxer in with a female even if she's a world champion. The likelihood is the man will win..

 

If it's to be stuck to 100% of time expect to see 5 pens every match because teams will be abusing the * out of that rule.

It won't.

 

Sorry Minty, however that article only talks about VAR decisions not very decision. It also quote FIFA as saying they was no scandals" yet off the top of my head I can remember at least three really dodgy ones.

 

If VAR is used fairly you have 20-25 penalties every game.

 

That exactly what people are saying will happen. Players will be trying to hit defenders on the arm to get a penalty from now on.

 

How so?. I mean just watching all our games alone have you seen 20-25 incidents inside the box that should have been pens.

Even with the hackers and standards of the SPFL and its appalling refs, I'd say absolutely not.

 

“Pierluigi Collina, head of FIFA's referee committee, said that 95 per cent of the decisions taken initially by referees had been correct, and this had been raised to 99.3 per cent thanks to the intervention of VAR.”

He said that 335 decisions had been checked in the 48 group stage matches and there had been 17 VAR reviews - 14 on the field and three by the VAR assistants.

I read this as meaning all decisions? Can’t have been 335 VAR incidents.

 

Then, as it was today, its up to ref to make that call and use some common sense because its not the only rule in football and no rule is kept to 100% of the time. If it were the move to VAR wouldn't be required.

 

But is the 95% not just plucked out of the air ? 95% of what ?

 

Yes. Absolutely. Have you ever watched a game where there wasn't pushing/blocking off from a corner ? I would be surprised if you could make 10 mins of a game without 25 such infringements have been committed.

 

95% of refereeing decisions made in the World Cup. I’m not even sure now.

 

Just don't see how that can be the case Minty.

 

Folk say surely every Celtic wants VAR as it will eradicate cheating. First Ibrox defeat last season Beaton cheated all game, however he would have cheated just as much with VAR. DOB fouled and the ball goes to another DOB, then play on. When a Celtic player was fouled, he waited to see if there was an advantage and if there was then blew. VAR wouldn't have looked at that cheating.

 

Did Virgil foul that * then ? If not and the game had carried on would that have no affected the game ? Surely beiing fair you have to go back and give The Netherlands a free kick no !?

 

That was more of a foul than the goal disallowed earlier.

 

And that