VAR is being false flagged right now. The current implementation

>>76647476
>The current implementation of VAR has been purposely designed so that fans will be against video ref.
Jokes on them, I'm loving this shit right now.

>>76647476
I was 19 and I was doing the colimba

>>76647476
go back to /x/

Anon5 reveals his true identity. A larping Argie. Who'da thunk it?

>>76647510
>>76647536
Personally I don't care about if you call me paranoid because I only watch sports for the drama and this is perfect but don't cry in a few years when football is the only pro sport without proper video ref.

>>76647584
the videoref is drama on itself

>>76647637
No, properly executed VAR is anti drama, or at least less drama than allowing offside goals or diving. Look at rugby, handegg, hockey, etc. It's obvious FIFA doesn't want that, and they tell me to go back to /x/, they are too naive.
It's like they forgot Grondona was the vice president and could've been president if he wanted, nothing has changed. FIFA doesn't want more transparency and fairness.

>>76647674
How is it not drama? Did you see Pitana doing the square signal? That was golden

Normally i'd say you're being silly and paranoid but given how corrupted football really it wouldn't surprise me if you turned out to be right. I also wouldn't be surprised if Real Madrid were somehow involved in it.

I actually like it.
It only happens in goal occassions to secure it was the right decision.
I am 100% with it.

>>76647752
It baffles me how there are people right now who don't think FIFA is rotten to the core.

>>76647584

Nobody really cares either way. VAR or no VAR we will still be watching.

>>76647795
b-but Blatter and all the baddies where fired

>>76647775
And disallowing valid goals is also fine according to you? Chile's goal was onside. A properly executed VAR wouldn't have been receiving the mixed opinions that the current video ref is getting

>>76647476
Not working. I love VAR.

The main problem is wrong offsides. VAR corrects wrong offsides, awarding the goal.

But what if the wrong offside call spoils the goal chance?

>>76647824
>Chile's goal was onside
It wasnt. VAR hasnt made a mistake. They use an algorithm along with visual feedback from 3 other judges in a video room to verify. It's literally infallible.

>>76647824
>Chile's goal was onside
no

>>76647808
That's because VAR or no VAR Ireland would still lose. if there was something at stake for you then you would care

>>76647843
No, VAR is used after the offside is called. The ref is the first line of jurisdiction so if an offside is called, its on the linesman who gave the call, not VAR.

>>76647843
I think it happens retroactively, the play is played and is only after the ball is dead (goal or goes out of bounds) when the call is made. They do not stop plays.

>>76647871
>>76647870
VAR doesn't stop the play, but linesmen do. If the linesman stops the play and a goal chance, then VAR can't help.

tl;dr fuck the linesmen, make it all VAR

>W-WAAAAHHHHHH I CANT SCORE OFFSIDE GOALS ANYMORE!
>people are actually mad about this
Your sport deserves to be a corrupt semen fest.

>>76647847
>>76647857
it was a legit goal m8

>>76647903
I understand now, and agree.

>>76647926
No it wasn't. VAR correctly judged it to be offsides. Its statistically inpossible for multiple people to be wrong about one neutral event unless they were actively trying to sabotage you which most likely isnt the case.

>>76647824
can someone link this goal

>>76647903
Can you think of an example? As far as I know linesmen won't raise the flag unless absolutely sure they were the player was in an off-side position. With VAR, I guess that means at least a body past the defense line.

>>76647926
Fucking retard.

File: 1496900623977.png (777KB, 729x1008px) Image search: [Google]

777KB, 729x1008px

>>76647959
>it's impossible for multiple people to be wrong
lol wut

>>76647824
>>76647926
No, it wasn't mate.
First my inner indio reacted and I shouted at the ref and his mom, but watching the replays you realize that the camera angle is what it makes it seem like he's onside, but if you draw the perspective line, it was offside. Close call, sure, but it still was.

What isn't right, though, is the stupid amount of time it takes to allow or disallow a goal. That was just plain retarded.
If you have a fucking team of monkeys viewing the replays, they should take no more than 30 seconds with nowadays technology, not a couple of minutes like those retards did.
I think that's what make it truly infuriating.

>>76648833
For me it was a legit goal. Anyway, what ruins it is what you say, the time it took, and the fact that nobody knows what is being discussed. They should have open mics so we all here the guys reviewing the play.

I'd say this is offside too. Isn't Alexis' head past the line?

File: 2896303_big-lnd[1].jpg (113KB, 960x540px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 960x540px

>>76650140
Of course I forgot the picture.

>>76650149
Nah, don't think so but it's literally impossible to say 100%

Nobody can complain about this goal given in any case.