Group C - Page 14
Forum Index > FIFA World Cup 2018 |
sharkie
Austria18002 Posts
| ||
Ghostcom
Denmark4776 Posts
On June 22 2018 01:57 sneirac wrote: There is no randomness on what gets reviewed, it is clearly and distinctly defined and applied to both teams. Fair enough if you think it should be more, it will eventually be more but it would never have been approved in the first place if it immediately went from no VAR to full VAR. You need to be aware of what you are actually arguing. Every time VAR is used a mistake is corrected in the game. In order for VAR to make the game worse not only does a call have to be missed, a call has to actually be changed from correct to wrong. Unless that happens or it takes far longer than it should, it will always be a net gain to the game. I am fully aware. And you are wrong. VAR doesn’t get it right every time - just like the on-field ref doesn’t. And sometimes correcting a call which only happened because another call went uncorrected will not lead to a net gain. Take Australia’s penalty which they only got because a situation arose following another missed call which wasn’t reviewed. Had the ref not missed the call the situation would never have arisen. | ||
Ghostcom
Denmark4776 Posts
On June 22 2018 02:01 sharkie wrote: Ghostcom is just a bitter Dane and whining on VAR because it cost them two penalties Whenever you want to add some substance feel free to join in. | ||
sneirac
Germany3463 Posts
On June 22 2018 02:03 Ghostcom wrote: I am fully aware. And you are wrong. VAR doesn’t get it right every time - just like the on-field ref doesn’t. And sometimes correcting a call which only happened because another call went uncorrected will not lead to a net gain. Take Australia’s penalty which they only got because a situation arose following another missed call which wasn’t reviewed. Had the ref not missed the call the situation would never have arisen. I didn't say VAR gets it right every time. I said VAR is almost never a detriment to the game. And again, eventually all sports will be fully video reviewed and a freekick like oyu mentioned will be part of VAR, but we aren't there yet and correcting some mistakes is better than correcting no mistakes. | ||
Ghostcom
Denmark4776 Posts
Also you literally stated that every time VAR is used a mistake is corrected in the game. A statement which I fail to comprehend in any other way than you thinking that VAR gets it right every time. | ||
nojok
France15837 Posts
Both Kantés were amazing. Qualified for the next round. Sad to see Peru eliminated rather than the other two bus from the group. | ||
sneirac
Germany3463 Posts
On June 22 2018 02:09 Ghostcom wrote: That is your opinion and that is fine. But please be aware that what you are currently actually doing is simply moving fairly obvious perceived unfairness of a wrong call to another less obviously perceived unfairness which is to get your call reviewed. Also you literally stated that every time VAR is used a mistake is corrected in the game. A statement which I fail to comprehend in any other way than you thinking that VAR gets it right every time. Fair enough we disagree, and just so you know the stats the first season of use in Italy, Germany and Neds show a net benefit, early but promising. As to the 2nd part: In order for VAR to be used there has to be a mistake in the game, now 3 options: a) VAR is used to correct the call -> benefit to the game b) VAR should be used but isn't -> the call is still wrong, VAR did not improve or worsen the game c) VAR is used and actively makes a mistake or VAR is used when there was no mistake in the game -> VAR has made the game worse As far as I know, c) has happened once in 150+ uses in the bundesliga and not at all in this world cup. | ||
Ghostcom
Denmark4776 Posts
Also, the experience differs quite a bit in the NFL to the point where a yearly increasing proportion of fans, pundits and players argue to let the onfield refs do the job and do away with the video review and challenge-system altogether as it disturbs the flow of the game too much (I'll admit I've been in this camp since VAR was used to overrule the Dez Bryant catch for a TD two years ago - and I'm actively rooting against the cowboys) | ||
TheNewEra
Germany3128 Posts
On June 22 2018 02:26 Ghostcom wrote: Except you are not accounting for the behaviour of the players which VAR promotes in both cases a, b, and c. Cornelius for example stated that he is much more likely to dive in the future to get his plays reviewed. Clearly there are more facets to the discussion than you list. Also, the experience differs quite a bit in the NFL to the point where a yearly increasing proportion of fans, pundits and players argue to let the onfield refs do the job and do away with the video review and challenge-system altogether as it disturbs the flow of the game too much (I'll admit I've been in this camp since VAR was used to overrule the Dez Bryant catch for a TD two years ago - and I'm actively rooting against the cowboys) Unfortunate example. The stats show that in Italy the dives have way decreased since VAR is used. Something like 40% or so | ||
sharkie
Austria18002 Posts
It's a blessing | ||
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom8727 Posts
| ||
Ghostcom
Denmark4776 Posts
On June 22 2018 02:29 TheNewEra wrote: Unfortunate example. The stats show that in Italy the dives have way decreased since VAR is used. Something like 40% or so It was a literal quote from a player from a league where diving is frowned upon. You can argue that it won’t help him as he will get carded for acting rather than get a penalty (which I may agree with although VAR has resulted in some quite liberal penalties so far at the WC - maybe you have some data on the average number of penalties with/without VAR?), but to say that he is not going to do what he literally says he will because the league plagued the most by diving (possibly second to Spain admittedly) saw a reduction is a pretty weak argument. You can argue overall that diving will be decreased, but then you have already conceded that VAR changes behavior. Your underlying assumption seem to be that the behavior will only be changed positively, however it is just a question of time before players figure out what they have to do to get VAR reviews to be favorable to them before they start doing it. Again, look to the NFL. Further, you have yet to address the issue of the flow of the game when VAR is necessarily expanded to more aspects of the game. | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28264 Posts
the argument about too extensive VAR being detrimental to the free flow of the game is a valid point of view - but I disagree that what we've seen in the WC has constituted that (but it'd be a fair point of view). But more decisions being made correctly (factual consequence) and that players will misbehave less (observable from other leagues where it's been implemented) are both overall good consequences that can't really be contested, even if it's possible to find individual cases where it's been bad. The idea of diving more because of VAR seems like a pretty stupid statement from a guy who is understandably frustrated by getting two VAR calls against, where one actually could have gone either way even with video review and I don't actually think he's gonna follow through with it. | ||
Ghostcom
Denmark4776 Posts
The statement about diving more was exactly because VAR is apparently only used at the WC if you dive as VAR was not used to review Cornelius situation (or the rules of football changed and you are now allowed to pull the jersey nearly off your opponent to stop him). Another such example was seen in the latest Switzerland game. VAR is in its current implementation results in unfairness due to only selected situations being reviewed. Ultimately my argument is that for the current iteration of VAR to be fair you have to review all situations, and If you are to take the current iteration of VAR and review all situations you are going to interrupt the flow of the game too much (to be clear: that is quite a different argument than the one you are refuting). As always thanks for providing a constructive post though. It is appreciated. | ||
mahrgell
Germany3854 Posts
At first this group might look like it is already decided, given the points distribution (6-4-1-0). But... it is not! France is already in the playoffs, but if they still take their last game serious, they can help out Australia. Denmark better put everything into this game. And Australias only venture in the knockout rounds was with a 4 point group stage back in 2006. Can they repeat that? Possible qualification scenarios: Denmark 1st, France 2nd, Australia eliminated - Denmark wins France 1st, Denmark 2nd, Australia eliminated - Denmark draws - Denmark loses, Australia does not win - Denmark loses by 1, Australia wins by 1, Denmark scores more goals than Australia - Denmark loses by 1, Australia wins by 1, they score the same amount of goals and Australia gets at least 2 FFPR points (e.g. 2 yellows) more than Denmark - Denmark loses by 1, Australia wins by 1, they score the same amount of goals and Australia gets 1 FFPR point (e.g. 1 yellow) more than Denmark and Denmark wins the lottery France 1st, Australia 2nd, Denmark eliminated - Denmark loses, Australia wins, one game has a goal margin of at least 2 - Denmark loses by 1, Australia wins by 1, Australia scores more goals than Denmark - Denmark loses by 1, Australia wins by 1, they score the same amount of goals and Australia gets less or the same amount of FFPR points as Denmark - Denmark loses by 1, Australia wins by 1, they score the same amount of goals and Australia gets 1 FFPR point (e.g. 1 yellow) more than Denmark and Australia wins the lottery | ||
sharkie
Austria18002 Posts
It seems coaches share our point of resting players being fatal for tournament success. | ||
mahrgell
Germany3854 Posts
| ||
sharkie
Austria18002 Posts
Aren't you surprised that France is going full squad? | ||
mahrgell
Germany3854 Posts
On June 26 2018 22:53 sharkie wrote: Nope I really meant it for real. Aren't you surprised that France is going full squad? Well... they arent, lol.... Did you see the lineups? They rotated 6 times, if this isn't a B team, I don't know what is... | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41099 Posts
| ||
| ||