My biggest gripe isn't the slow mo / micrometer level detail reviews, but more on what is actually reviewed and what isn't when it comes to tackles in the box and dangerous fouls in normal play. Just seems like there is no consistency
mathguy86 said:
Yeah. To be clear, it's not harsh because it's close. And an AR isn't ignoring it because it's close. I think it's impossible to catch in live action. If you catch it you have to call it. VAR is doing something here that soccer doesn't expect.
That's my biggest gripe about VAR. Calls are being made with micrometers and slo mo replay with cameras and several hundred or more frames per second. That's not real life.
Hit the nail on the head.jeffk said:
100% agree - the way VAR is being utilized in the WWC is making the sport more like American football with first downs and dragging toes inbounds and targeting and all that other small, incremental, measured decisions. And soccer has never been that kind of sport. It's more free-flowing and rewarding of creativity and use of space. All of these VAR-assisted calls are technically correct, but they feel *wrong* in the context of the sport.
) shows they are aware that unforeseeable issues will arise and they are willing to adjust quickly. That being said, the fact that FIFA seems to be testing out some of the interpretations during a World Cup seems slightly unfair to the players and fans.
Hand Of God said:
5 European teams have now reached the QF. USA the other. Netherlands and Italy have a chance to make it 7/8 if they win tomorrow.
Feels like they're gonna get one, momentum has definitely shifted.Hand Of God said:
So many chances. Japan really should have the lead by now.
timely subs by the Dutch manager. they needed the breather and the stop in run of play. like a coach in basketball calling a timeout to stop the bleeding.Hand Of God said:
Noooooo! Penalty for Netherlands. Gutted for Japan who looked to deserve the win.