Post by thad on Jan 17, 2022 13:59:28 GMT
Without wishing to re-open the whole VAR debate, consider the merits of placing a limitation on the time allowed to review a decision...(?)
Yes, I understand that the entire intention is to arrive at the "correct outcome" following a "clear & obvious" error by the on-field officials....
...and yes I also cynically believe that achieving decisions that benefit Man Utd is the main reason why the system was adopted in the first place...
...but if it takes 3.5 minutes (genuine example) to decide that a "goal" scored scored against Man Utd should not stand... how can it possibly be reasonably considered to have been a "clear & obvious" error in the first instance....?
IMHO with the technology available in Stockley Park, any "clear & obvious" error should be spotted within 60 seconds... otherwise it is self-evident that any potential mistake, was never "clear & obvious" in the original instance....!
Yes, I understand that the entire intention is to arrive at the "correct outcome" following a "clear & obvious" error by the on-field officials....
...and yes I also cynically believe that achieving decisions that benefit Man Utd is the main reason why the system was adopted in the first place...
...but if it takes 3.5 minutes (genuine example) to decide that a "goal" scored scored against Man Utd should not stand... how can it possibly be reasonably considered to have been a "clear & obvious" error in the first instance....?
IMHO with the technology available in Stockley Park, any "clear & obvious" error should be spotted within 60 seconds... otherwise it is self-evident that any potential mistake, was never "clear & obvious" in the original instance....!
