Another VAR debate…..

[dsr-burnley]

I'd just give them 30 seconds to make a decision, if they can't decide go with the onfield decision. If it's clear and obvious that's plenty of time and it would do away with the TV screen nonsense.

I have no idea why the VAR man should ever take more than 30 seconds for foul or red card decisions. He has no power to make those decisions, his only power is to advise the ref that there is something worth a second look.

Once he has decided it's worth a second look, which he should comfortably do in 30 seconds or less, then advise the ref to take the second look and stop wasting time while the man with no whistle decides whether he would have blown it if he could.

 

[Champagneblade]

I have no idea why the VAR man should ever take more than 30 seconds for foul or red card decisions. He has no power to make those decisions, his only power is to advise the ref that there is something worth a second look.

Once he has decided it's worth a second look, which he should comfortably do in 30 seconds or less, then advise the ref to take the second look and stop wasting time while the man with no whistle decides whether he would have blown it if he could.

Still don’t quite get how Holgate’s careless swipe against Mitoma is bigged up to be some sort of assassination PG-18 effort whilst Maguire basically trampling on someone’s ankle whilst barging them to the floor is just a yellow.

Why is it even a debate when a challenge that can break someone’s ankle is so easily spotted that they debate it and just issue a yellow?

Not sure about others, but I’ll take a glancing blow in the midriff vs about 18 stone with force on my ankle any day of the week!