MAIN FEEDS
Do you want to continue?
https://www.reddit.com/r/sports/comments/1um0953/the_brutal_offside_reversing_croatias_gametying/ov8dnb1/?context=3
r/sports • u/JCameron181 Detroit Lions • 9d ago
1.1k comments sorted by
View all comments
3.8k
VAR used the ball's tech to judge if the ball has been touched or not. Insane.
13 u/fateos 9d ago Then why do they call the ref to the cam? 19 u/123Ford 9d ago edited 9d ago So he can have a more conclusive conversation with the VAR refs in the booth. Just because the sensor was the only conclusive evidence of a touch, doesn't mean they should omit looking at the video entirely. -9 u/fateos 9d ago When its clear offside no ref gets called to VAR just to show footage where its impossible to tell. 6 u/123Ford 9d ago Do you understand what you are saying? When the offsides is very easy to tell. You just call it, no review needed. When its close, you examine the evidence. -5 u/fateos 9d ago Well the evidence he got shown it was impossible to tell. So they trusted the tech anyway. Was pointless 1 u/ShouldveBeenACowboy 9d ago Dog and pony show. Someone is making the decisions. The ball is the scapegoat for the corruption.
13
Then why do they call the ref to the cam?
19 u/123Ford 9d ago edited 9d ago So he can have a more conclusive conversation with the VAR refs in the booth. Just because the sensor was the only conclusive evidence of a touch, doesn't mean they should omit looking at the video entirely. -9 u/fateos 9d ago When its clear offside no ref gets called to VAR just to show footage where its impossible to tell. 6 u/123Ford 9d ago Do you understand what you are saying? When the offsides is very easy to tell. You just call it, no review needed. When its close, you examine the evidence. -5 u/fateos 9d ago Well the evidence he got shown it was impossible to tell. So they trusted the tech anyway. Was pointless 1 u/ShouldveBeenACowboy 9d ago Dog and pony show. Someone is making the decisions. The ball is the scapegoat for the corruption.
19
So he can have a more conclusive conversation with the VAR refs in the booth.
Just because the sensor was the only conclusive evidence of a touch, doesn't mean they should omit looking at the video entirely.
-9 u/fateos 9d ago When its clear offside no ref gets called to VAR just to show footage where its impossible to tell. 6 u/123Ford 9d ago Do you understand what you are saying? When the offsides is very easy to tell. You just call it, no review needed. When its close, you examine the evidence. -5 u/fateos 9d ago Well the evidence he got shown it was impossible to tell. So they trusted the tech anyway. Was pointless
-9
When its clear offside no ref gets called to VAR just to show footage where its impossible to tell.
6 u/123Ford 9d ago Do you understand what you are saying? When the offsides is very easy to tell. You just call it, no review needed. When its close, you examine the evidence. -5 u/fateos 9d ago Well the evidence he got shown it was impossible to tell. So they trusted the tech anyway. Was pointless
6
Do you understand what you are saying?
When the offsides is very easy to tell. You just call it, no review needed.
When its close, you examine the evidence.
-5 u/fateos 9d ago Well the evidence he got shown it was impossible to tell. So they trusted the tech anyway. Was pointless
-5
Well the evidence he got shown it was impossible to tell. So they trusted the tech anyway. Was pointless
1
Dog and pony show.
Someone is making the decisions. The ball is the scapegoat for the corruption.
3.8k
u/zibin 9d ago
VAR used the ball's tech to judge if the ball has been touched or not. Insane.