More VAR fun

[handsofclay]

2 hours ago, Rudolf Hucker said:

The application of Hawkeye technology in tennis is restricted to a limited number of appeals by a player in each set. It is never instigated by the umpire.

It's application in cricket is similar however the umpires can and too frequently, do request reviews of anything from a fair catch to the award of a boundary.. This has had the effect of preventing umpires from making decisions in real time in case they are subsequently proved to have made a wrong call. How often does an umpire give a run out or a stumping without review? They have abdicated to technology their responsibility and skill in decision making. Personally, I prefer the sometimes flawed decision making of a Dickie Bird rather than the sterile approach taken by today's umpires whose skill is limited to drawing in the air an imaginary rectangle.

I don't want VAR in football. It won't improve the spectacle just remove the controversy - and the game thrives on controversy. Leeds supporters wouldn't agree but I prefer my sport to contain the potential for controversy such as introduced by referee Ray Tinkler in their 1971 match vs WBA. I've remembered the match for well over 40 years because of his decision that day. Had VAR been around back then, I'd have no reason to recall it.

Goal line technology is a step forward for the sport. VAR is not.

I cannot agree more with all that you say. My standpoint completely. Plus, umpires in test cricket don't seem to call no balls anymore. They seem to think that if a wicket is taken the first thing that is reviewed is if the bowler overstepped so they don't need to worry about it now so don't bother to watch the bowler's feet. It might get like it in football where they don't bother to call offsides anymore because if a goal is scored it will be picked up on review on VAR if anyone was offside and the goal would then not stand.