zinny will be fine for the first 60 mins

Its handball in europe. Its good var

its a rule in uefa. Our players should assume, any handball is a penalty in europe

they are winning against newcastle, they got the same level of dirtiness that newcastle got

Thats how it is in europe, the leagues do not do that

Well it is in Uefa

Uefa rules, they give it consistently.

True embarrassment that the replacements could not top him.

The snake hahaha

The thing they all would be independent. Thats how it is done in other sports. You don’t have refs talking to each other and they all arrive to a decision independently. That way you negate any biases. The only person that should be talking on field ref is the person who is an intermediatory between var and ref.

Well its either that, or you don’t have the on field ref making the decisions. Then it becomes var being the ref. On field ref is just there to enforce what var says. If it still is decision of on field ref, it can produce competent refs. They would have 4 independent refs on var as assistants. Going against 4 independent refs if they all said it is a red is prob going to need some justification. In case of rashfords foul, if all 4 independent refs its a red, you can’t really argue with that. They want to get rid of these types of fouls even if they are intentional. On field ref if he did not see in live, can still see what var saw and why they think it is a red. I think in reality, if there were 4 refs, 2 refs would have said it is a yellow while 2 would say its a red in case of rashfords. Then it becomes the on field refs decision to decide.

Cricket has become pretty objective once var was introduced. Its just easier in cricket because there clear objective rules. No so much the case in soccer.

You can’t completely get rid of subjectivity. You can reduce it. The more refs you have in a panel, less subjective the decisions will be. This has been adopted accross various sports that have a degree of subjectivity in awarding points. The only way you can add more refs would be in VAR. So when there is a subjective decision which happens on fouls, the var should compose of atleast 4 refs all looking at the foul independently and they all should arrive at a decision if it is foul or not independently. They should also independently come to conclusion of what color the card should be in case it warrants a card. They should then communicate that lets say on field ref thinks it no foul but 2/4 refs think this is a foul to the on field ref and then the on field ref should look at the replays. Maybe they can communicate what each ref thought what card should be or if any card on the screen. The decision should be left to the on field ref then. Now it becomes a shared decision. It should be fine if the on field ref thinks its not a foul or is a foul. But ultimately, it should be on field refs decision, not Var. He is still making informed decision. Also What Var is communicating and what Ref is saying should be transparent, their reasoning needs to be transparent live. This lowers subjectivity a lot more than just having 1 Var and 1 ref.

This situation will help with clear reds, and helping with fouls or no fouls. The only subjective area it leaves is the color of the card. But even then, lets say, one ref thinks its a foul but no card, another thinks its a yellow and third one thinks its a red and another thinks it is no foul. In this scenario, you still need a majority. Then it falls on the on field ref to make the decision. I feel this is the objective way they can start by improving var. I dont see this slowing down the game either. Since all 4 are working independently on var, it should not be the chaotic mess it is when you listen to var. They should take the same amount of time. This time its only happening 4 more times the var check simultaneously.

The new role in this method would be the person who is communicating with the on field ref. This person should not be the 4 var refs. Its a intermediatory between the 4 var refs and the on field ref. Honestly any form of panel system would be better than what we have right now. I am sure informed people can come up with better panel systems.

You can’t completely get rid of subjectivity. You can reduce it. The more refs you have in a panel, less subjective the decisions will be. This has been adopted accross various sports that have a degree of subjectivity in awarding points. The only way you can add more refs would in VAR. So when there is a subjective decision which happens on fouls, the var should compose of atleast 3 refs all looking at the foul independently and they all should arrive at a decision if it is foul or not independently. They should then communicate that lets 2/3 refs think this is a foul to the on field ref and then the on field ref should look at the replays. The decision should be left to the on field ref then. Now it becomes a shared decision. This lowers subjectivity a lot more than just having 1 Var and 1 ref.

Szczesny