Looks well onside that. **** sake
In a game where no VAR is in use the benefit of the doubt should be given to the attacking team, there is absolutely no way that should of been called as offside.Looks close enough that it is impossible to call and could have gone either way. VAR would tell us but apparently that is ruining the game...
totally disagree. The benefit of the doubt should always be given to the attacking team on tight calls and that’s clearly a tight call. We had no VAR stop speaking about VAR it means nothing to us in the championship.No it shouldn't. The decision that the linesman thinks is correct should be made, which is what happened.
The fact that it might be wrong shows why VAR , especially for offsides, is a good thing to have.
The benefit of the doubt should always be given to the attacking team on tight calls and that’s clearly a tight call.
I don’t know why you keep bringing VAR into it, I have never mentioned anything about it. The sheer fact your even mentioning VAR is an indication that the decision is so close, I do accept decisions will be wrong, but I also think when it’s clearly so close he can’t be sure it’s offside , so he should of kept his flag down, you should make a decision when you know, not when you have an element of doubt. He’s bottled it and made the wrong decision.Fully agree that the officials aren't good enough, hence VAR being a better option. I'm not even saying it should have been given as offside, just that it is too close to call and so either on or off are valid.
You are also assuming that the linesman has any doubt to give a benefit to the attacker. The linesman thinks he is offside so has given it. He has made what he thinks is the correct decision.
That still image doesn't tell the story. You have no way of knowing whether it is the correct image to use and the angle means that it is impossible to tell whether Fletcher is on or off. The linesman must have thought he had good enough information to give offside.
Either you accept that officials making wrong decisions is a part of the game or you accept that we need VAR.
My experience is that it would not necessarily have been any different at the Riverside. The officials need help to keep them on the straight and narrow, there’s nothing wrong withvVAR, it’s the way it is used. A car driven badly is not a bad car.I suspect the decision would have been different at the Riverside, home advantage/effect.
I would rather drop pooints than have to put up with VAR. (Mike can now tell us how wonderful VAR is and how making the right decision is more important than being entertained)
you should make a decision when you know, not when you have an element of doubt.