2018 FIFA World Cup Final: France v Croatia, 15th July, 4pm(GMT)

[Railway Blue]

It's a good job England never reached the Final as it could well have been the biggest ever score.

 

[Dirk]

Congrats to our friendly neighbours from France.

And now I am happy that this shite tournament is over /s

 

[Railway Blue]

so why didn't the ref give it in the first instance ? as I said peviously....

'Var couldn't decide and sent it back to the ref to make a second decision. What is the point of VAR if it doesn't make the decision ? '

VAR means that players don't get away with something the referee has missed (on this occasion anyway). Not perfect (yet).

 

[Benji]

Congratulations and well done Florian Thauvin.

 

[AFCB_Mark]

Congrats to our friendly neighbours from France.

And now I am happy that this shite tournament is over /s

Aww no Dirk it's been great!

 

[Bilo]

Congrats to our friendly neighbours from France.

And now I am happy that this shite tournament is over /s

No offense but it's been a fantastic tournament

 

[Dirk]

Aww no Dirk it's been great!

of course, it was. Just saying

EDIT: Damn, I should've posted a smiley at the end and not a "/s" . My bad (the "shite" was to "illustrate" our performance at this tournament)

 

[Fompous Part]

Further proof, if it were needed, that referees can make incompetent decisions and ruin a game even when they have the luxury of stopping the game for 3-4 minutes and watching an incident 27 times in slow motion. Criminal to give a penalty for that. Poor Croatia.

 

[epic73]

Possibly the worst refereed match at the WC so far, France were gifted two goals.

 

[Leo]

VAR means that players don't get away with something the referee has missed (on this occasion anyway). Not perfect (yet).

So there are three opportunities for a decision to be made ? Ref....VAR....then back to the Ref ? Again....what the fuck is VAR there for if it is referring incidents back to the ref that the ref has already declined? VAR has the facility to view/review incidents so if it cannot decide why not simply go by the ref's initial decision ? And if that is the case what the fuck is it there for ?

 

[Renegade]

So there are three opportunities for a decision to be made ? Ref....VAR....then back to the Ref ? Again....what the fuck is VAR there for if it is referring incidents back to the ref that the ref has already declined? VAR has the facility to view/review incidents so if it cannot decide why not simply go by the ref's initial decision ? And if that is the case what the fuck is it there for ?

The referee has the final decision, no matter what the VAR officials tell him. He has to review it and ultimately make a decision himself. VAR gives the referee the option to look at the incident again in slow motion from a different angle.

It gives the referee another team's perspective and another chance to look at it. Pretty obvious what the benefits are.

 

[Leo]

That is the point, isn't it? They flag it for the referee to go and double check?

No it isn't.....Ref gives a decision and (if there is any controversy) the....VIDEO ASSISTANT REF is there to decide (as far as I am aware and I presume that is very obvious) whether the ref's decision is correct or not & for VAR to make a decision. Passing the decision back to the ref for a 3rd bite at the cherry is outrageous in the extreme imo!

 

[Leo]

The referee has the final decision, no matter what the VAR officials tell him. He has to review it and ultimately make a decision himself. VAR gives the referee the option to look at the incident again in slow motion from a different angle.

No he doesn't....how often have you seen VAR decisions given without the ref running to the sidelines?

 

[Renegade]

No he doesn't....how often have you seen VAR decisions given without the ref running to the sidelines?

What are you talking about? The VAR team will tell the referee that he should have another look at an incident (implying a mistake has been made or that something is worth having a second look at), then it is up to him to decide whether or not a different decision should be made after he looks at the incident again. The on field referee has the final decision.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42635899

 

[Super_horns]

No it isn't.....Ref gives a decision and (if there is any controversy) the....VIDEO ASSISTANT REF is there to decide (as far as I am aware and I presume that is very obvious) whether the ref's decision is correct or not & for VAR to make a decision. o!

VAR doesn't rule for the on pitch match official - can just advise which I guess is another debate as what one ref will think is a foul/handball might be viewed differently by another.

 

[Leo]

What are you talking about? The VAR team will tell the referee that he should have another look at an incident (implying a mistake has been made or that something is worth having a second look at), then it is up to him to decide whether or not a different decision should be made after he looks at the incident again. The on field referee has the final decision.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42635899

Apologies...I was certain that VAR had the power to overrule the refs. I'm still sure (?) that decisions have been made by VAR without the ref reviewing on the sidelines. However I will say....what is the point of VAR if 'IT' cannot make a decision based upon the numerous replays it has access to without sending the ref to review his original decision ?

VAR doesn't rule for the on pitch match official - can just advise which I guess is another debate as what one ref will think is a foul/handball might be viewed differently by another.

Exactly.

 

[Super_horns]

I think its really only supposed to be used if the ref has made a total mess of something or maybe missed an incident but it has been used quite a bit for as 50/50 decisions where had the ref kept with his original decision no-one would have complained.

 

[Renegade]

Apologies...I was certain that VAR had the power to overrule the refs. I'm still sure (?) that decisions have been made by VAR without the ref reviewing on the sidelines. However I will say....what is the point of VAR if 'IT' cannot make a decision based upon the numerous replays it has access to without sending the ref to review his original decision ?

I haven't seen any decisions made by VAR without the referee reviewing the footage again and making the final decision. VAR has its place when the referee makes an obvious mistake, but yes, unless the VAR team believes the referee made an obvious error, the incident probably shouldn't be reviewed again.

However, it definitely has its uses and the vast majority of decisions impacted by VAR at this World Cup were correct. It has improved the percentage of correct calls in football, despite being an imperfect system that still has some tweaks to iron out. It's unfortunate that it got the call wrong in the biggest match of them all, but statistically it's improving the accuracy of decision making. Just because it's fallible doesn't mean it should be discarded, the previous system is even more imperfect. More correct calls should equate to fairer results.

 

[dedwardp]

Definitely hasn't been any decisions made without the referee consulting the monitors on the side of the pitch.

However I will say....what is the point of VAR if 'IT' cannot make a decision based upon the numerous replays it has access to without sending the ref to review his original decision ?

You are right on that one, at least - all the time spent faffing around with the referee running over to view videos should be cut out and the guy in the video room should be able to just tell him what the correct decision is. The Portugal v Iran game was an absolute farce and it wouldn't have been if this was the case.

 

[SALTIRE]

It wasn't a 'ridiculous decision' coming from smug Shearer; there was room for debate on it, and the ref called it. No biggie for me.

Well done to France though, despite the useless keeper Hugo Lloris, doing his best to fuck it up for you. Delighted for Mbappe, seems a great lad. Only seems like yesterday for France's first World Cup in '98 (alas, the last time Scotland actually qualified!). Congratulations on your second trophy. Best team in the tournament without a doubt.

 

[Kneezy]

You have to feel for Croatia, they’ve played out of their skins but in the end France have been the best team in this World Cup all things considered.

Feel for Lovren losing two finals in the span of two months.

Croatia have been the better team throughout.
But they can't beat France AND the crap ref

 

[Kneezy]

It wasn't a 'ridiculous decision' coming from smug Shearer; there was room for debate on it, and the ref called it. No biggie for me.

Well done to France though, despite the useless keeper Hugo Lloris, doing his best to fuck it up for you. Delighted for Mbappe, seems a great lad. Only seems like yesterday for France's first World Cup in '98 (alas, the last time Scotland actually qualified!). Congratulations on your second trophy. Best team in the tournament without a doubt.

Shearer was absolutely correct
It WAS a "ridiculous decision" as it doesn't even go by the games laws
It was NOT "deliberate"

 

[Renegade]

Let's be honest, how often are handballs "deliberate"? Yet they are given up and down the country every week during the season despite clearly not being deliberate. That the rule can be open to such interpretation is pretty ridiculous. The hand being in an unnatural position is not in the rulebook, yet it is often factored into the decision.

I have seen many penalties given for handballs like today's, which suggests referees don't seem to agree on what constitutes a deliberate handball. Might explain why the VAR team or the referee today thought that was a foul.

 

[valefan16]

Felt for Croatia as they were superb today and just came up against France being clinical and some questionable officiating.

In terms of VAR it is meant to be a clear and obvious error... the referee reviewed it multiple times before deciding which suggests it wasn't clear and obvious.. simple as that.

The Free kick was a dive too so France got the luck but punished Croatia for the short period they went to sleep in the second half to kill the game off.

Perisic is a class player.

Mbappe is unreal... hes 19 now but anyone who watched the Champions League ties the season before last with Man City and Monaco will know just how good he was then at 17! This young lad could be the greatest in the world in the years to come.

Fair play to France, they've been fairly average in most games but got the job done tactically and efficiently. They could be a force for the next few tournaments like Spain were a decade ago.

 

[Dirk]

Only seems like yesterday for France's first World Cup in '98 (alas, the last time Scotland actually qualified!)..

yeah, seems really like yesterday when Scotland qualified for the last time for a World Cup

 

[Super_horns]

There is a Frenchman who will be missing a medal:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1018550534532288512

 

[JJ1532]

I doubt anyone will be missing one. They'll have made more than enough to have spares. They give them out to players, management, support staff etc. Question is, who is she and why does she A. want one for herself or B. want one for Putin. Why would he want one, such an odd trinket to desire.

 

[Renegade]

I doubt anyone will be missing one. They'll have made more than enough to have spares. They give them out to players, management, support staff etc. Question is, who is she and why does she A. want one for herself or B. want one for Putin. Why would he want one, such an odd trinket to desire.

Ha, Putin has previous to be fair...

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/...per-bowl-ring-from-the-patriots-robert-kraft/

That might be a replica World Cup being lofted.

 

[Renegade]

 

[mistermagic]

Pretty pissed right now. Champs-Elysées smelled like tear gas. Must have missed most of the party. Oh well.