Quote Originally Posted by NeverFeltBetter
The general issue I've had with VAR during the WWC has been how slow its been, sometimes for things that should need just one look at replay monitor, if even that. There are plenty of decisions that the VAR official should be able to adjudicate on without the need for the ref to run off the field for minutes at a time.

At the same time, since of the commentary on it, especially from the likes of George Hamilton, has verged close to hysteria. Marginal or not, VAR has spotted things refs and linesmen havent or aren't able to. That semi offside is the perfect example, as was the penalty England botched later in the half.

Refs - especially, if I may dare to say so, female refs - need more time and experience with VAR, so they learn to use it effectively, not excessively, and that it's an assist, not a crutch.
In fairness, FIFA were in a difficult position. If they allow VAR to be used at the WWC, the refs are criticised for their lack of experience with it. If they don't allow VAR to be used, they're branded "sexist", and all the usual tall tales about discrimination that go with it, for only allowing the Men's WC to have it. In the end, they allowed the Women to use it. And I think that was the right decision.

Referees leave the pitch for up to 30 seconds at a time, not "minutes", so they can see for themselves all the facts around an incident and make an informed judgement based on those facts. Most delays are for the finger to the ear. Sometimes decisions are complex, sometimes 2 or more parts of the same move have to be checked where just 1 decision can be reached. It takes a bit of time sometimes, but it's worth it if the right decision is ultimately made, as is usually the case.

If you thought Hamilton was hysterical, it wasn't a patch on the daily rants against VAR from Paul Dempsey covering the Copa America. Some of these fuddy duddies and luddites just don't get it. It's not a question of if VAR will stay, it's a question of how will it expand and how soon will it do so. This is the way it's going to be from now on. Embrace the positive difference it makes or reminisce about the bad old days. Your choice.

Riley has some welcome comments to make generally, especially on ref's trusting what VAR officials are telling them, but I guess we'll see how likely his "delay of game only once in five matches" will be.
It's not likely, but he is trying to play the populist line atm and reassure the sceptics, who have been put off VAR by all the negative headlines in the media.

The pace of English football, coupled with all the appeals for penalties and offsides etc, inevitably means most games will see VAR used at some point. Goals will be ruled out that previously stood and vice versa. For or against it though, people are just going to have to get used to it. It's success is judged by how often the final decision is accepted as the correct one. Which will be the case at least 99% of the time.