I was gonna reply 'you still would' to your original post but you seemed angry so I bottled it :hehe:
I just remember how long it took them to get DRS right. Remember the days when the 3rd umpire would give the on field umpire the details and left it to the umpire to make the final call? It was carnage for a while. It's been refined and improved and refined again to what we have now
Although, in DRS, the on field umpire still has final say, the parameters are fairly well defined. There is a certain degree of out or not out and this took a few years. Imagine how Football, a constantly moving game with much wider room for interpretation, will work to refine and improve the VAR system.
Perhaps, the VAR should only be used to define black and white decisions. Was the ball over the line (throw, GK/corner/goal etc), was a foul inside or outside the box and offside. Strictly define the parameters and then apply them accordingly.
It might take 10 years to get to that point....
The problem with football, of course, is that there is that element of discretion left to referees regarding intent and so forth, so a review system will always mean that there will be a clash between different interpretations. The question is whether on or off-field officials will have the final say.
Yep - one of the interesting things about Sunday's decision for Liverpool's non-goal was that the ref Pawson (booooooooooo) was on VAR for the United Everton game and didn't give a foul for a similar challenge on De Gea. So his definition was consistent, yet he gets overturned in this instant. Even though I think it was a foul, it hardly makes any sense
And nobody wants the officials to be correct 100% of the time, in any case. Otherwise how to explain away a 2-0 defeat at Swindon Town, or somewhere like that, without at least in part blaming the linesman or the ref. For the good of the game, these functionaries must continue to exist as sort of Aunt Sally, pantomime characters.