Premier League to trial VAR this season

The Wolves goal v MMan City would defo have been disallowed so there's technically 2 more points for City and one less for Wolves. Would the Bournemouth player have gone v EFC, would Bardsley have gone v United.

Would Salah have got a penalty vs Palace or been suspended for 3 games like Niasse. These are the questions that need answering before our refs and their cohorts are given VAR to play with.

There's a reason they had no British refs at the World Cup – they are not good enough. If VAR makes them better then I welcome it but somehow I reckon it will make them even more confused and us with them.

VAR will monitor games but will not intervene, nor will the match referee use it. It's more like a simulation to test their ability to monitor all matches at the same time.

So we won't see an actual VAR referral until next season – if my understanding is correct.

The World Cup did a lot for VAR, the PR and the over exposure of it helped brow beat many into acceptance.

It did however show a very good improvement in offside decisions, which is a step forward.

Moreover the understanding and subsequent application of the handball rule and a what constitutes a ‘clear error' when a penalty/non penalty is overturned were not a success.

Is VAR useful, yes, is it ready, for me no. The whole approach is interventionist, when the game is about the players. It should be they not the officials who request a review. Players know what's marginal and what is a clear mistake. And that is really what you should see to eradicate.

Let it be fine-tuned elsewhere and only use it for offside goals if at all. The German league penalty at half-time last season and the World Cup proves that it isn't fit for purpose.

I would rather enjoy the game and moan and cheer rather than have time-outs whilst people debate and kill the ever decreasing atmosphere at the match.

Not for me.

I'm afraid that I don't share your enthusiasm for VAR; the few times I saw it in operation, the referees didn't request assistance, it was the four or five 'referees' many miles away who were pulling the strings.

I am on record as stating that I have no qualms over goal-line technology, because the decision is instant. However, I am of the opinion that football is a sport played by humans, officiated by humans, and watched by humans, and as we all know, humans make mistakes.

I'm not one of those people who believe that wrong decisions even themselves out over a season; I believe that we all receive a share of dubious decisions but some receive more than others.

To return to the VAR discussion, I believe that the human element is being removed from the game, and I can relate to the time when there were no substitutes allowed etc. I appreciate that some will question if that could be considered as "The good old days"...

But I can envisage the time, when you reach the age of 80, and you're telling your grandchildren of the days when penalty takers, and throw-in experts were not sitting on the bench waiting to take a penalty or throw-in before resuming their seat. And when it was harder to score because the goal wasn't 12 yards wide and 10 feet high, and there weren't 3 'robot referees' in each half... but then again, I suppose that's progress.

This is a very good point, John. However, irrespective of the benefits, potential or realized, I'm still unable to fully decide how I feel about it. The basis of the game has remained almost untouched for well over a century (yes, some minor tweaks).

This is part of its appeal – the inherent human aspect, the organic understanding that every young player or fan grows to develop, learning the vagaries and their place in the scheme of it.

I don't condone the errors in the game, and they certainly do "cost" teams (to varying extents, but that's another story). Somehow though, in the greater picture, it's all provided an adequately balanced and fair game over the long haul.

Deep and far-reaching messing with this history is to be undertaken very carefully. There are few things left that stand unaltered, most things in life having fallen victim to the reform/fit-for-purpose mantras. Football is golden, IMO.

On a personal and political note, I also don't like the fact that there is now a huge momentum behind inserting Tech/IT/digitization into absolutely everything, whether functionally needed or not – and football provides a huge and very visible vehicle for that meme.

In this last test, England v India match, both captains were gung-ho with their reviews and it came back to bite them.

What we cannot have is players demanding VAR ad nauseum to break up the play, waste time and generally cheat. That will cut down the reviews to those actually on the pitch. No captain with a brain would waste their reviews and only the captain should approach the referee.

An arsehole like Stephanie Gerrard would be unable to convince his tour-friendly ref, ie Shatonberg, to get away with getting a penalty for a foul outside the area and then persuading him to send Tony Hibbert off. Kuyt would have been red-carded, and Spitting Carragher too for wresting Lescott to the ground!

It is impossible to say on many occasions and it will depend on the mindset of the VAR ref on that particular day.

Offsides will be easier to adjudicate on. Dark arts in the penalty box could be spotted by it, shirt pulling etc.

For me, an incident has to be clear-cut to give a VAR decision, if it can be in any way argued it is not clear-cut then it just falls to opinion again. Leave the match ref to it.

It slows down the game so much that it affects the flow of the game.