I think I'm actually siding with Owen on this. Firstly the Mail is definitely filled with scumbags and secondly, shows like that can help people get why certain decisions were made.
I dont get the recent demand to "challenge" refs. Telling refs they're shite won't make them get the next call right. If anything, it'll make it harder for them to do their job with even more shrill screams heading in their direction.
Scumbags can also be correct in their observations, and it's fairly obvious that the intention, atleast from Webbs side, is to get a more positive spin around the use of VAR in the Premier League. Like talking about the brilliance of VAR in the situation where Chelsea got a penalty against Tottenham, such great use in what as an absolutely obvious call they had to make. They are being selectively transparent in terms of the audio they release and the decisions they debate, and there's no real attempt to ask Webb any difficult questions, like Webb in some cases releasing the actual audio and in other he's giving
his interpretation of what the referee
might have been thinking.
It's like a complete reset every episode. Aaah, now we understand why these decisions were made, it's the complete opposite from more or less identical situations last weekend but lets not focus on that.
It's not as if it's about challenging the refs in public, telling them that they're shite, it's about challenging the implementation of a system that's clearly causing controversial decisions
due to thresholds put in place , like clear and obvious, by people like Webb, and how it's being handled. If anything, it should be about challenging Webb and not the referees doing what they are told. An example: Go back to our match against Arsenal last year, where Arsenal had a disallowed goal due to VAR reacting to a foul in the build up that the referee waved on. This was listed as a VAR mistake because the higher ups didn't agree that the thresholds for clear and obvious had been met, their feeling was that the referee on the pitch accepted the level of contact and VAR should've stayed out. Everyone could see it was a clear foul, where Eriksen was taken out before the ball was even touched, but the entire focus was the threshold for on the pitch decisions and not re-refereeing games.
Then you have the penalty situation between Wolves and Newcastle, It's easy to understand why Anthony Taylor, with his view of the situation, thought there was more contact and that it was a penalty. VAR looks to see if it's clear and obvious that the on pitch decision by Taylor is wrong, and while you can see it's not really a penalty you can also see Hwang connect with the Newcastle player and VAR is stuck with Taylors subjective on the pitch decision. YET, in this case, we suddenly have a turnaround where Webb is now asking VAR to send the referee to the monitor to have another look at it.
If i had Webb in a studio, the obvious route would be to bring up the amount of very similar situations and ask why there's such a big difference in reactions, and why the solution isn't to
consistently ask the referee what he saw and then compare it to the video, rather than Webb's suggested solution of only doing it in some cases. The outcome of the Wolves penalty decision, that really wasn't mental compared to other decisions, is that Taylor got demoted as punishment. Now, i'm not much of a fan of Taylor, but the use of demotions as punishment for a situation like that seems strange.
What about the audio from the match against Brighton, where the ball was deemed to have crossed over the line by VAR, yet the situation was more or less identical to the Newcastle goal against Arsenal where the angles of the recording means that they can't accurately state if the ball is over or not. I would love to hear the audio from our match when VAR decides the ball has crossed the line, because it seems to be nothing but guessing and completely against their directives which is that if they can't clearly determine it then they revert to the on the pitch decision.
What about the audio from the decisions not to recommend red cards for Havertz, Nketiah, Udogie?
The lack of consistency was understandable without VAR, decisions are made in split seconds based on not always ideal angles, with VAR in place it's no longer understandable or acceptable.