VAR, Refs and Linesmen | General Discussion

stevoc said:
It's been obvious for years now that Refs are reluctant to give United big decisions for fear of the media backlash. To the point where we rarely even get a stone wall pen awarded.

When we got that run of penalties 2 years ago when VAR first came in, that was probably because the refs knew their decisions were being reviewed and they had to give them. Of the pens we were given only the Bruno vs Villa was even debatable.

But all it took was Turkey teeth moaning about it in a presser, the press picking up the story and making a big deal about it for them to shit themselves about giving United a penalty again.
Click to expand...
It has been obvious refs haven't got the balls to take on the ABU media.
 
Ridiculous decision to allow our 4th goal in the wolves game. Our bloke (can't remember who it was) grabs hold of of Traore's shirt. Definitely impedes him. We collect the ball play it through and score. Ref gets called over to the monitor but decides there wasn't enough in it. It's true Traore should play to the whistle but the handful of shirt is clear as day as is the fact it impedes him. I'd be livid as a Wolves fan. Terrible decision.
 
Until these twats are called out as either incompetent or bent rather than it just being put down to "inconsistency" every time something unbelievably obviously wrong happens, it will just keep happening.
 
soft pen was given in Southampton vs Spurs game, in injury time. Ref had clear view + VAR. This has nothing to do inconsistency, refs are consistently shit.
Imagine if United got this kind of call. Media would run it for a month straight.
 
It didn’t cost us today but feck off not allowing VAR to intervene when a ball is clearly not a corner and is a goal kick. If that corner given after it clearly hits Havertz in the last minutes results in a goal it would be completely unfair when you have the tech to prove it.
 
SilentWitness said:
It didn’t cost us today but feck off not allowing VAR to intervene when a ball is clearly not a corner and is a goal kick. If that corner given after it clearly hits Havertz in the last minutes results in a goal it would be completely unfair when you have the tech to prove it.
Click to expand...
That's why I like the thought of a challenge system. Why is it in the referees' hands to decide what type of refereeing error is a significant one from Everton's perspective? They're not even doing what they're supposed to do, which is consistently review all goals and potential red card tackles, and adding another ref's subjective opinion on top of a subjective opinion from the on-field ref hasn't really got the results we've wanted as fans.

Conceding a clearly wrong corner in the 94th minute can cost you a place in the PL next season, and if it turns out you're wrong and you waste a challenge on it then you can't have any complaints about not being able to use a challenge later on.

I really think we should remove the VAR and replace with a video guy, and then teams can force on-field ref to the monitor for a review of an incident. The only argument against it is that teams will use it as a time-wasting tactic, but how much time is lost if the referee runs over to the screen and instantly realises it's a bullshit challenge? 30 seconds? That's less than half the time Nick Pope needs to take a fecking goal kick when Newcastle are leading a game.
 
Anustart89 said:
That's why I like the thought of a challenge system. Why is it in the referees' hands to decide what type of refereeing error is a significant one from Everton's perspective? They're not even doing what they're supposed to do, which is consistently review all goals and potential red card tackles, and adding another ref's subjective opinion on top of a subjective opinion from the on-field ref hasn't really got the results we've wanted as fans.

Conceding a clearly wrong corner in the 94th minute can cost you a place in the PL next season, and if it turns out you're wrong and you waste a challenge on it then you can't have any complaints about not being able to use a challenge later on.

I really think we should remove the VAR and replace with a video guy, and then teams can force on-field ref to the monitor for a review of an incident. The only argument against it is that teams will use it as a time-wasting tactic, but how much time is lost if the referee runs over to the screen and instantly realises it's a bullshit challenge? 30 seconds? That's less than half the time Nick Pope needs to take a fecking goal kick when Newcastle are leading a game.
Click to expand...

Definitely not a challenge system either, it’s not needed. Checking if something is a corner or a goal kick takes no time at all. Just use the system with common sense.
 
That decision on Leeds 4th goal :wenger: VAR made the ref go and have a look at it and he still chose to allow it! It’s the most obvious foul you’ll ever see. It’s so obvious everyone stopped. I actually can’t get my head round it at anymore. Are they deliberately sabotaging it or are the refs just that bad??

Until we get to hear the communication between refs and VAR (like literally every other sport allows) then it’s never going to be trusted.
 
Craig Dawson for Wolves jumped studs first into one of the Leeds players yesterday, missed the ball completely and got a yellow.
How can pudits come on Sky Sports etc and say Casemiro's was a red card when worse challenges aren't even highlighted after games. Make it make sense.
 
I don't really get why people are so convinced the refs are suddenly bad or corrupt or getting worse, or the standard is lower. What's the difference between these refs and refs of the past, VAR aside? They were making some poor decisions back in the day and they're about the same now. Maybe it's just pretty hard to please everybody in that job if there are so few success stories. Harder than armchair fans like to imagine who think it's as simple as putting a ref outfit on and "being consistent"

Also VAR doesn't change much for many types of decision. Yes they get a replay but it's still the same body of individuals pouring over the footage. So you're not going to get complete consistency on tackles, handballs etc. Why would you just because you've got a bloke in a studio? They're still going through the same thought processes.

The only thing that's changed is that now offsides are correct. That's due to technology not human input. So until you have some sort of AI derived process with a robot running round the pitch judging fouls etc, you won't see the same consistency for those things and I don't know why there's this relentless expectation for humans not to be human.

They're fecking questionable much of the time in Europe too. How many times do we get a Euro ref and complain constantly about the calls. So don't think it's about English refs. It's about human refs.

Take it one step further, do we really think they don't make feck up after feck up in egg chasing as well? England had a bloke sent off for nonsense yesterday that ruins the game. The only difference between us and them is they have a culture of accepting refs decisions bad and good, promoting their authority, and getting on with it. For the most part. We don't, we undermine them and micro analyse everything, they're basically stress balls for managers to lambast, pundits to make big statements over that keeps them in a job, and players to make excuses around.
 
Last edited:
The red card for Jonny against Leeds is another example of the rules changing week by week. The exact same foul was committed in the Chelsea/Leicester game as pointed out last weekend with the Casemiro red and it wasn't even a booking.

So why is VAR allowed to intervene on both cases but skip the Chelsea/Leicester incident?

This is where the frustration comes from, there's no consistency with the rules.
 
Abraxas said:
I don't really get why people are so convinced the refs are suddenly bad or corrupt or getting worse, or the standard is lower. What's the difference between these refs and refs of the past, VAR aside? They were making some poor decisions back in the day and they're about the same now. Maybe it's just pretty hard to please everybody in that job if there are so few success stories. Harder than armchair fans like to imagine who think it's as simple as putting a ref outfit on and "being consistent"

Also VAR doesn't change much for many types of decision. Yes they get a replay but it's still the same body of individuals pouring over the footage. So you're not going to get complete consistency on tackles, handballs etc. Why would you just because you've got a bloke in a studio? They're still going through the same thought processes.

The only thing that's changed is that now offsides are correct. That's due to technology not human input. So until you have some sort of AI derived process with a robot running round the pitch judging fouls etc, you won't see the same consistency for those things and I don't know why there's this relentless expectation for humans not to be human.

They're fecking questionable much of the time in Europe too. How many times do we get a Euro ref and complain constantly about the calls. So don't think it's about English refs. It's about human refs.

Take it one step further, do we really think they don't make feck up after feck up in egg chasing as well? England had a bloke sent off for nonsense yesterday that ruins the game. The only difference between us and them is they have a culture of accepting refs decisions bad and good, promoting their authority, and getting on with it. For the most part. We don't, we undermine them and micro analyse everything, they're basically stress balls for managers to lambast, pundits to make big statements over that keeps them in a job, and players to make excuses around.
Click to expand...

People are more willing to accept errors from refs when they get one view of the incident in real time (obviously depending how bad an error it is).

What VAR should have cut down on is a lot of that inconsistency. With the benefit of replays, they should (generally) be applying the same standards across all matches. The problem, in my view, is that they have decided to include the “clear and obvious error” wording. That introduces another discretionary factor into the situation. The VAR has to think about whether or not it’s clear and obvious as well as thinking about whether it’s a foul. That adds an extra blurred line that can lead to massive inconsistency.

Personally, I would remove that “clear and obvious” wording. The way I would want to see it work is that the VAR decides whether they think it is, for example, a red card (assuming the ref hasn’t given one). If they do, then the main ref goes over to the video and they watch it together and talk it through (preferably in real time from different angles) - with no expectation the ref will definitely overturn it. Ultimate decision rests with the onfield ref.

I don’t think the refs are overly inept or corrupt. They aren’t helped by this process and also by the fact some of the rules are complete nonsense - the handball rule particularly currently is an absolute mess.
 
Just watching the FA cup tie between Sheffield Utd & Blackburn and have to say the quality isn’t too bad, albeit McCoists opinions which are quite outdated.

Hadn’t realised they use VAR in all Championship cup matches until Sheffield were awarded a penalty.
 
Doracle said:
People are more willing to accept errors from refs when they get one view of the incident in real time (obviously depending how bad an error it is).

What VAR should have cut down on is a lot of that inconsistency. With the benefit of replays, they should (generally) be applying the same standards across all matches. The problem, in my view, is that they have decided to include the “clear and obvious error” wording. That introduces another discretionary factor into the situation. The VAR has to think about whether or not it’s clear and obvious as well as thinking about whether it’s a foul. That adds an extra blurred line that can lead to massive inconsistency.

Personally, I would remove that “clear and obvious” wording. The way I would want to see it work is that the VAR decides whether they think it is, for example, a red card (assuming the ref hasn’t given one). If they do, then the main ref goes over to the video and they watch it together and talk it through (preferably in real time from different angles) - with no expectation the ref will definitely overturn it. Ultimate decision rests with the onfield ref.

I don’t think the refs are overly inept or corrupt. They aren’t helped by this process and also by the fact some of the rules are complete nonsense - the handball rule particularly currently is an absolute mess.
Click to expand...
It's easy to say apply the same standards as a buzzword, which undoubtedly they're trying to do to the best of their ability, but it's not like they get a batch of decisions that are exactly the same, they're still unique incidents otherwise we'd just have robots analysing them in binary. As fans we throw decisions together into these clusters that look roughly the same and that's good enough for us to make an inconsequential point. It's not very scientific, it's just "X happened last week and now Y has happened", nothing to do with overall consistency across a season as an entire body of decisions refs make and how that may or may not be improving ref standards over time. But could removing the clear and obvious stuff help? Maybe, you could have a point.

With regards to consistency, standards and VAR, I think we'd find it a lot different if we actually had to sit down and make these decisions, even in the VAR chair where people make out it's simple. You have a set of regulations so we think they can be applied with perfect uniformity, but they have to interpret them over the top of a specific incident and the devil is in the detail. They all have different speeds, different contact, different contact with the ball, different ref interpretation of the intent. With handballs it can be very difficult to interpret too.

Look at pundits and how they make a living hauling these guys through the streets so fans can throw tomatoes at them. Even they can't fecking agree on a decision and they are the "experts" that keep reminding us refs didn't play the game. They're the ones in their own VAR studio with no skin in the game, no jeopardy and they don't find full agreement. Do we really fecking think they'd reach the standards of consistency and the near elimination of human error that they expect? What does that tell us about the job if not that it contains subjectivity and human error, even from the studio nevermind the poor cnut with a whistle.

It's just a bloody tough job IMO. Especially on the pitch but also in the studio where the scrutiny is huge. The fitness required, barrages of abuse for simply doing a job, the scrutiny on every single aspect of your work, very few jobs entail that, probably even the footballers. I know it's reasonably paid but bloody hell, it ain't easy.
 
Abraxas said:
It's easy to say apply the same standards as a buzzword, which undoubtedly they're trying to do to the best of their ability, but it's not like they get a batch of decisions that are exactly the same, they're still unique incidents otherwise we'd just have robots analysing them in binary. As fans we throw decisions together into these clusters that look roughly the same and that's good enough for us to make an inconsequential point. It's not very scientific, it's just "X happened last week and now Y has happened", nothing to do with overall consistency across a season as an entire body of decisions refs make and how that may or may not be improving ref standards over time. But could removing the clear and obvious stuff help? Maybe, you could have a point.

With regards to consistency, standards and VAR, I think we'd find it a lot different if we actually had to sit down and make these decisions, even in the VAR chair where people make out it's simple. You have a set of regulations so we think they can be applied with perfect uniformity, but they have to interpret them over the top of a specific incident and the devil is in the detail. They all have different speeds, different contact, different contact with the ball, different ref interpretation of the intent. With handballs it can be very difficult to interpret too.

Look at pundits and how they make a living hauling these guys through the streets so fans can throw tomatoes at them. Even they can't fecking agree on a decision and they are the "experts" that keep reminding us refs didn't play the game. They're the ones in their own VAR studio with no skin in the game, no jeopardy and they don't find full agreement. Do we really fecking think they'd reach the standards of consistency and the near elimination of human error that they expect? What does that tell us about the job if not that it contains subjectivity and human error, even from the studio nevermind the poor cnut with a whistle.

It's just a bloody tough job IMO. Especially on the pitch but also in the studio where the scrutiny is huge. The fitness required, barrages of abuse for simply doing a job, the scrutiny on every single aspect of your work, very few jobs entail that, probably even the footballers. I know it's reasonably paid but bloody hell, it ain't easy.
Click to expand...
Calm down Howard Webb. There’s a significant margin for error even with VAR. What there isn’t is acceptance for total incompetence and downright inconsistency almost to the point of cheating or influencing football matches. Allowing someone to decide wether they will bother to intervene, or having refs unquestioned over long periods of time who have booked twice as many United players as opposing players...or var showing misleading images to refs that influence their decision is downright cheating.

If you think everyone should get on board with this and Pat the PGMOL on the back then I’d like some of what you’re smoking.
 
RopersReturn said:
Just watching the FA cup tie between Sheffield Utd & Blackburn and have to say the quality isn’t too bad, albeit McCoists opinions which are quite outdated.

Hadn’t realised they use VAR in all Championship cup matches until Sheffield were awarded a penalty.
Click to expand...
Neither did Radio 5 live. It was funny listening to him say and of course no VAR at a championship ground a few times only to be dumbfounded when it came on the screen
 
Jeppers7 said:
Calm down Howard Webb. There’s a significant margin for error even with VAR. What there isn’t is acceptance for total incompetence and downright inconsistency almost to the point of cheating or influencing football matches. Allowing someone to decide wether they will bother to intervene, or having refs unquestioned over long periods of time who have booked twice as many United players as opposing players...or var showing misleading images to refs that influence their decision is downright cheating.

If you think everyone should get on board with this and Pat the PGMOL on the back then I’d like some of what you’re smoking.
Click to expand...
What does "almost to the point of cheating" mean? Are they cheating or are they not?

They're inconsistent yes, that's a description of the fact they don't make 100% correct judgments across 100% of incidents so it's relatively obvious they are inconsistent. There are a lot of judgments to make and a lot of subjectivity so why wouldn't there be.

But if you say they're incompetent then I ask by what standard are they incompetent? Compared to what and who because there must be some reference point of competence. Every Euro game we have we have fans on here complaining, so I don't see a body of referees that are at the standard which fans and pundits seem to demand and think is possible. I see international refs that are our refs! Maybe it's possible to have exceptional individuals, just as it's possible to have exceptional individual footballers, but they're exceptional because they're outliers.

Even in other sports, I see rugby refs making mistakes on the regular even with VAR, I see boxing refs that interpret the action completely differently. Some breaking clinches up like their lives depend on it, some laissez faire, some taking points if someone farts. I wouldn't describe them as completely consistent. I'd say they're human and they feck up, get on with it. So what's the deal, what is so unique about what we see in football? The only unique thing I see is a bunch of fans and pundits that taking moaning to the nth degree. It's pretty much cultural, even down to chanting at refs whereas nobody gives a feck about the ref in other sports. That tells me there is a borderline obsession with refs and from a media POV it seems to sell and perpetuate this analysis.

It's nothing to do with praising the refs, I don't know why you're bringing that up, it's just a straw man.
 
Did WE pay the refs in this Fulham game?

You have to say absolutely not. Because the owners never put a cent towards the club.
 
AaronRedDevil said:
Did WE pay the refs in this Fulham game?

You have to say absolutely not. Because the owners never put a cent towards the club.
Click to expand...
There's an implication that the decisions were wrong and they weren't. It was well refereed throughout to be honest.

In the game, he's definitely been a little more lenient to Fulham, typical smaller team in the cup decisions. Sancho having his shirt pulled and a free kick against him, 60 seconds later Maguire touches Reid and an instant foul for Fulham.
 
VAR and the refs have done their jobs in this game. That hasn't been the case recently, both for and against us.

Don't know what on earth Silva has a problem with tbh.
 
AaronRedDevil said:
Did WE pay the refs in this Fulham game?

You have to say absolutely not. Because the owners never put a cent towards the club.
Click to expand...

Would have hit his body if his arm wasn't there anyway, it was tucked in next to his body? Made the mistake of not having arms behind his back?

Intentional handball?
 
Wait. 3 red cards at the same time? What the feck happened? :lol:

Edit: ah the 3rd is the coach.
 
Last edited:
As straighforward a penalty call as you'll get. Losing their heads over that is madness.
 
No brainer decisions. Deliberate handball on the line, unless we're going to argue he accidentally moved his arms in the direction of the ball to stop it. He'd be a pretty good goalkeeper with those instincts for moving exactly towards the ball without any intention.

Then manhandling and probably verbally abusing a referee. Needs to be totally stamped out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.