VAR, Refs and Linesmen | General Discussion

Annihilate Now! said:
Yeah, definitely not "clear & obvious"

The main problem with VAR in my mind is that they've created an enviornment that gives too much weight to the VAR decision. The framing of "clear and obvious" and then "presenting evidence to back the decision" means that the refs more or less will always side with VAR because that's how it goes.

I have no problem with VAR thinking something might be a red if that's their opinion, but then it should be a discussion with the ref - not "presenting the best evidence to suggest its a red", not telling the ref what they've done is clear and obivously wrong - just a normal discussion between two refs about what the right decisin should be.
Click to expand...

A discussion which should also be miked up for the watching public to listen to and understand how the decision is being reached - as happens in rugby. It’s really not difficult to see how VAR could be properly implemented.
 
Doracle said:
A discussion which should also be miked up for the watching public to listen to and understand how the decision is being reached - as happens in rugby. It’s really not difficult to see how VAR could be properly implemented.
Click to expand...

Yeah that would work too. Would you achieve consistancy? Probably not - because all refs are different. Would better decisions be made though? Ulitmately yes - because you're using two refs in unison as opposed to the current system of using two refs seperately, with one of them having to worry about a random arbitary "Clear and Obvious" bar that doesn't actually exist.
 
There's actually a show on Sky now where they try to explain all the referee decisions from the weekend. The thing that stands out more than anything is that there is absolutely zero consistency from one week to the next. They don't know what they're doing and neither does anyone else.
 
Predictably Dermot says Romero handball WAS a penalty and he was lucky not to be sent off for it.
Yet the more obvious one not given for United wasn’t a penalty according to him.
Bias much?!
 
That football daily interview with dermot confirms it for me. VAR will never be implemented correctly with them all covering each others backs.
 
At this point the only reason we don’t get to hear the conversations live is because they are saving their backs. There is no other possible explanation
 
bosnian_red said:

Joke really
Click to expand...


Came to post this. What a fecking joke. This guy isn't even involved directly with the FA or PGMOL anymore right? What's stopping him from saying: "Yeah, that should've been a penalty as well?". Afraid to upset his mates, or are these pricks just always covering for each other no matter what?
 
Has anyone suggested having a few refs from other leagues ref in the Premier League?

They'd surely be more impartial and not a part of the refereeing cabal over here.
 
Mike Smalling said:
Came to post this. What a fecking joke. This guy isn't even involved directly with the FA or PGMOL anymore right? What's stopping him from saying: "Yeah, that should've been a penalty as well?". Afraid to upset his mates, or are these pricks just always covering for each other no matter what?
Click to expand...

That would be because Gallagher defended the decision not to award us a penalty against Tottenham.
 
bosnian_red said:

Joke really
Click to expand...


That's really shit from Sky - you've got a ref in to answer questions about decisions/consistency, you get a perfect example of clear inconsistency - scouse full back who's name I can't remember so I'm going to call him Steve Finan brings it up, and instead of having the clip clued up, instead of bringing up what he said about that pen, instead of pushing him in anyway - they just let him mumble under his breath for a bit and move on swiftly... absolutely shocking "reporting".
 
Gio said:
I don't get how Nketiah got away with that one either. Putting it down to either a directive to "let things go a bit more because it's a derby". Or where referees need a steer from people who have played the game who understand instantly how dangerous that challenge was. Either way, it's as poor a decision as I've seen in the league this year.
Click to expand...

Bizarre.

Also, in regards to Gusto’s red card, it’s quite similar to Saka’s studs tackle on Bruno where you can clearly see him stamp down on his foot.
 


A month ago, Romero escaped giving away a penalty against Manchester United when the VAR opted against intervening, based upon proximity. The VAR Review from after that match stated, "we will likely see similar situations that result in a penalty." On Sunday, the ball hit Romero from close range and the VAR advised the referee a penalty should be awarded.

Fans want consistency but each situation is going to be judged on its own merits, and when the subjectivity of different referees is adding into it -- especially when handball is far from cut and dried -- there will always be perceived inconsistencies.

The incident against Arsenal was a clearer offence, as it blocked a shot close to goal, yet you cannot blame supporters for thinking there was little difference in arm position or proximity in the two situations.
Click to expand...

This is the reality. They were very similar incidents that were judged differently because there is a huge amount of subjectivity in the handball law.

I don't know why Gallagher doesn't just say that. It might not be an answer people like but it is the answer.
 
Rules shouldn't have wriggle room for different interpretations. A rule should be a rule, with no doubt and clear, precise instruction.

The big problem is that footballs rules aren't clear and precise. Each ref, each official will have slightly and sometimes vastly different interpretations. This leads to inconsistent judgements game by game.

VAR is just another branch of officiating using the same shitty rules so it's no surprise that it's also inconsistent. What football really needs is a review process of the rules which focuses on how to implement VAR to fix clear problems.

There will always be officiating errors from time to time. But football should not be so inconsistent, we have technology now to help the officials. So rather than half arsing the use of VAR, football should learn from these few trial years and come to a clear conclusion on when VAR is used that is consistent for every game. None of this "when a clear error has occurred" bullshit because that's subjective as it comes.

Football fans aren't pissed at the technology, it's the use of the technology and the standard of the officiating which is in part due to the shitty rules.
 
Annihilate Now! said:
Yeah, definitely not "clear & obvious"

The main problem with VAR in my mind is that they've created an enviornment that gives too much weight to the VAR decision. The framing of "clear and obvious" and then "presenting evidence to back the decision" means that the refs more or less will always side with VAR because that's how it goes.

I have no problem with VAR thinking something might be a red if that's their opinion, but then it should be a discussion with the ref - not "presenting the best evidence to suggest its a red", not telling the ref what they've done is clear and obivously wrong - just a normal discussion between two refs about what the right decisin should be.
Click to expand...
Just looking at it now. Some angles it doesn't look too bad, but from another angle he has both feet off the ground, that will be classed as reckless. That will be why the ref was told to look at it again.
 
Anybody else listen to the No Question About That podcast? I thought Daniel summed the whole circus up pretty well with this:

“I think the problem is we can see frame by frame what happened, slowed down in a replay - and still not have a fecking clue what the ref is gonna give.”
 
RedSky said:
Rules shouldn't have wriggle room for different interpretations. A rule should be a rule, with no doubt and clear, precise instruction.

The big problem is that footballs rules aren't clear and precise. Each ref, each official will have slightly and sometimes vastly different interpretations. This leads to inconsistent judgements game by game.

VAR is just another branch of officiating using the same shitty rules so it's no surprise that it's also inconsistent. What football really needs is a review process of the rules which focuses on how to implement VAR to fix clear problems.

There will always be officiating errors from time to time. But football should not be so inconsistent, we have technology now to help the officials. So rather than half arsing the use of VAR, football should learn from these few trial years and come to a clear conclusion on when VAR is used that is consistent for every game. None of this "when a clear error has occurred" bullshit because that's subjective as it comes.

Football fans aren't pissed at the technology, it's the use of the technology and the standard of the officiating which is in part due to the shitty rules.
Click to expand...
Then you may as well not have VAR as the referee and linesman can interpret those incidents without VAR putting their oar in.
 
2 man midfield said:
Anybody else listen to the No Question About That podcast? I thought Daniel summed the whole circus up pretty well with this:

“I think the problem is we can see frame by frame what happened, slowed down in a replay - and still not have a fecking clue what the ref is gonna give.”
Click to expand...

No change there then.

We can also have no clue what the next poster on redcafe will think.

The notion that slo mo replays will reveal the “truth” in every incident is the myth on which the whole shitty VAR house of cards is built on. And it was always obviously a myth. Because it’s always been obvious that the exact same video replays can and will be interpreted differently by different people.
 
DomesticTadpole said:
Then you may as well not have VAR as the referee and linesman can interpret those incidents without VAR putting their oar in.
Click to expand...

No because you always need VAR to fix what officials may not have been able to see. I.e. if a goal was really offside or not. Technology and VAR should help reduce the errors, but they should only be able to pass judgement on a decision that they can give clear and accurate judgement on.

The problem currently is the shitty rules. They're far too subjective. That means that now we have the officials making inconsistent judgements and also VAR. VAR should always be 100% accurate. Anything subjective, which requires an opinion should be the refs decision alone. VAR can offer the ref different angles of the incident but no judgement.
 
RedSky said:
No because you always need VAR to fix what officials may not have been able to see. I.e. if a goal was really offside or not. Technology and VAR should help reduce the errors, but they should only be able to pass judgement on a decision that they can give clear and accurate judgement on.

The problem currently is the shitty rules. They're far too subjective. That means that now we have the officials making inconsistent judgements and also VAR. VAR should always be 100% accurate. Anything subjective, which requires an opinion should be the refs decision alone. VAR can offer the ref different angles of the incident but no judgement.
Click to expand...
Yes definitely agree with the last bit, offsides, off the ball incidents or as you say things the referee didn't see. At the moment they are bringing referees decisions into disrepute left right and centre. I also agree with the different angles, the problem starts if they say to the referee that they think he got it wrong, so put a doubt in his mind, when actually it might be VAR who get it wrong. It takes a brave ref to stick to his guns.
 
Withnail said:
Hang on what????

Asked what's the difference, he just waffles on about the recent decision?

Did he say anything about the Romero one that wasn't given to United, at the time?
Click to expand...
Said it wasn't a pen at the time due to proximity/"not intentional" which is of course nonsense. Just defending his mates
 
Pogue Mahone said:
No change there then.

We can also have no clue what the next poster on redcafe will think.

The notion that slo mo replays will reveal the “truth” in every incident is the myth on which the whole shitty VAR house of cards is built on. And it was always obviously a myth. Because it’s always been obvious that the exact same video replays can and will be interpreted differently by different people.
Click to expand...

Yeah this is pretty spot on. With the amount of mistakes we get and the general lack of consistensy, I dont believe we see less mistakes overall then we did pre VAR. The only thing we have "gained" is a massive diminishing of epic moments in games due to not being sure whether VAR will interwene or not.
 
Lyng said:
Yeah this is pretty spot on. With the amount of mistakes we get and the general lack of consistensy, I dont believe we see less mistakes overall then we did pre VAR. The only thing we have "gained" is a massive diminishing of epic moments in games due to not being sure whether VAR will interwene or not.
Click to expand...

Yup. The diminishing of epic moments is the most unforgiveable element to this whole charade. Screwing up the very reason we all watch football in the first place. So insane this was allowed to happen.

The other obvious downside is the way we've moved on from "referees are crap" to "referees are corrupt" VAR has ended up creating a greater sense of injustice than we ever felt before it was foisted on us. The exact opposite of what it was supposed to achieve. Which is, again, utter madness.
 
bosnian_red said:
Said it wasn't a pen at the time due to proximity/"not intentional" which is of course nonsense. Just defending his mates
Click to expand...
This is where the “journalists” should do their job and probe further - ‘but yesterdays incident was closer, you inept feck. Explain?’
 
I'm fine with the Evans goal being ruled out on Saturday - imo that's entirely a fair call given how close he is to the keeper.

But how many goals just like that have we conceded with De Gea stuck behind an opposition player? Feels like at 2 or 3 a season. None as bad as when Calvert-Lewin was allowed to pull down De Gea's arms, but still.

The whole strategy of surrounding the keeper is interfering with them. Loads of goals still stand. It's just weird.
 
Its such a simple fix. Only use VAR/technology for goals and offsides. Binary decisions. On/off....over the line/didn't cross.

everything else is subjective so should be left to the on the field ref
 
Beachryan said:
I'm fine with the Evans goal being ruled out on Saturday - imo that's entirely a fair call given how close he is to the keeper.

But how many goals just like that have we conceded with De Gea stuck behind an opposition player? Feels like at 2 or 3 a season. None as bad as when Calvert-Lewin was allowed to pull down De Gea's arms, but still.

The whole strategy of surrounding the keeper is interfering with them. Loads of goals still stand. It's just weird.
Click to expand...

Yeah same - I think that sort of thing absolutely should be offside, but it seems totally arbitary whether it is or isn't... and it's not a difficult thing to apply some sort of consistency too either. Is bloke offside? Yes... is his presence interfering with the keeper in any way? Yes.... simples.
 
Beachryan said:
I'm fine with the Evans goal being ruled out on Saturday - imo that's entirely a fair call given how close he is to the keeper.

But how many goals just like that have we conceded with De Gea stuck behind an opposition player? Feels like at 2 or 3 a season. None as bad as when Calvert-Lewin was allowed to pull down De Gea's arms, but still.

The whole strategy of surrounding the keeper is interfering with them. Loads of goals still stand. It's just weird.
Click to expand...

They’re allowed to block off the keeper if they’re not offside. Usually the defending team have at least one defender on a post, so there’s no risk of being offside if someone tries to block the keeper. This one was unusual because all the defenders were a few yards out from the end line when Evans headed the ball.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.