VAR, Refs and Linesmen | General Discussion

[Oranges038]

Were referees better before they turned professional?

If you think about it, during the week they probably had regular jobs and had general interaction with public, which probably helped them in terms of making responsible decisions. They still made poor decisions and fecked up, but I think it was more acceptable than now, because they weren't professional and didn't have 4 guys backing them up with replays from all angles.

These guys are so insulated and protected and so afraid of stepping on each others toes from the VAR room. I get there is an element of not questioning their authority and decision making on the pitch. But, getting a bad decision backed up by your colleague, just because he doesn't want to make you look bad, is worse than making the wrong decision and someone having the balls to correct it.

They really should have retired or a different set of referees on VAR. Having these guys alternate roles every week expecting them to referee each other just isn't working.

 

[Nearctic]

If you're going to review a second yellow card then you need to review all of them because the first one could be nonsense one and the second one entirely valid, that's never happening

First one can be a nonsense one. The second yellow is all mportant, so that’s the one should receive the scrutiny as it has the most impact. They already review the most impactful incidents. It wouldn’t be something new.

 

[Owen Hargo]

What's the point of being a football fan if you can't appreciate a mental cup run (Newport, Liverpool and Coventry were all bizarre) followed by a sturdy dismantling of our local rivals in the final?

Liverpool game was class tbf. I feel like the 5 extra months we had with EtH delayed our chances of winning the league for another 2 years at best.

 

[SuperiorXI]

Were referees better before they turned professional?

If you think about it, during the week they probably had regular jobs and had general interaction with public, which probably helped them in terms of making responsible decisions. They still made poor decisions and fecked up, but I think it was more acceptable than now, because they weren't professional and didn't have 4 guys backing them up with replays from all angles.

These guys are so insulated and protected and so afraid of stepping on each others toes from the VAR room. I get there is an element of not questioning their authority and decision making on the pitch. But, getting a bad decision backed up by your colleague, just because he doesn't want to make you look bad, is worse than making the wrong decision and someone having the balls to correct it.

They really should have retired or a different set of referees on VAR. Having these guys alternate roles every week expecting them to referee each other just isn't working.

Secondary referreeing is a can of worms. For me there's 2 piss easy things they can do to instantly improve things: give the ref a smart watch type device which buzzes for him to watch replays when prompted by VAR. VAR are not allowed to talk to or influence the ref.

 

[Red in STL]

First one can be a nonsense one. The second yellow is all mportant, so that’s the one should receive the scrutiny as it has the most impact. They already review the most impactful incidents. It wouldn’t be something new.

It's never happening, it's either all or none except for when a yellow should have been a straight red

 

[Thom Merrilin]

Yep the Ref going to the monitor is pure pantomime to make it seem like his decision hasn't been overturned. I can't remember the last time a Ref has watched a replay on a monitor but ignored the VAR and stuck with his original decision. I imagine it doesn't happen often these days. As you say its a waste of time to protect egos.

Happed on Sunday to Rangers. One of the most bizarre bits of officiating I've seen in the VAR era.

 

[Thom Merrilin]

The line doesn't need to be massive just enough so that looking at it with the naked eye the attacker would look more clearly offside. Which you then confirm with the lines. Under the current rules it's not so clear, if you have to zoom in on a freeze frame and draw lines to determine whether or not someone is offside. Then clearly the rule was never designed or introduced for those types of situations.

I think no matter how much leeway the attackers were given you'd still have these incredibly close decisions though, no? Like if you allowed attackers to be 6 inches offside then there'd inevitably be situations where a player is 6.01 inches offside and we'd be arguing about that.

 

[Ekkie Thump]

I think if it's within 9" then you go with the onfield decision. If it's wrong, then the linesman gets the blame. If it's egregiously wrong (greater than 9") then VAR can overturn.

 

[Annihilate Now!]

First one can be a nonsense one. The second yellow is all mportant, so that’s the one should receive the scrutiny as it has the most impact. They already review the most impactful incidents. It wouldn’t be something new.

I agree with this

A second yellow carries just as much weight as a red card.

And even if the first yellow is nonsense, the player in question will know they're on a booking so knows they can't do something to get a second yellow.

 

[Alex99]

I think no matter how much leeway the attackers were given you'd still have these incredibly close decisions though, no? Like if you allowed attackers to be 6 inches offside then there'd inevitably be situations where a player is 6.01 inches offside and we'd be arguing about that.

If everyone knows that you've already got an advantage as the attacker, then it's less of an issue when the marginal calls happen.

A line has to be drawn somewhere, but this method of identifying the correct frame to pause at and then selecting the right pixels to draw from is stupid.

 

[NotChatGPT]

If everyone knows that you've already got an advantage as the attacker, then it's less of an issue when the marginal calls happen.

A line has to be drawn somewhere, but this method of identifying the correct frame to pause at and then selecting the right pixels to draw from is stupid.

Depends if you're rooting for the attacking or defending team.

 

[Alex99]

Depends if you're rooting for the attacking or defending team.

Well that's already the case. The point is that you can't complain about someone being a slither offside when we already know they've been given a portion of wiggle room.

I think it's all shite anyway. Unless they can sort the automated thing out, they should bin it.

 

[sullydnl]

 

[Marwood]

Were referees better before they turned professional?

If you think about it, during the week they probably had regular jobs and had general interaction with public, which probably helped them in terms of making responsible decisions. They still made poor decisions and fecked up, but I think it was more acceptable than now, because they weren't professional and didn't have 4 guys backing them up with replays from all angles.

These guys are so insulated and protected and so afraid of stepping on each others toes from the VAR room. I get there is an element of not questioning their authority and decision making on the pitch. But, getting a bad decision backed up by your colleague, just because he doesn't want to make you look bad, is worse than making the wrong decision and someone having the balls to correct it.

They really should have retired or a different set of referees on VAR. Having these guys alternate roles every week expecting them to referee each other just isn't working.

Good point that.


The game was easier to ref as well. A lot easier. The players and managers didn't cheat for a start by faking injury and pain. That's a world of difference.

I also think they probably did make plenty of mistakes but if anything by being too lenient. But fans find that a lot easier to accept.

Everybody would rather see a ref being too lenient rather than too strict. We all want to watch a decent game of 11vs 11. Not with players sent off or players too scared to make a tackle.

 

[nmm85]

Is there a reason why the discussion between the officials can't be broadcasted live? Surely it would benefit everyone and maybe force them to a bit more accountability.

Also do the refs listen to all the VAR discussion that is happening during the game? Or just when play is stopped? All the refs talking at the same time sounds so overwhelming when you listen to it. Would be a real distraction while trying to officiate.

 

[stevoc]

I think no matter how much leeway the attackers were given you'd still have these incredibly close decisions though, no? Like if you allowed attackers to be 6 inches offside then there'd inevitably be situations where a player is 6.01 inches offside and we'd be arguing about that.

Yes of course but I've no problem with close decisions in an of themselves. My problem is goals being ruled put because their head or shoulder is 10-20mm offside.

If the attackers are given more advantage. Then close calls will be much more clearly offside. And more in spirit with the game.

The offside rule was never introduced to flag up the situations VAR is being used for to rule out goals.

 

[Red in STL]

Good point that.


The game was easier to ref as well. A lot easier. The players and managers didn't cheat for a start by faking injury and pain. That's a world of difference.

I also think they probably did make plenty of mistakes but if anything by being too lenient. But fans find that a lot easier to accept.

Everybody would rather see a ref being too lenient rather than too strict. We all want to watch a decent game of 11vs 11. Not with players sent off or players too scared to make a tackle.

The game was easier to ref, not as much 'cheating' going on as you say but it was also a lot slower

Not sure I'd agree with the more lenient bit, the rules are a lot stricter in certain areas, especially tacking, that leads to more yellows and inevitably more reds for 2 bookings

I suspect in the past there was also some allowances made for the shite pitches, gotta be hard to time tackles when the ball is bobbling about everywhere, that's a lot less likely these days in top flight football

 

[Marwood]

The game was easier to ref, not as much 'cheating' going on as you say but it was also a lot slower

Not sure I'd agree with the more lenient bit, the rules are a lot stricter in certain areas, especially tacking, that leads to more yellows and inevitably more reds for 2 bookings

I suspect in the past there was also some allowances made for the shite pitches, gotta be hard to time tackles when the ball is bobbling about everywhere, that's a lot less likely these days in top flight football

More lenient back then I mean. Which I think everybody would prefer.

Most of today's bad calls are refs going over the top. Dishing out cards unnecessarily.

If you're going to get it wrong, do it in a way that keeps the game 11vs 11.

Like Oliver at weekend. If he gives a yellow and then on the replay it's a bit worse than initially thought, I don’t think there'd be a huge uproar. But he's gone the opposite way.

I don’t think speed of the game is an issue because personally I believe this idea it's much quicker is overplayed. The players are fitter of course but how the game's now played is slower.

 

[Red in STL]

More lenient back then I mean. Which I think everybody would prefer.

Most of today's bad calls are refs going over the top. Dishing out cards unnecessarily.

If you're going to get it wrong, do it in a way that keeps the game 11vs 11.

Like Oliver at weekend. If he gives a yellow and then on the replay it's a bit worse than initially thought, I don’t think there'd be a huge uproar. But he's gone the opposite way.

I don’t think speed of the game is an issue because personally I believe this idea it's much quicker is overplayed. The players are fitter of course but how the game's now played is slower.

Most teams don't pass the ball slowly around the back like we do, the game as a whole is much quicker, ex-players say so as well and they're likely to know

Regarding Oliver (or any of the others), TBH they can't win in this situation either way, VAR the way it's being used (badly) is unlikey to change the decision

I can understand why he gave the red but obviousy it wasn't as bad as he thought it was, it should have been a yellow but VAR didn't tell him that, in the opposite scenario he could give a yellow and the replay could show it should be red, VAR is probably not going to tell him that either - still doesn't make him less of a cnut though!