VAR in the Premier League yesterday

[Murraysrightplum]

There should be a checklist for the refs operating VAR… question 1. Was there something clear and obvious that the ref missed, yes or No?

That’s it! If yes, ask them to go and look at it, if they’ve already seen it and made a decision then you play on. IMO if you have to look at a dozen different slow mo replays to see if something did or did not happen then it isn’t clear and obvious. VAR checks should be 10 seconds and that’s it.

[Tangle Foot]

1 hour ago, The Bard said:

IMO the issue isn't training or anything like that, it's a lack of openness.  Rugby season starts next week and if you watch a game you will hear the ongoing discussion between TMO and ref.  They work together. 

Once a referee has watched back a few of his decisions, he will become far more self-aware, a lot more so than if this is done privately.  At the same time, the more sane and reasonable of the football community will begin to have a lot more empathy for the referees and understanding of their decisions.  The likes of Wayne Barnes are regular contributors to coverage of rugby whilst still being an active referee.  Football treats refs like something that needs to be washed off their shoes. 

That nonsensical 4 minutes to award an offside against Brighton would've lasted 30 seconds if the footballing equivalent of Wayne Barnes was allowed to be in charge.  " He's clearly in an offside position, and he remains active so it's offside".  That took 4 and a half minutes, most of which involved TV viewers seeing the same images over and over again whilst the VAR people tried to draw lines on the screen.  He was a yard offside FFS.

I would have a system whereby the ref's mike is off during the game until there is an intervention from VAR.  The whole conversation between ref & VAR person would then be broadcast.

@The Bard I do like that idea. Another idea I’ve heard discussed is having 3 VAR’s (possibly one being a former player) independent of each other. Majority rules, so if 2 out of the 3 decide the ref has made a clear mistake then that’s it, decision made, and the on pitch refs decision is overturned (with full disclosure given to the crowd, and viewers when the match is being broadcast).

[Taylor10]

27 minutes ago, mozo said:

Surely we'd have had about a dozen more penalties and therefore loads more points if we had VAR? Nige seems to think so.

Without doubt more penalties, but we could also have had more go against us too. The standard of officiating is poor but even with the help of VAR things are still not great, plus there is too much waiting around.

Goal line tech was great on sat, it was instant, no questions asked.

[Cowshed]

2 minutes ago, Taylor10 said:

Without doubt more penalties, but we could also have had more go against us too. The standard of officiating is poor but even with the help of VAR things are still not great, plus there is too much waiting around.

Goal line tech was great on sat, it was instant, no questions asked.

So has VAR made decisions worse? Has VAR helped referees? Are they respected more? 

Decisions made with VAR cannot be instant because of the nature of football rules e.g. A ball hitting the arm/hand leads to the question of is it a penalty.

[mozo]

15 minutes ago, Taylor10 said:

Without doubt more penalties, but we could also have had more go against us too. The standard of officiating is poor but even with the help of VAR things are still not great, plus there is too much waiting around.

Goal line tech was great on sat, it was instant, no questions asked.

I bet Kal Naismith isn't a fan of goal line technology  

[RoystonFoote'snephew]

2 hours ago, The Bard said:

IMO the issue isn't training or anything like that, it's a lack of openness.  Rugby season starts next week and if you watch a game you will hear the ongoing discussion between TMO and ref.  They work together. 

Once a referee has watched back a few of his decisions, he will become far more self-aware, a lot more so than if this is done privately.  At the same time, the more sane and reasonable of the football community will begin to have a lot more empathy for the referees and understanding of their decisions.  The likes of Wayne Barnes are regular contributors to coverage of rugby whilst still being an active referee.  Football treats refs like something that needs to be washed off their shoes. 

That nonsensical 4 minutes to award an offside against Brighton would've lasted 30 seconds if the footballing equivalent of Wayne Barnes was allowed to be in charge.  " He's clearly in an offside position, and he remains active so it's offside".  That took 4 and a half minutes, most of which involved TV viewers seeing the same images over and over again whilst the VAR people tried to draw lines on the screen.  He was a yard offside FFS.

I would have a system whereby the ref's mike is off during the game until there is an intervention from VAR.  The whole conversation between ref & VAR person would then be broadcast.

I'd have a system where VAR is switched off, the VAR official is told to take a powder, and the on-field match official makes his own mind up without any interference from a remote individual. 

[The Bard]

15 minutes ago, Tangle Foot said:

@The Bard I do like that idea. Another idea I’ve heard discussed is having 3 VAR’s (possibly one being a former player) independent of each other. Majority rules, so if 2 out of the 3 decide the ref has made a clear mistake then that’s it, decision made, and the on pitch refs decision is overturned (with full disclosure given to the crowd, and viewers when the match is being broadcast).

3 VARs !

[Taylor10]

3 hours ago, Cowshed said:

So has VAR made decisions worse? Has VAR helped referees? Are they respected more? 

Decisions made with VAR cannot be instant because of the nature of football rules e.g. A ball hitting the arm/hand leads to the question of is it a penalty.

I would say no to all of the above, which is my point. With the additional waiting around to add to that, just what purpose is VAR serving currently?

[Cowshed]

1 hour ago, Taylor10 said:

I would say no to all of the above, which is my point. With the additional waiting around to add to that, just what purpose is VAR serving currently?

VAR has improved efficiency. There has to be less error. and there is. That serves a purpose.

I made a prediction on here, which wasn’t really that clever, that what was called formerly technology assistance would undermine referees and officials. It does, and has to because its nature focusses minds on error, and failing.

Technology assistance will never work with complete efficiency in a fast-paced game with subjective rules, 

I also wrote that once the genie is out of the bag VAR becomes entrenched its an industry. The VAR itself as prdicted becomes a topic of debate, and the inevitable inefficiency feeds controversy. It a cyclic nature. The pundits and media feed off the new technological; controversies, as entertainment and the media love those juicy VAR and refs are bad lines.  

The benefit? I didn’t think the undermining of respect for refs and the game, and the consequences of undermining officialdom are worth the improved efficiency, in a game that is seeing a crisis in ref recruitment – VAR is part of that culture that is creating that crisis.

Edited September 5, 2022 by Cowshed

[MarcusX]

21 hours ago, Cowshed said:

No. I am qualified to coach keepers but do not. 

What I provided is from the FA who run courses for Managers/ coaches and players each season on rules changes. In regards to goal keepers what we see are common misapprehensions. 

We can see a lot of misapprehensions from TV pundits and from Managers. The FA and the PMGO can highlight that ref efficiency has improved and VAR has improved efficiency, there are less errors. 

What TV pundits and Managers should recognise is that error is part of football, and so are its subjective rules. The game will never and cannot be perfect. Managers of pro sides feel they are exempt from responsibility to the game. A game that in the future could have serious ref recruitment problems because at the bottom of the development ref pyramid the game is losing refs faster than it recruits them.

The disrespect shown to officialdom, the abusing and criticising of refs at the top manifests itself at the bottom.

Football is haemorrhaging referees.

Can I ask an off-topic question?

Has there been a crackdown or rule change this season to prevent keepers time wasting by falling to their knees when they catch a ball (example below)

I played a game in goal a couple of weeks ago and did this and got warned by the ref it’s being clamped down and now a bookable offence but can’t see it in the law changes?

Ive been looking out for keepers doing it and must admit I didn’t see Bentley do it once against Blackpool or Wycombe

Below video is a clip of Alison doing it last season against Everton after Pickford did it in the first half.

 

[Sheltons Army]

2 minutes ago, MarcusX said:

Can I ask an off-topic question?

Has there been a crackdown or rule change this season to prevent keepers time wasting by falling to their knees when they catch a ball (example below)

I played a game in goal a couple of weeks ago and did this and got warned by the ref it’s being clamped down and now a bookable offence but can’t see it in the law changes?

Ive been looking out for keepers doing it and must admit I didn’t see Bentley do it once against Blackpool or Wycombe

Below video is a clip of Alison doing it last season against Everton after Pickford did it in the first half.

 

How can it be a ‘bookable offence’ Marcus - The balls in play !

 

If it persists they need to go back to x seconds rule (Once you’ve handled it)

[Hxj]

The technology isn't the problem - it's the implementation.

In cricket it works well with the limited challenges and "umpire's call" everyone knows the rules and accepts them.  Everyone can see and hear what is going on and the communication is great.  The process over-rules the truly bad and ignores the dodgy.

In rugby it is used to cover any instances of foul play and assist the referee with the decision.  it works well and everyone can see and hear what is going on.  The process enables the referee to over-ride their truly bad decision, provide other angles and ignores the dodgy.

In football it is all secret, there's no communication, it applies whenever and however VAR decides, it can effectively over rule any decision relating to a goal. a penalty or a straight red card, in a seemingly random way.  It's used to criticise the officials 'You need to look at at screen as you have made a mistake.'  It takes far too long.

If multiple camera reviews can't establish what happened in a minute, it cannot by definition be a clear and obvious error.

However I do think that the Premier League managers are a major problem, in endlessly complaining about every official.

[Sheltons Army]

You can have technology or no technology

 

But if two alleged Premier League Standard officials watch a defender forcefully push an attacker into his goalkeeper ,  A number of times on replay , and come to the conclusion that it’s  (Newcastle game)

No goal , not a penalty , but in fact .............a free kick to the defending team

You sort of give up really 

Truly unbelievable ,   I assume severely incompetent rather than corrupt

 

[Cowshed]

1 hour ago, MarcusX said:

Can I ask an off-topic question?

Has there been a crackdown or rule change this season to prevent keepers time wasting by falling to their knees when they catch a ball (example below)

I played a game in goal a couple of weeks ago and did this and got warned by the ref it’s being clamped down and now a bookable offence but can’t see it in the law changes?

Ive been looking out for keepers doing it and must admit I didn’t see Bentley do it once against Blackpool or Wycombe

Below video is a clip of Alison doing it last season against Everton after Pickford did it in the first half.

 

 

Yes, there is meant to be instruction to alter that behaviour and others that slow the game down..

Pickford takes a minute to take a goal kick. Forster is the top theatrical diver and is recording past thirty seconds to succumb a dead ball.

The possible offence has always been there. Check with refs because it can fall under differing things. 

What’s happened to the instruction generally? I don’t know.

Edited September 5, 2022 by Cowshed

[Numero Uno]

49 minutes ago, Sheltons Army said:

You can have technology or no technology

 

But if two alleged Premier League Standard officials watch a defender forcefully push an attacker into his goalkeeper ,  A number of times on replay , and come to the conclusion that it’s  (Newcastle game)

No goal , not a penalty , but in fact .............a free kick to the defending team

You sort of give up really 

Truly unbelievable ,   I assume severely incompetent rather than corrupt

 

It's difficult to defend accusations of corruption when decisions are so wrong and literally EVERYONE else can see it. I overheard someone say "Why would anyone be corrupt when it's Newcastle United v Crystal Palace?".......betting syndicates run by criminals would be an easy place to start. I'm not saying it is corrupt but if it were subsequently proven to be so a few years down the line you would hardly be falling off your seat in shock. In my opinion, to alleviate rumours of foul play, the Referee and VAR officials concerned need to be banished from the Premier League for a minimum of six weeks.

[Mr Popodopolous]

I've not yet viewed the incidents in full so won't comment in full until I have.

Quick point on VAR etc though. I remember and forget the corruption for a second, but was there any validity to the anti technology stance of Blatter...he was particularly for better or worse, anti VAR for years- eventually he moved on goal-line technology.

Doubtful the genie can be re-inserted back into the bottle but would it have been better had we stopped at goal-line technology? A bit of Devil's Advocate and Alternate History granted.

Edited September 5, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Sheltons Army]

15 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I've not yet viewed the incidents in full so won't comment in full until I have.

Quick point on VAR etc though. I remember and forget the corruption for a second, but was there any validity to the anti technology stance of Blatter...he was particularly for better or worse, anti VAR for years- eventually he moved on goal-line technology.

Doubtful the genie can be re-inserted back into the bottle but would it have been better had we stopped at goal-line technology? A bit of Devil's Advocate and Alternate History granted.

The new ‘robot / computer’ system for offsides is coming , has been trialled and will be used at World Cup

You of course need a ‘5th’ official to view the decision of the technology and the ‘relevance’ of the offside player

But then With offsides and goaline decisions sorted (When it doesn’t fail !) I’d leave it at those two things only

Actually can I choose 3 - Violent conduct

No other interference or minutes of VAR checking , Not for pens , fouls in build up to goals etc etc

[Rob k]

3 hours ago, Numero Uno said:

It's difficult to defend accusations of corruption when decisions are so wrong and literally EVERYONE else can see it. I overheard someone say "Why would anyone be corrupt when it's Newcastle United v Crystal Palace?".......betting syndicates run by criminals would be an easy place to start. I'm not saying it is corrupt but if it were subsequently proven to be so a few years down the line you would hardly be falling off your seat in shock. In my opinion, to alleviate rumours of foul play, the Referee and VAR officials concerned need to be banished from the Premier League for a minimum of six weeks.

That referee should be forced to come out and explain himself for that decision - i can just about understand the West Ham one but there’s absolutely no excuse for the Newcastle decision and you can 100% understand why people think referees are corrupt 

[Mr Popodopolous]

3 hours ago, Sheltons Army said:

The new ‘robot / computer’ system for offsides is coming , has been trialled and will be used at World Cup

You of course need a ‘5th’ official to view the decision of the technology and the ‘relevance’ of the offside player

But then With offsides and goaline decisions sorted (When it doesn’t fail !) I’d leave it at those two things only

Actually can I choose 3 - Violent conduct

No other interference or minutes of VAR checking , Not for pens , fouls in build up to goals etc etc

Good ideas I think.

Yes read a bit about this automated offside thing, the human element I dunno how I feel about it, should bolster accuracy massively if it works.

5th official can still see human error but then perfection is likely impossible. A majorly automated game would leave me cold and probably the vast majority who follow football likewise, but some of the decisions are just terrible even with VAR seemingly helping, if there is data out there as to how it's improved the game that'd be interesting.

[Numero Uno]

14 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I've not yet viewed the incidents in full so won't comment in full until I have.

Quick point on VAR etc though. I remember and forget the corruption for a second, but was there any validity to the anti technology stance of Blatter...he was particularly for better or worse, anti VAR for years- eventually he moved on goal-line technology.

Doubtful the genie can be re-inserted back into the bottle but would it have been better had we stopped at goal-line technology? A bit of Devil's Advocate and Alternate History granted.

To be fair even goal line technology that ensured justice was done in our game at Blackburn failed at Huddersfield on Sunday but credit to the EFL they’ve called Hawk Eye in to explain themselves and to propose how such errors can be avoided. It’s no help to Huddersfield right now but at least they are being seen to act. Compare that to PMGOL who just say “sorry, we were wrong, bad luck chaps”.

In terms of corruption it’s the elephant in the room and paying customers as we are all now considered need to know that when we attend a game and pay plenty of money for the privilege we are watching something that is fair and not affected by some betting syndicate in Malaysia holding a proverbial (or literal!!) gun to somebody’s head. Burying heads in the sand won’t wash. Is the game clean or is it bent? Nobody knows for sure and reassurances are needed.

[downendcity]

13 hours ago, Rob k said:

That referee should be forced to come out and explain himself for that decision - i can just about understand the West Ham one but there’s absolutely no excuse for the Newcastle decision and you can 100% understand why people think referees are corrupt 

I've seen a video with Dermot Gallacher ( I think it was) reviewing the Newcastle decision. His comment was that when the referee went to the screen to review the incident the VAR people only gave him the last part of the action that showed the Newcastle player clattering into the keeper. He then said that had he been given a longer clip he would have seen the Newcastle player pushed, causing him to collide with the keeper. Interestingly Gallacher felt that, ith this fuller view, the correct decision would have been a penalty to Newcastle.

Re.the West Ham incident. I caught a bit of Talksport discussing this yesterday. Graham Souness felt it was a foul ( ironic given his playing style!). Souness felt that most commentators had (incorrectly focussed on Bowen's trailing leg, but Souness felt that the foul _ Souness felt a dangerous foul - was due to Bowen's leading foot, as he ( Bowen) showed "six studs " to the keeper and could have seriously injured him.

Given that Bowen appeared to be trying to avoid the keeper by jumping over him, I wondered just how he could do so without showing the keeper "six studs". I presume Souness would have avoided showing six studs by allowing the toe end of his boot to collide with the keeper's ribs or head! 

[MarcusX]

22 hours ago, Sheltons Army said:

How can it be a ‘bookable offence’ Marcus - The balls in play !

 

If it persists they need to go back to x seconds rule (Once you’ve handled it)

Time wasting, there’s no X second rule anymore though as far as I’m aware it’s referees discretion I think. Happy to be proved wrong on that.

I didn’t believe it at first but I haven’t seen it done anywhere near as much this season.

[Sheltons Army]

4 minutes ago, MarcusX said:

Time wasting, there’s no X second rule anymore though as far as I’m aware it’s referees discretion I think. Happy to be proved wrong on that.

I didn’t believe it at first but I haven’t seen it done anywhere near as much this season.

Guess they will argue , the logic that ,  as it’s in your hands , an opponent can’t play the ball so as such the ball isn’t in play and any unnecessary in distribution / restarting the game is  ‘ time wasting’
 

Have to say it is really annoying and needs stamping out

Edited September 6, 2022 by Sheltons Army

[MarcusX]

The problem with technology is that ultimately VAR is not technology.

Hawk Eye is tech, and generally it’s worked well. Only the 2nd instance in the UK that it’s known to have failed I think?

VAR is just letting someone else view several replays. The laws are so subjective and rarely a definitive yes / no decision so all you’re doing it bringing another opinion in to muddy the waters.

Where it gets even muddier is in the offside rule because that IS a definitive yes / no, and probably shouldn’t be as it leads to scrutinising it to the most specific detail (eg a toe).

However whether you like it or not, at least with the offside rule as it is you get the “correct” outcome by the letter of the law. If you want to make it more “benefit of the doubt” or less exact you’ll then get the argument of given in one game and not in another.

it’s a mess in its current state and there’s nothing I’ve hated more at a live game than experiencing a goal, everyone celebrating then seeing it ruled out. Footballs already an emotional rollercoaster without that added heart break!

 

[BCFC101]

10 minutes ago, MarcusX said:

However whether you like it or not, at least with the offside rule as it is you get the “correct” outcome by the letter of the law. If you want to make it more “benefit of the doubt” or less exact you’ll then get the argument of given in one game and not in another.

Champions League is introducing semi-automated offsides in every game starting tonight, which will eliminate the manual task of drawing lines etc. and should therefore make it perfectly consistent across all games. The tech has been developed by HawkEye so I have high hopes that it will work as it's intended to, will be interesting to see what impact it does have. Prem have already said they'll look to introduce the system next year if it goes well in the CL and World Cup later this year.

Edited September 6, 2022 by BCFC101

[MarcusX]

7 hours ago, BCFC101 said:

Champions League is introducing semi-automated offsides in every game starting tonight, which will eliminate the manual task of drawing lines etc. and should therefore make it perfectly consistent across all games. The tech has been developed by HawkEye so I have high hopes that it will work as it's intended to, will be interesting to see what impact it does have. Prem have already said they'll look to introduce the system next year if it goes well in the CL and World Cup later this year.

Yep interested to see how this works

[Cowshed]

17 hours ago, MarcusX said:

Time wasting, there’s no X second rule anymore though as far as I’m aware it’s referees discretion I think. Happy to be proved wrong on that.

I didn’t believe it at first but I haven’t seen it done anywhere near as much this season.

The rule is still six seconds. Check the laws of the game for fouls and misconduct. 

[phantom]

17 hours ago, BCFC101 said:

Champions League is introducing semi-automated offsides in every game starting tonight, which will eliminate the manual task of drawing lines etc. and should therefore make it perfectly consistent across all games. The tech has been developed by HawkEye so I have high hopes that it will work as it's intended to, will be interesting to see what impact it does have. Prem have already said they'll look to introduce the system next year if it goes well in the CL and World Cup later this year.

 

10 hours ago, MarcusX said:

Yep interested to see how this works

Watching the footage on SSN this morning, certainly looks a bit more progressive, just puts a player etc into a 3D image that can be rotated 360 rather than a TV camera angle looking across the pitch

[MarcusX]

1 hour ago, Cowshed said:

The rule is still six seconds. Check the laws of the game for fouls and misconduct. 

Thanks, I can't remember ever seeing it enforced though. Every keeper takes a good 10-20 seconds or more

[phantom]

17 minutes ago, MarcusX said:

Thanks, I can't remember ever seeing it enforced though. Every keeper takes a good 10-20 seconds or more

Can't honestly say I have seen this enforced in many years