VAR in the Championship

[steveybadger]

Think I’d rather have an absence of parachute payments and a better distribution of income from the Prem overall, than VAR.

[Rocking Red Cyril]

3 minutes ago, steveybadger said:

Think I’d rather have an absence of parachute payments and a better distribution of income from the Prem overall, than VAR.

Agreed. But we have seen the dismal ref and lines men at the gate this season. VAR is needed but with the communication between ref and var officials on the tanyo and video screens 

[Rocking Red Cyril]

Maybe a windfall tax on Murdoch and his profits from the premier League . Fed back into the pyramid 

Edited October 2, 2022 by Rocking Red Cyril
Still can't type

[Kingswood Robin]

I've never been to a game with VAR, but if it meant waiting longer than 30 seconds for a decision, or looking at a big screen every 5 minutes, I think I'd stick to watching my son  play on Sunday mornings.

[Cowshed]

13 hours ago, PFree said:

Can’t say I like the idea of it but is it time to introduce it?

Financially, there is so much at stake and I can’t help but feel the standard of officials in this league is worse than at any stage before?

We got what we deserved today, but that said with correct decisions it would have been a different game..

It isn't.

The standard of refs is of a higher standard due to the rigourous development process.

[Silvio Dante]

A small point I’d make about the lack of offside on the second goal, and which would not help decisions overall (although was not why we lost - we deserved to).

Both City and QPR wore white shorts and predominately white socks. The referee can insist on a kit change if the colours aren’t considered to be sufficiently distinct - no question here on shirts, but the ‘lower half’ was very similar (noting our ‘hoops’) In something like the offside which was far side, the linesman is looking across the box and if the torso isn’t the bit that can be seen clearly, ability to give offside becomes more difficult.

So, I think there is a case that a bad refereeing call was actually made before the game.

 

[Packman]

11 hours ago, Bar BS3 said:

 

Yeah, I hadn't even realised that the second goal was in question of offside. 

Photos seem to show that it was, just, offside. 

Not exactly scandalous, but a poor call nonetheless. 

I'd still rather see a a decision like that go against us now & again, than have VAR involved. 

Who said it does..? 

Any part is sufficient. 

Just offside it wasn't even close, terrible decision yet again.

[exAtyeoMax]

44 minutes ago, Packman said:

Just offside it wasn't even close, terrible decision yet again.

I thought he was miles offside, but what do I know!

[steveybadger]

2 hours ago, Rocking Red Cyril said:

Agreed. But we have seen the dismal ref and lines men at the gate this season. VAR is needed but with the communication between ref and var officials on the tanyo and video screens 

I must confess I was firmly in the pro VAR camp before the was introduced, but…..

2 hours ago, Kingswood Robin said:

I've never been to a game with VAR, but if it meant waiting longer than 30 seconds for a decision, or looking at a big screen every 5 minutes, I think I'd stick to watching my son  play on Sunday mornings.

….this is the thing that makes me wonder whether we should just live without it. The main point of watching football is the huge Adrenalin rush from seeing your team score. It must be so deflating to then 30 seconds later have it disallowed.

[Alex_BCFC]

Yeh no VAR for me despite us going through what seems to be a horrible period of decisions. 

[Davefevs]

FWIW, I wasn’t there yesterday, and at the time of the “handball incident” I had just started watching a stream (a poor, jittery one on Hesgoal) whilst in New Moon On The Quay on the Harbourside.  I heard the roar from AG, then the boos, then a WhatsApp message from @petehinton saying he’s a yard outside his box…the. Hesgoal caught up.

My first view was that it was tight.

Everything I’ve seen since says it was NOT handball.

Yet on twitter, people are still saying it’s handball.  @ralphindevonpicture is excellent.  I think the keeper coming from outside the box, back into it, is clouding people’s judgement (and their City bias).

Good point @Silvio Dantere shorts colour.  Something to think about.

[Offside]

From my seat in S20 there was absolutely no doubt it was handball, and very deliberate from their keeper. The linesman (who was awful) presumably couldn’t see it because the goalie’s body was in the way, but the ref should have be better sighted. 

[Steve Watts]

From my position in S20 it looked clear cut that it was a handball.Assuming the ball was partially on the line, though I've not seen a photo with a conclusive angle as yet, what makes this in the area as opposed to outside? Goal line technology dictates the ball isn't IN the goal unless it is fully over. Therefore isn't the same logic then that the ball isn't IN the area unless it's fully over. Especially so when considering the direction of travel of the Ball. It was heading into the area rather than outside.

On a similar note, if the goalkeepers hands were outside the area when they caught the ball does that change the situation?  

It's not a situation that crops up often, but either way, for once the finger of blame cannot be aimed at the linesman as the referee probably had the better view.

[PFree]

12 hours ago, Cowshed said:

It isn't.

The standard of refs is of a higher standard due to the rigourous development process.

There might be more investment and ‘criteria’ to fulfil but the refereeing this season has been terrible, and sadly, it is clear very few have ever played the game..

[View from the Dolman]

12 hours ago, Cowshed said:

It isn't.

The standard of refs is of a higher standard due to the rigourous development process.

How have you measured this? 

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Steve Watts said:

From my position in S20 it looked clear cut that it was a handball.Assuming the ball was partially on the line, though I've not seen a photo with a conclusive angle as yet, what makes this in the area as opposed to outside? Goal line technology dictates the ball isn't IN the goal unless it is fully over. Therefore isn't the same logic then that the ball isn't IN the area unless it's fully over. Especially so when considering the direction of travel of the Ball. It was heading into the area rather than outside.

On a similar note, if the goalkeepers hands were outside the area when they caught the ball does that change the situation?  

It's not a situation that crops up often, but either way, for once the finger of blame cannot be aimed at the linesman as the referee probably had the better view.

I think you raise a valid / interesting question.

Can the ball be classed as inside the area (some part of the ball overhanging the outside of the painted line), BUT the keeper’s hands be completely outside.

This site:

https://www.sportsrec.com/8095705/what-happens-if-a-goalie-is-outside-the-box-with-the-ball-in-his-hands-during-a-soccer-game

says that if Dieng touches the ball with his hands outside of the area, but the ball is a smidgeon overhanging the line, then it’s NOT deemed handball, ie it is the ball that determines inside, not the keepers hands.

 

[DownendRed97]

I was bang in line with it in S21 and definitely handball, I went mental and I rarely get animated at games. Although I agree it was nearly impossible for the ref or linesman to see it and even with VAR I don’t think they would have a camera angle from my seat which is bang in line with the edge of the box on the left side. So probably wouldn’t have been given even with VAR. 

Edited October 2, 2022 by DownendRed97

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, DownendRed97 said:

I was bang in line with it in S20 and definitely handball, I went mental and I rarely get animated at games. Although I agree it was nearly impossible for the ref or linesman to see it and even with VAR I don’t think they would have a camera angle from my seat which is bang in line with the edge of the box on the left side. So probably wouldn’t have been given even with VAR. 

from the replay I’ve seen taken from a camera behind the goal, I think a bit of the ball overhangs the paint, and therefore it’s inside the area, as per my post above.

[DownendRed97]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

from the replay I’ve seen taken from a camera behind the goal, I think a bit of the ball overhangs the paint, and therefore it’s inside the area, as per my post above.

Maybe once he’s fully caught the ball, it’s just over, but as his hands first came into contact with the ball, he was outside IMO. Fine margins of course, but we always love a talking point!  

[hinsleburg]

Think the ref went with the 'safe call' for the handball as, like with every other decision Saturday, he couldn't make up his mind either way. I think based on the rules it was probably correct and not handball just based on the subsequent pictures I've seen since. It makes me laugh though, if we treat the line as 'in the box' and instead of handball Dieng fouled Wells in the exact same spot no way would the referee have backed himself to give a penalty. Would have again reverted to the safe call of Free Kick on the edge...

The Linesman Lansdown Stand was fantastically incompetent, constantly 5-10 yards behind play. The 2nd goal, the player looked a long way offside from the initial long ball from the keeper. Sadly I haven't seen a decent camera angle yet to see if that was the case however the linesman would never have known as he was stood on the halfway line in his own world...

[RiderJake]

8 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I think you raise a valid / interesting question.

Can the ball be classed as inside the area (some part of the ball overhanging the outside of the painted line), BUT the keeper’s hands be completely outside.

This site:

https://www.sportsrec.com/8095705/what-happens-if-a-goalie-is-outside-the-box-with-the-ball-in-his-hands-during-a-soccer-game

says that if Dieng touches the ball with his hands outside of the area, but the ball is a smidgeon overhanging the line, then it’s NOT deemed handball, ie it is the ball that determines inside, not the keepers hands.

 

Interesting article, thank you. That is, the goalkeeper can even stand completely outside the penalty box and touch the ball, which is inside the penalty box. I used to think that the goalkeeper had to stand within the penalty area, but now it turns out that he doesn't.

[Steve Watts]

23 hours ago, Cowshed said:

It isn't.

The standard of refs is of a higher standard due to the rigourous development process.

Well the standard of apologies for shit refereeing is of a higher standard I guess.

For my money, the standard of refereeing is worse than I've ever seen it.....and I include the Lester Shapter, Vic Callow and Gurnam Singh era in that!

43 minutes ago, hinsleburg said:

Think the ref went with the 'safe call' for the handball as, like with every other decision Saturday, he couldn't make up his mind either way. I think based on the rules it was probably correct and not handball just based on the subsequent pictures I've seen since. It makes me laugh though, if we treat the line as 'in the box' and instead of handball Dieng fouled Wells in the exact same spot no way would the referee have backed himself to give a penalty. Would have again reverted to the safe call of Free Kick on the edge...

This is key for me and comes down to consistency.  If instead of the keeper catching the ball he brings Nakhi down with part of his foot on the line there's not a chance in hell he's giving anything other than a free kick on the edge of the area.

9 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I think you raise a valid / interesting question.

Can the ball be classed as inside the area (some part of the ball overhanging the outside of the painted line), BUT the keeper’s hands be completely outside.

This site:

https://www.sportsrec.com/8095705/what-happens-if-a-goalie-is-outside-the-box-with-the-ball-in-his-hands-during-a-soccer-game

says that if Dieng touches the ball with his hands outside of the area, but the ball is a smidgeon overhanging the line, then it’s NOT deemed handball, ie it is the ball that determines inside, not the keepers hands.

 

I've read the link a couple of times Dave, and I honestly don't see where it's saying slightly on the line is considered inside the area (though it's not 9am yet and I'm only 1 coffee into the day so may have missed it!).  @Hinsleburg makes a very valid call and it comes down to consistency of application for the rules.  Just to muddy the waters a little more I guess, the line is 5 inches thick, so where is the point that the 18 yard box starts and ends. Is the nearest part of the line 18 yards from the goal, or the outer part of the line?

Edit: I realise that last point is extremely pedantic, but when it comes down to goal line technology the pedantry comes down to millimetres, so I'm being very generous I feel!

Edited October 3, 2022 by Steve Watts

[GrahamC]

54 minutes ago, hinsleburg said:

Think the ref went with the 'safe call' for the handball as, like with every other decision Saturday, he couldn't make up his mind either way. I think based on the rules it was probably correct and not handball just based on the subsequent pictures I've seen since. It makes me laugh though, if we treat the line as 'in the box' and instead of handball Dieng fouled Wells in the exact same spot no way would the referee have backed himself to give a penalty. Would have again reverted to the safe call of Free Kick on the edge...

The Linesman Lansdown Stand was fantastically incompetent, constantly 5-10 yards behind play. The 2nd goal, the player looked a long way offside from the initial long ball from the keeper. Sadly I haven't seen a decent camera angle yet to see if that was the case however the linesman would never have known as he was stood on the halfway line in his own world...

It wasn’t why we lost but I thought the ref was really poor.

He tolerated their blatant time wasting (he added time on but never warned them once, virtually all of the 69th minutes applause for Beanie was wasted by them, the ball was never live), he allowed Chair to stand in front of the ball to stop every quick free kick & applied completely different rules for yellows for us & them, the incident that he brought play back for after Williams was fouled when we were on the attack & then didn’t book Iroegbunam was pathetic.

As you say the linesman was worse, rarely up with play & missed 3 offsides (including the 2nd goal) before finally spotting one right on HT & earning a standing ovation.

I’m so bored of marginal decisions going against us, the penalty thing (to be clear there was none of this on Saturday) means I’m edging towards VAR because I don’t trust referees & their assistants to get enough right.

 

[Cowshed]

38 minutes ago, Steve Watts said:

Well the standard of apologies for shit refereeing is of a higher standard I guess.

For my money, the standard of refereeing is worse than I've ever seen it.....and I include the Lester Shapter, Vic Callow and Gurnam Singh era in that!

 

I didn't post an apology. The development process to become a referee is rigorous and referess now make less quantifiable mistakes than they did ten years ago. 

Refereeing efficiency is measured and standards are high. Championship ref efficiency compares favourably to that of counterparts across Europe, so unless the standard of refereeing across Europe has dropped (it has not) standards are not shit as you put it.

[IAmNick]

57 minutes ago, RiderJake said:

Interesting article, thank you. That is, the goalkeeper can even stand completely outside the penalty box and touch the ball, which is inside the penalty box. I used to think that the goalkeeper had to stand within the penalty area, but now it turns out that he doesn't.

I guess it kind of makes sense if you think about the other side of the box, where it's not unusual for a keeper to be stood with their body either fully in their goal, or behind the dead ball line with arms outstretched to indicate the ball didn't cross the line.

[Cowshed]

11 hours ago, View from the Dolman said:

How have you measured this? 

I do not the Premier league officials limited, the FA, and the intenational body IFAB do.

[bcfc01]

1 hour ago, Cowshed said:

I didn't post an apology. The development process to become a referee is rigorous and referess now make less quantifiable mistakes than they did ten years ago. 

Refereeing efficiency is measured and standards are high. Championship ref efficiency compares favourably to that of counterparts across Europe, so unless the standard of refereeing across Europe has dropped (it has not) standards are not shit as you put it.

How many UK referees will be officiating at the world cup ?

Edit: Just looked it up and the answer is 2.

I genuinely thought it was zero.

Edit2: For completeness, England has 2 referees out of 36, 2 assistant refs out of 69, and zero VAR officials (which says a lot imo).

https://digitalhub.fifa.com/m/1da4b811328add8f/original/MEDIA-Alphabetical-order-List-of-Match-Officials-FWC-2022-Qatar.pdf

Edited October 3, 2022 by bcfc01

[Steve Watts]

13 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

I didn't post an apology. The development process to become a referee is rigorous and referess now make less quantifiable mistakes than they did ten years ago. 

Refereeing efficiency is measured and standards are high. Championship ref efficiency compares favourably to that of counterparts across Europe, so unless the standard of refereeing across Europe has dropped (it has not) standards are not shit as you put it.

I wasn't suggesting you did post an apology.  But as a club we've probably got a filing cabinet full of those we've received from the PGMOL.

[bcfc01]

Just now, Steve Watts said:

I wasn't suggesting you did post an apology.  But as a club we've probably got a filing cabinet full of those we've received from the PGMOL.

I would think a hell of a lot of clubs have the same.

The standard is demonstrably poor.

[Davefevs]

10 hours ago, DownendRed97 said:

Maybe once he’s fully caught the ball, it’s just over, but as his hands first came into contact with the ball, he was outside IMO. Fine margins of course, but we always love a talking point!  

He may have been outside, but the ball deemed to be inside = NOT handball 

1 hour ago, Steve Watts said:

Well the standard of apologies for shit refereeing is of a higher standard I guess.

For my money, the standard of refereeing is worse than I've ever seen it.....and I include the Lester Shapter, Vic Callow and Gurnam Singh era in that!

This is key for me and comes down to consistency.  If instead of the keeper catching the ball he brings Nakhi down with part of his foot on the line there's not a chance in hell he's giving anything other than a free kick on the edge of the area.

I've read the link a couple of times Dave, and I honestly don't see where it's saying slightly on the line is considered inside the area (though it's not 9am yet and I'm only 1 coffee into the day so may have missed it!).  @Hinsleburg makes a very valid call and it comes down to consistency of application for the rules.  Just to muddy the waters a little more I guess, the line is 5 inches thick, so where is the point that the 18 yard box starts and ends. Is the nearest part of the line 18 yards from the goal, or the outer part of the line?

Edit: I realise that last point is extremely pedantic, but when it comes down to goal line technology the pedantry comes down to millimetres, so I'm being very generous I feel!

The whole of the ball has to be outside the outer edge of the white line.  A crude pic below:

As you can see the ball (whether on the grass or in the air) is overhanging a tinsy-wincy bit of the line.  Therefore the ball is deemed inside the area.  If it was a few mm to the left it would be outside the area.  But in my pic it’s not.  Dieng can touch the ball without his gloves being inside the area…and it not be handball, it is the position of the ball that determines inside or outside, not the keeper’s gloves.

From the images and video I’ve seen it looks like the ball meets the criteria to be classed as inside the area, even though Dieng’s gloves might be outside when they make contact.

Hope that makes sense.

Its an unusual scenario, normally it’s the keeper sliding out of the box, rather than into it.

 

If we just imagine that the picture is exactly what happened Saturday, then I see why so many City fans are adamant it was handball…but if this was what happened, then they are wrong!

Edited October 3, 2022 by Davefevs