so I presume the new boss of the refs association won't be coming to Ashton Gate?

[Never to the dark side]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/64057906

Start reading from line fourteen in connection with our lack of penalties

don't think he would get a warm connection from any city followers who he might bump into.

 

[RedZepperin]

He might if they're carrying a thermos of mulligatawny soup.

[leader]

VAR is a joke let’s go back to referee and linesman doing there job 

 

[The Bard]

Webb is easily the best ref I have seen and clearly the right man to be in charge of referees in this country.  Given the incompetence of a number of championship refs, I wonder why there haven't been more female refs. Given Webb is married to a female ref, it wouldn't surprise me if this is a change.  Saturday's ref would've struggled with a vets game.  

[Super]

Six is still too high given they can watch the incident many times.

[BTRFTG]

The only thing to take from that article is VAR MUST be scrapped.

So they reviewed many hundreds of incidents only to discover the officials erred on a dozen occasions. Half when (and despite all the technology,) they incorrectly made a decision, balanced by half where they should have acted yet didn't. 

 

[Steve Watts]

50 minutes ago, leader said:

VAR is a joke let’s go back to referee and linesman doing there job 

 

I'll give you a moment to process what you've just said and find the flaw in your thinking.

[sh1t_ref_again]

54 minutes ago, leader said:

VAR is a joke let’s go back to referee and linesman doing there job 

 

If they could do that in the first place- fantastic

[Redandproud]

1 hour ago, leader said:

VAR is a joke let’s go back to referee and linesman doing there job 

 

I sit in A8, half the time the lino is not up with play, and quite often they miss an offside, goal kick or corner, yes we need  VAR in the Championship 

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Super said:

Six is still too high given they can watch the incident many times.

That is the crux for me.

I was reading about Hawkeye the other day.  I’d never heard of the 3m rule before on an LBW.  So I googled it. Basically if the ball hits the batsman more than 3m from the wickets then Hawkeye cannot intervene on line as it’s not accurate enough to predict that big a distance.  I found out it used to be 2.5m, but the tech has improved, so it can predict longer distances.

I watch a lot of cricket and was surprised I’d not heard this before.

Back to VAR, and in particular the people using it….they need to improve their processes and decision making.

[GrahamC]

2 hours ago, The Bard said:

Webb is easily the best ref I have seen and clearly the right man to be in charge of referees in this country.  Given the incompetence of a number of championship refs, I wonder why there haven't been more female refs. Given Webb is married to a female ref, it wouldn't surprise me if this is a change.  Saturday's ref would've struggled with a vets game.  

Good point.

I think we also need to get away from this mindset of British exceptionalism, the standard here is now far worse than in many other European countries.

Didn’t watch the WC but lots were raving about the performance of the Polish ref in the final, we need to learn from other nations.

Instructive than an Aussie ref who came over (Jared Gillett) was fast tracked to the Prem, what does that tell you?

[cidered abroad]

2 hours ago, Steve Watts said:

I'll give you a moment to process what you've just said and find the flaw in your thinking.

You comment fell on deaf ears.

[East Londoner]

It’s important to realise that change will take time. We had Mike Riley in charge for years who only seemed good at sending letters of apology whilst standards continued to fall

So don’t be surprised if it takes another season or two before standards bottom out. As for VAR the concept is good but the application is terrible, I’d like to see a time limit put on reviews so if an offence is not found within 90 seconds for example then it’s not clear or obvious 

Edited December 22, 2022 by East Londoner

[Steve Watts]

2 hours ago, cidered abroad said:

You comment fell on deaf ears.

Didn't it just? 

 

[Numero Uno]

4 hours ago, Davefevs said:

That is the crux for me.

I was reading about Hawkeye the other day.  I’d never heard of the 3m rule before on an LBW.  So I googled it. Basically if the ball hits the batsman more than 3m from the wickets then Hawkeye cannot intervene on line as it’s not accurate enough to predict that big a distance.  I found out it used to be 2.5m, but the tech has improved, so it can predict longer distances.

I watch a lot of cricket and was surprised I’d not heard this before.

Back to VAR, and in particular the people using it….they need to improve their processes and decision making.

So stand 3m from the stumps then!! You might get stumped 56 times a season but you’re halfway to taking LBW out of the equation………..

[Merrick's Marvels]

14 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

So stand 3m from the stumps then!! You might get stumped 56 times a season but you’re halfway to taking LBW out of the equation………..

You'd be doing well to stand 2 metres outside your crease and still be able to play Wood, Archer, Starc, Cummins, Bolt!

And Jasprit Bumrah would probably bowl you round your legs! (He certainly confuses my spellchecker)

[Numero Uno]

1 hour ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

You'd be doing well to stand 2 metres outside your crease and still be able to play Wood, Archer, Starc, Cummins, Bolt!

And Jasprit Bumrah would probably bowl you round your legs! (He certainly confuses my spellchecker)

Fair point, you would definitely get the hurry up facing Wood 3m down the wicket.......

[italian dave]

6 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

The only thing to take from that article is VAR MUST be scrapped.

So they reviewed many hundreds of incidents only to discover the officials erred on a dozen occasions. Half when (and despite all the technology,) they incorrectly made a decision, balanced by half where they should have acted yet didn't. 

 

I don’t find the article very clear, but as I read it that’s not what the report is saying.

They reviewed hundreds of decisions and there were 48 where VAR intervened. Depending on what “hundreds” means that suggests that at best 5% of referee decision are wrong and at worst 25% are wrong! 

Of the 48, VAR then got 6 wrong.

I’m no fan of VAR either. And you could use the above to support your view too: basically, VAR makes as many mistakes as referees do!

For me, part of the problem is that many decisions are anything but clear cut and involve a judgement being made. Particularly when issues like ‘intent’ and ‘interference’ come into play. And the referee’s judgement may differ from the VAR but is just as valid. And possibly the panel involved in this review simply added another judgement. 

But on the other hand there are situations where it clearly can correct errors. Things like offside which on the whole is a more objective judgement. And things like England’s second pen v France when the ref simply had a poor view (not his fault) and was able to get a better view. 

One thing I can guarantee though: if it was introduced in the Championship tomorrow, the first thing it would do would be to review a penalty awarded to Bristol City….and rule it out. 

[Lanterne Rouge]

41 minutes ago, italian dave said:

 

One thing I can guarantee though: if it was introduced in the Championship tomorrow, the first thing it would do would be to review a penalty awarded to Bristol City….and rule it out. 

`And we`re off to Bramall Lane where Bristol City have been awarded a penalty, their first in four years. What happened Bianca?

Well Jeff, Tommy Conway was clean through on goal when he was scythed down on the edge of the six yard box. He still managed to get his shot away but the Sheffield United right back punched it over the bar. It went to VAR, no penalty given and Conway was booked for diving`

[Lrrr]

7 hours ago, Davefevs said:

That is the crux for me.

I was reading about Hawkeye the other day.  I’d never heard of the 3m rule before on an LBW.  So I googled it. Basically if the ball hits the batsman more than 3m from the wickets then Hawkeye cannot intervene on line as it’s not accurate enough to predict that big a distance.  I found out it used to be 2.5m, but the tech has improved, so it can predict longer distances.

I watch a lot of cricket and was surprised I’d not heard this before.

Back to VAR, and in particular the people using it….they need to improve their processes and decision making.

The 3m rule should be about as far down the track as it is that the batsman is allowed to stand before they're in the danger zone of the strip anyway (remember the likes of Bairstow trying to eliminate LBW so started so far out their crease) so there shouldn't be that much space for someone to be able to play a shot while still not on that zone.

[Davefevs]

15 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

The 3m rule should be about as far down the track as it is that the batsman is allowed to stand before they're in the danger zone of the strip anyway (remember the likes of Bairstow trying to eliminate LBW so started so far out their crease) so there shouldn't be that much space for someone to be able to play a shot while still not on that zone.

I think they shouldn’t be allowed to take their stance in the protected area, but in the course of the ball being delivered why not?  No different to charging down the wicket to hit over the top.  You might take LBW out of the equation, but there are other risks, e.g. stumped, caught, bowled…as well as danger to yourself which less time to react to the ball being delivered.

[RoystonFoote'snephew]

9 hours ago, leader said:

VAR is a joke let’s go back to referee and linesman doing there job 

 

I'd go further, let's go back to referee and linesman being allowed to do their jobs without outside interference. 

[Lrrr]

34 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I think they shouldn’t be allowed to take their stance in the protected area, but in the course of the ball being delivered why not?  No different to charging down the wicket to hit over the top.  You might take LBW out of the equation, but there are other risks, e.g. stumped, caught, bowled…as well as danger to yourself which less time to react to the ball being delivered.

You can't stand in the protected area, same as bowlers, the England players got warnings when they overdid it, but my point is the distance from protected area to crease is probably just over 3m so there shouldn't be much space between being on the protected area being a no no and the 'more than 3m away from the wicket'

[Davefevs]

2 hours ago, Lrrr said:

You can't stand in the protected area, same as bowlers, the England players got warnings when they overdid it, but my point is the distance from protected area to crease is probably just over 3m so there shouldn't be much space between being on the protected area being a no no and the 'more than 3m away from the wicket'

Yes, you’re right, forgot about the distance from crease to stumps too.  Doh.

[W-S-M Seagull]

12 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

The only thing to take from that article is VAR MUST be scrapped.

So they reviewed many hundreds of incidents only to discover the officials erred on a dozen occasions. Half when (and despite all the technology,) they incorrectly made a decision, balanced by half where they should have acted yet didn't. 

 

Var isn't the issue. 

It's those that are responsible for it that's the problem. Webb coming in should go a long way to solving that problem. 

[Never to the dark side]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/64047311

[Sandhurst Red]

On a slightly different note, can someone clarify or confirm my thinking with regard to linesmen/women.

This season in particular, they seem very hesitant to make any type of decision - even when it is directly in front of them. Be it a foul, offside or even a corner kick.

They always seem to look at the referee, await their decision, and then raise the flag in the necessary direction to back up the Ref's choice.

Has anyone else noticed this trend, as I do wonder if there has been a directive from the PGMOL that they follow this approach, and let the ref make the majority of the decisions during a game. 

 

[Davefevs]

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

8 hours ago, Never to the dark side said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/64047311

Easier work as a pundit/coach/job at an old club or wirh mates at an old club, more cash for less work- certainly pro rata.

Nice warm studio or relatively cushy ambassadorial role eg on one hand, or officiating? From a money and ease of work perspective no brainer.

That's forgetting that quite a lot of top flight definitely and quite a few Championship players in theory make enough to be made for life anyway over the course of their career.

Tough sell! Of course it depends on the level, the earnings and the profile of the player. Lower down you go,  the easier it might be to entice some.

Edited December 23, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Davefevs]

4 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Easier work as a pundit/coach/job at an old club or wirh mates at an old club, more cash for less work- certainly pro rata.

Nice warm studio or relatively cushy ambassadorial role eg on one hand, or officiating? From a money and ease of work perspective no brainer.

That's forgetting that quite a lot of top flight definitely and quite a few Championship players in theory make enough to be made for life anyway over the course of their career.

Tough sell! Of course it depends on the level, the earnings and the profile of the player. Lower down you go,  the easier it might be to entice some.

Probably not gonna be ex-PL players signing up, but lower league, players released young, etc, which you state.  And I think that is a good starting place.  Know the laws AND the game unlike a number of refs who appear to just know the laws.

Edited December 23, 2022 by Davefevs