Video refereeing is a must next season

[filbertway]

2 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

Ah, thanks for that. Actually I'm quite surprised that they overturned a handball decision as they are usually quite subjective. Must have been obviously deliberate.

Yeah he's gone up hands in the air and it's hit his hand, could easily have passed for his head in real time.

I needed a goal for a bet so was happy when it was given haha

[Manwell Pablo]

On 20/04/2017 at 08:36, sylofox said:

You are joking. Did you not see what happened last season. The prem had more worldwide exposure than it's ever had.

 

Every country in the world reported on it. News papers in tiny American towns doing spreads on us. TV debates on how to say Leicester.

 

The whole world bought into our story. Just as it would had we made the CL final. Little Leicester would have more pulling power than a Real Barca game.

 

UEFA would have been quid's in had we made the final.

 

Id not waste your time seems the tin foil hats are well and truly out.

 

Find it amusing really given Bayern Barcelona Dortmund and every English team are gone and the mighty Monaco are still in if their fixing it their not doing a very good job.

[Danny Clender]

1 hour ago, WigstonWanderer said:

In the Aussie trial, the stated objective is to overturn howlers only, not try to ref the whole match. I think this is best in the short term. It can always be extended in the future depending on how well it works out. As it stands I don't think it can possibly do any harm and most probably will improve standards in much the same way as goal line tech has improved things.

 

In the match I watched today there were a couple of decisions that were reviewed (while play continued) but nothing was overturned. There was also a penalty decision which was fairly borderline if I'm remembering correctly.

And overall how would you say its been received by the fans/crowd/pundits etc etc?

[WigstonWanderer]

I haven't heard anyone criticise it. As I say there's very little to criticise. It's been implemented in a fairly innocuous way with a light touch and nothing controversial so far to my knowledge. The penalty mentioned by filbertway is the only incident I am aware of where it's made any difference so far so it's early days yet. I assume they will keep using it next season after completing the trial for the remainder of the finals matches (4 more matches).

 

Fortunately it wasn't yet live during an earlier Perth match where a Diego Castro goal would have neen disallowed as the VAR spotted that the ball had gone out of play . BTW he's a fantastic player even at his age - can we sign him?

[WigstonWanderer]

Btw, I know the VAR can overturn a goal it it turns out that it was offside. I assume he can also reinstate a goal that's been wrongly disallowed due to offside. I wonder if this means players will continue after an offside decision to put the ball in the net in the hope that the offside is overturned? Might get a bit messy at that point, as the opposition might have stopped playing due to the refs whistle.

 

Presumably in this case the VAR cannot intervene (for incidents occurring after the whistle has gone).

[Milo]

On 4/18/2017 at 22:55, Redouane said:

With the technology here and ready to be used, 2017/18 needs to start off with video refereeing. The argument that it dehumanizes football cannot stand anymore after seeing so many wrongful decisions affect the faith of all these games

I am totally 100% against video refereeing - think it will kill the game. Goal line technology is just about do-able, as its a static decision.

 

I don't get the argument that the decisions will only be for howlers that the ref makes - For example, if the ref incorrectly awards a corner, is that a howler? Can it be overturned? If not, what if the opposition score from the corner? Goal, or no goal?? Surely no goal as the corner shouldn't have been awarded in the first place.

Same with a throw-in, free kick, etc. Will we then have to review every corner, free kick and throw in?

 

If you think Managers (and fans) are going to accept goals given against them incorrectly, when the technology is place to clearly see what should and shouldn't have been given, then I think you are mistaken.

 

I can hear Big Sam post match moaning "The ball clearly went out off their player and the corner and should have been a goal kick to us...they scored from the corner which ultimately sent us down. We have video technology, why can't it be used for such important decisions..." blah blah blah...

 

Would rather see better referees, tbh. 

 

 

 

 

[WigstonWanderer]

4 hours ago, Milo said:

I am totally 100% against video refereeing - think it will kill the game. Goal line technology is just about do-able, as its a static decision.

 

I don't get the argument that the decisions will only be for howlers that the ref makes - For example, if the ref incorrectly awards a corner, is that a howler? Can it be overturned? If not, what if the opposition score from the corner? Goal, or no goal?? Surely no goal as the corner shouldn't have been awarded in the first place.

Same with a throw-in, free kick, etc. Will we then have to review every corner, free kick and throw in?

 

If you think Managers (and fans) are going to accept goals given against them incorrectly, when the technology is place to clearly see what should and shouldn't have been given, then I think you are mistaken.

 

I can hear Big Sam post match moaning "The ball clearly went out off their player and the corner and should have been a goal kick to us...they scored from the corner which ultimately sent us down. We have video technology, why can't it be used for such important decisions..." blah blah blah...

 

Would rather see better referees, tbh. 

 

 

 

 

I think you need to read the earlier stuff for the scope of the VAR, at least as trialled here in Oz. It wouldn't be used to award corners and suchlike. I believe the Oz trial is part of a FIFA experiment so any introduction elsewhere (such as PL) is likely to be based on the same rules.

[Danny Clender]

10 hours ago, WigstonWanderer said:

Btw, I know the VAR can overturn a goal it it turns out that it was offside. I assume he can also reinstate a goal that's been wrongly disallowed due to offside. I wonder if this means players will continue after an offside decision to put the ball in the net in the hope that the offside is overturned? Might get a bit messy at that point, as the opposition might have stopped playing due to the refs whistle.

 

Presumably in this case the VAR cannot intervene (for incidents occurring after the whistle has gone).

Well it sounds very successful, so far to me.

 

Your scenario sounds like a potential nightmare, but ref's blow to the linesman right? not sure how that differs.

In all honesty, I could see that becoming part of the game taken away from linesman altogether.

The scenario you'd describe would be showing up their mistakes every week, eventually they'd just give up. 

I'd love to know what a linesman thinks about the introduction, sure they'd be happy to not call on offside's anymore and concentrate on other stuff like......er?

[st albans fox]

the thin end of the wedge. Once it comes in for offsides, then it's only a matter of time before it is used for pens and then there will be a call for i to to be used for corners, etc etc (as these incorrectly awarded can lead to a goal - blah blah blah)

 

im against it

 

i can cope with referees making mistakes. For me, it's part of the game. 

 

Too many grey areas. as noted above, offsides incorrectly given will be reviewed. Defences will be told to stop playing as soon as the whistle goes to make any correction impossible. so linesmen will stop putting their flags up if they think it's close. Refs will stop making decisions re pens and leave it to VAR. I want officials to make decisions, not bottle out of them completely. 

 

goal line technology can be extended to cover the entire area of play. Ball in or out is a statement of fact with an instant call. The rest of it is so much more subjective and will change the game for the worse imo. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with the beautifu, game. Let's not fiddle too much eh? 

[Danny Clender]

4 hours ago, Milo said:

I am totally 100% against video refereeing - think it will kill the game. Goal line technology is just about do-able, as its a static decision.

 

I don't get the argument that the decisions will only be for howlers that the ref makes - For example, if the ref incorrectly awards a corner, is that a howler? Can it be overturned? If not, what if the opposition score from the corner? Goal, or no goal?? Surely no goal as the corner shouldn't have been awarded in the first place.

Same with a throw-in, free kick, etc. Will we then have to review every corner, free kick and throw in?

 

If you think Managers (and fans) are going to accept goals given against them incorrectly, when the technology is place to clearly see what should and shouldn't have been given, then I think you are mistaken.

 

I can hear Big Sam post match moaning "The ball clearly went out off their player and the corner and should have been a goal kick to us...they scored from the corner which ultimately sent us down. We have video technology, why can't it be used for such important decisions..." blah blah blah...

 

Would rather see better referees, tbh. 

 

 

 

 

Those are elements of the VAR that I really can see most people understanding.

But when you're watching a game and the ball is seen to deflect out from the defending team, yet the ref awards a goal kick instead of a corner to your team that is attacking, do you always accept it and think that's part of the game? 

I don't and those mistakes can cost you points.

 

I'm not trying to change your mind, it's not as clear cut as everybody thinks, I just think give it a try and see if it works.

[WigstonWanderer]

As I say, the current trial is a much lighter touch than what's being described above. It is only being used for goals, penalties, red cards and mistaken identity, not for every foul, corner, offside or thow in.

 

Perhaps I haven't described it very well.

[Milo]

19 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

the thin end of the wedge. Once it comes in for offsides, then it's only a matter of time before it is used for pens and then there will be a call for i to to be used for corners, etc etc

This. Exactly.

Once millions has been invested into the introduction of the technology, they won't just bin it if it's not working...

 

If you're for video referees, which (by their very nature) are able to call every decision correctly, then why play the game with any incorrect decisions at all? Surely if you want correct decisions then it should be across the board?

I don't see why a throw in that leads to a goal is any more or less important than a penalty that leads to a goal - why would one be allowed to be VAR'd and the other one not?

 

Nightmare

  

[Milo]

10 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

As I say, the current trial is a much lighter touch than what's being described above. It is only being used for goals, penalties, red cards and mistaken identity, not for every foul, corner, offside or thow in.

 

Perhaps I haven't described it very well.

Thanks for your input on this, btw - useful to have someone who's actually seen it in action and being discussed as it's in use.

Keep us posted as to how it pans out

[Blarmy]

Maybe a tennis-style challenge system, say three per half?

[Milo]

3 hours ago, Blarmy said:

Maybe a tennis-style challenge system, say three per half?

I heard that this was thought about when the whole idea of video refs came about. Can't see it working, tbh - what if there were more really bad decisions than appeals? It would mean that still some of the major decisions could not be corrected if wrong.

The whole argument from the pro-VAR people is that the major decisions should be correct...if there are, say, 4 major incidents and only 3 appeals then that wouldn't fix the problem.  

 

I would like better referees, more transparency from them. Maybe they should be allowed to explain why they came to a decision and we should just accept that sometimes they are going to be wrong. I know I'm swimming against the tide with this a bit.

 

Would also be nice if players didn't make it quite so hard for refs by cheating, etc...but that's a different topic 

 

 

[Royston.]

It needs doing in cases where there is clearly doubt. For example the non penalty v Madrid.

However sometimes even on a replay it is still unclear and comes down to opinion.

 

Should at least be trailed at the top level for 1 season so we can see for ourselves the pro's and con's.

[WigstonWanderer]

2 hours ago, Royston. said:

It needs doing in cases where there is clearly doubt. For example the non penalty v Madrid.

However sometimes even on a replay it is still unclear and comes down to opinion.

 

Should at least be trailed at the top level for 1 season so we can see for ourselves the pro's and con's.

In that case the ref's original decision will stand. It's only overturned if it was clearly wrong.

[Finnegan]

On 18/04/2017 at 22:58, Kitchandro said:

You think that would make any difference?

 

Cheating UEFA officials can look at a video and still give a dishonest decision.

 

They aren't going to just start refereeing the game fairly.

 

 

https://portalvhds8vvm7z0zbcg8n.blob.core.windows.net/uploadswp/2016/11/tinfoil-hat-guy1.jpg

 

[The Doctor]

On 18/04/2017 at 22:58, Kitchandro said:

You think that would make any difference?

 

Cheating UEFA officials can look at a video and still give a dishonest decision.

 

They aren't going to just start refereeing the game fairly.

 - Seriously? In the case of cut and dry decisions like the atletico penalty, no chance. By full time everyone had seen the penalty incident and said the ref had made a mistake, there's no way the ref could hide given a replay of it to call on as well. Where the referees can have a replay and still not come to the honest decision (which I guess in this case means the decision you'd have made?) is where the incident is debatable and due to the vagueness of the rules (e.g. whether a handball is deliberate).

[Danny Clender]

1 hour ago, WigstonWanderer said:

In that case the ref's original decision will stand. It's only overturned if it was clearly wrong.

Sorry, WW, been following this and now I'm confused.

The Ref's decision regarding the 1st leg Pen for AM was clearly wrong, so from your experience how would have that decision been judged?

[KingsX]

The Cup semi may add some impetus for more incremental change.  High profile game and clubs, missed call changed the outcome, technology already in use which would have allowed the correction.

[Danny Clender]

13 minutes ago, KingsX said:

The Cup semi may add some impetus for more incremental change.  High profile game and clubs, missed call changed the outcome, technology already in use which would have allowed the correction.

For me this is the thing.

How many Man City fans would be saying NO to VAR now?

Also, had VAR have been in use and the AM penalty not been given, how many LCFC fans would be saying no to the system.

 

Cue Jim Bowen for a hypothetical scenario, now Leicester fans, you can either agree with the referee there and have that incorrect penalty decision awarded or you can go with the VAR and have it overruled, you've got the time it takes for Bully's board to revolve....

CUE AUDIENCE PERSUASION....

 

"Well Jim, we've had a great day and we'll take the incorrect penalty decision as it stands"

my arse!

[Thracian]

On 22/04/2017 at 07:13, Milo said:

I am totally 100% against video refereeing - think it will kill the game. Goal line technology is just about do-able, as its a static decision.

 

I don't get the argument that the decisions will only be for howlers that the ref makes - For example, if the ref incorrectly awards a corner, is that a howler? Can it be overturned? If not, what if the opposition score from the corner? Goal, or no goal?? Surely no goal as the corner shouldn't have been awarded in the first place.

Same with a throw-in, free kick, etc. Will we then have to review every corner, free kick and throw in?

 

If you think Managers (and fans) are going to accept goals given against them incorrectly, when the technology is place to clearly see what should and shouldn't have been given, then I think you are mistaken.

 

I can hear Big Sam post match moaning "The ball clearly went out off their player and the corner and should have been a goal kick to us...they scored from the corner which ultimately sent us down. We have video technology, why can't it be used for such important decisions..." blah blah blah...

 

Would rather see better referees, tbh. 

 

 

 

 

You're not going to get significantly better referees - or referees that don't make crucial mistakes. Once the parameters for the technology use are laid down I'm sure it will be as welcome as it has been in other sports.     

[Wymsey]

We, as football fans and particularly if a referee or linesman gives away a controversial decision that negatively affects the result for our side, wouldn't mind seeing new rules that makes referees etc having to explain these decisions post-match.

 

Despite it being somewhat required and necessary, their 'rights' would not allow such a thing to happen unfortunately.

[WigstonWanderer]

6 hours ago, Danny Clender said:

Sorry, WW, been following this and now I'm confused.

The Ref's decision regarding the 1st leg Pen for AM was clearly wrong, so from your experience how would have that decision been judged?

I should make it clear that there is very little experience to be had from the Aussie trial so far as I haven't seen anything reviewed bar the incident pointed out by filbertway a couple of pages back.

 

From what I have READ about the trial and the rules under which they operate, all penalty decisions would be reviewed by the VAR to see if the award was obviously wrong. In the case of AM first leg I would have thought that this would qualify as "obviously incorrect" as the incident was clearly outside the area, so would have been overturned.

 

It is explained here:

 

http://www.a-league.com.au/article/hyundai-a-league-vars-what-you-need-to-know/1a9mga9wyzjv013fpv57jhl3pd

 

Interestingly yesterday's Melbourne City/Perth Glory match included an incident where it wasn't clear whether the ball crossed the line or not for a goal, however it didn't seem to be referred to the VAR. No idea why not as according to the above link goal line tech is supposed to be available. Rather disappointing.