The VAR thread

[UniFox21]

Really feel they need to utilise the pitch side monitor. Especially in decisions that late in the game that can decide the result.

They need to be looking at the replay and speaking to the VAR official rather than what they think they've seen. As its going to take a lot of convincing if the VAR official calls a wrong decision, especially if the on field is adamant what they saw.

 

[whoareyaaa]

5 minutes ago, UniFox21 said:

Really feel they need to utilise the pitch side monitor. Especially in decisions that late in the game that can decide the result.

They need to be looking at the replay and speaking to the VAR official rather than what they think they've seen. As its going to take a lot of convincing if the VAR official calls a wrong decision, especially if the on field is adamant what they saw.

 

I thought the point of VAR was to overturn clear and obvious errrors, to me and to anyone looking at the replay it would suggest its a clear an obvious error as the ref has been tricked into thinking the player has been clattered but has actually took a dive.

 

[UniFox21]

11 minutes ago, whoareyaaa said:

I thought the point of VAR was to overturn clear and obvious errrors, to me and to anyone looking at the replay it would suggest its a clear an obvious error as the ref has been tricked into thinking the player has been clattered but has actually took a dive.

 

And that would be conveyed by the VAR official to the on field ref. However, it wouldn't hurt for the ref to walk to the off pitch screen and see what the VAR official is describing. 

Especially on things such as penalties that can decide a game, especially that late on in a game.

[Parafox]

9 minutes ago, UniFox21 said:

And that would be conveyed by the VAR official to the on field ref. However, it wouldn't hurt for the ref to walk to the off pitch screen and see what the VAR official is describing. 

Especially on things such as penalties that can decide a game, especially that late on in a game.

Yes. The ref has seen it in real time and made a decision in a split second. the VAR system should enforce a replay review, pitch-side by the ref at the same time as the panel review it so they can all see and evaluate what happened. There should then be a joint decision with the ref giving his reasons and VAR panel evaluating the decision by the ref in conjunction with what they see in multi-angle slo-mo replays.

Problem with that is, it takes time. 

 

[UniFox21]

2 minutes ago, Parafox said:

Yes. The ref has seen it in real time and made a decision in a split second. the VAR system should enforce a replay review, pitch-side by the ref at the same time as the panel review it so they can all see and evaluate what happened. There should then be a joint decision with the ref giving his reasons and VAR panel evaluating the decision by the ref in conjunction with what they see in multi-angle slo-mo replays.

Problem with that is, it takes time. 

 

But this is basically the last minute of the game, it's a huge decision. Id be happy they took a few minutes replaying and coming to a decision, to make sure they go the correct decision. 

[whoareyaaa]

2 minutes ago, Parafox said:

Yes. The ref has seen it in real time and made a decision in a split second. the VAR system should enforce a replay review, pitch-side by the ref at the same time as the panel review it so they can all see and evaluate what happened. There should then be a joint decision with the ref giving his reasons and VAR panel evaluating the decision by the ref in conjunction with what they see in multi-angle slo-mo replays.

Problem with that is, it takes time. 

 

in a situation like a penalty it shouldn't really matter, last season those 2 extra points that resulted from a dive would have seen them win the title... so we have the tech but still don't use it properly.

 

 

[Parafox]

6 minutes ago, UniFox21 said:

But this is basically the last minute of the game, it's a huge decision. Id be happy they took a few minutes replaying and coming to a decision, to make sure they go the correct decision. 

 

5 minutes ago, whoareyaaa said:

in a situation like a penalty it shouldn't really matter, last season those 2 extra points that resulted from a dive would have seen them win the title... so we have the tech but still don't use it properly.

 

 

Don't get me wrong, I think, where appropriate, decisions should be reviewed regardless of it taking several minutes. The ref should still be involved in the review process. The biggest help to us as supporters in the ground, would be told what is going on. That would alleviate the impatience and frustration that creates such opposition to VAR. 

It's a decent system that needs development to bring it up to the level of the TMO in rugby. 

I cannot understand why the talk between the ref and the VAR team isn't broadcast. What are they afraid of? Also frustratingly, the FA  won't explain why this is the case.

[whoareyaaa]

2 minutes ago, Parafox said:

 

Don't get me wrong, I think, where appropriate, decisions should be reviewed regardless of it taking several minutes. The ref should still be involved in the review process. The biggest help to us as supporters in the ground, would be told what is going on. That would alleviate the impatience and frustration that creates such opposition to VAR. 

It's a decent system that needs development to bring it up to the level of the TMO in rugby. 

I cannot understand why the talk between the ref and the VAR team isn't broadcast. What are they afraid of? Also frustratingly, the FA  won't explain why this is the case.

probably some form of corruption involved at some level.

 

 

[UniFox21]

4 minutes ago, Parafox said:

 

Don't get me wrong, I think, where appropriate, decisions should be reviewed regardless of it taking several minutes. The ref should still be involved in the review process. The biggest help to us as supporters in the ground, would be told what is going on. That would alleviate the impatience and frustration that creates such opposition to VAR. 

It's a decent system that needs development to bring it up to the level of the TMO in rugby. 

I cannot understand why the talk between the ref and the VAR team isn't broadcast. What are they afraid of? Also frustratingly, the FA  won't explain why this is the case.

 

Just now, whoareyaaa said:

probably some form of corruption involved at some level.

Giving the conversation would shut-up anyone arguing with the decision. But they won't do that, for a while anyway.

 

In big decisions such as red cards or penalties, the official should go to the screen and look at it again whilst speaking to the VAR official. 

[ajthefox]

The technology is a good idea in general, it works almost perfectly in cricket and rugby and to a lesser extent in the NFL but the implementation, as others have said, is horrendous. The standard of refereeing has got worse, and the PL/the FA have absolutely no credibility because they fail to admit that their referees are human and that they makes mistakes. 

[Spudulike]

So does this now mean that as VAR didn't over rule the penalty decision at the time then the FA can't administer a retrospective ban to Mane for simulation given the video evidence? 

[The Quick Brown Fox]

11 hours ago, Parafox said:

 

Don't get me wrong, I think, where appropriate, decisions should be reviewed regardless of it taking several minutes. The ref should still be involved in the review process. The biggest help to us as supporters in the ground, would be told what is going on. That would alleviate the impatience and frustration that creates such opposition to VAR. 

It's a decent system that needs development to bring it up to the level of the TMO in rugby. 

I cannot understand why the talk between the ref and the VAR team isn't broadcast. What are they afraid of? Also frustratingly, the FA  won't explain why this is the case.

I would think it was more along the lines of, if the Refs Mike picked up and broadcast everything said then it would broadcast the players screaming obscenities in the Refs face. You don't get this in rugby and I think that's part of it. 

I agree we should be able to hear what is being said, I can hear it now,

 

"We've reviewed it, it looks like a dive bit you're at Anfield and if we don't give it it's going to be a draw, so it's a pen."

[st albans fox]

13 hours ago, Spudulike said:

So does this now mean that as VAR didn't over rule the penalty decision at the time then the FA can't administer a retrospective ban to Mane for simulation given the video evidence? 

Correct - that would undermine the VAR official 

[Manwell Pablo]

14 hours ago, UniFox21 said:

And that would be conveyed by the VAR official to the on field ref. However, it wouldn't hurt for the ref to walk to the off pitch screen and see what the VAR official is describing. 

Especially on things such as penalties that can decide a game, especially that late on in a game.

 

It's not being used for reasons, The Premier League are not keen to have the game slowed down by VAR as the speed the game is played at in the Prem is one of it's main global marketing points. They also seem very keen to only have black and white decisions given by VAR and as I've said elsewhere Saturdays penalty was not black and white, it may have been an extremely dark shade of gray we all know he dived but soon as there is contact the old "he has the right to go down" argument gets rolled out and it's interpretation and they wont review it. Ours isn't even the worst one by a long way, the Kolisanic hand ball last Monday was unbelievable.

 

I am very curious to see how much of blatant error is going to have to be made for a decision to finally get over turned or at least reviewed pitch side. 

Edited 7 October 2019 by Manwell Pablo

[st albans fox]

Just heard a suggestion ..... the referee should be allowed to blow his whistle and not give a decision and then view the incident on the screen or just request the advice of the VAR official.  Hence nothing is being overturned and the referee’s authority isn’t challenged ...... 

 

worth discussing ???

 

 

[Dahnsouff]

46 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Just heard a suggestion ..... the referee should be allowed to blow his whistle and not give a decision and then view the incident on the screen or just request the advice of the VAR official.  Hence nothing is being overturned and the referee’s authority isn’t challenged ...... 

 

worth discussing ???

 

 

Fear all options will be like going down a rabbit hole, more and more complex.

 If the ref blows his whistle, one side will be unhappy, "We were on a counter attack", "I was about to get a shot away", etc, etc

Its a bit of a mess really. VAR has somehow made it more murky and controversial, just hope a happy medium all agree with can be found.

[Babylon]

20 hours ago, UniFox21 said:

Really feel they need to utilise the pitch side monitor. Especially in decisions that late in the game that can decide the result.

If VAR is never going to go against the ref's decision, then they have to use the monitor to give the ref the best view of everything possible. He then has the chance to change his mind, rather than VAR just pretending they are correct on everything. 

[Donk]

Why doesn't the VAR referee just say "check the monitor" and no more, on any kind of contentious decision?

 

That way the VAR does not undermine the decision of the on field referee, which seems to be the sticking point now.

 

Its totally the referee's choice to stick with the decision or to change the decision in that case.

 

VAR can do the factual black and white stuff that the referee and assistants have absolutely no hope of seeing in real time like close offsides.

 

 

[urban fox]

Not absolutely sure about this but I thought that a decision was made by the FA that the pitch side review screen is not actually being used this season in the PL?

Could be totally wrong but this seems to ring a bell somewhere and I cannot recall a single instance of the ref going to check on a pitch side monitor like they did in the world cup etc.

[Facecloth]

Could the ref not have a handheld device, even a mobile phone, to review decisions on? I know it's a not a big 50 inch screen but surely enough to see what they need and would remove the worry about slowing the game down.

[Super_horns]

21 hours ago, TK95 said:

Think we should be allowed to hear whatever sh*** they discuss between them

Like they do in rugby - would stop players and managers influencing the officials .

 

BTW Is Salah now out for months?

 

When I heard Klopp speaking thought he had broken his leg or something.

 

Not suffered a minor kick on the ankle from a slightly rash late but not dangerous tackle .

 

As they said on MOTD Mane made the most of the little tap and that is why they get away with it .

[ThaiFox]

21 hours ago, TK95 said:

Think we should be allowed to hear whatever sh*** they discuss between them

'Hi, this is the ref'

 

'Do you realize you're interrupting our tea break?'

 

'Sorry about that, but I've got a small problem'

 

'Well, get on with it, our tea's getting cold'

 

'Well, I've given a penalty but I'm not sure if Albrighton fouled him, or Mane dived'

 

'Just fiddle with your earpiece for a minute and look like we're discussing it'

 

'OK'

 

'Well, he did clip him, but he also dived'

 

'So what do you think? Penalty or not?'

 

'No idea, just let us get back to our tea break'

 

'Sorry to disturb you'

 

'Next time, make it something important'

[Dahnsouff]

12 minutes ago, Super_horns said:

Like they do in rugby - would stop players and managers influencing the officials .

 

BTW Is Salah now out for months?

 

When I heard Klopp speaking thought he had broken his leg or something.

 

Not suffered a minor kick on the ankle from a slightly rash late but not dangerous tackle .

 

As they said on MOTD Mane made the most of the little tap and that is why they get away with it .

What happening at your club? Injuries?

Sorry, haven’t watched anything of you except MOTD, so not sure if it’s as bad as it looks really 

[st albans fox]

2 hours ago, Dahnsouff said:

Fear all options will be like going down a rabbit hole, more and more complex.

 If the ref blows his whistle, one side will be unhappy, "We were on a counter attack", "I was about to get a shot away", etc, etc

Its a bit of a mess really. VAR has somehow made it more murky and controversial, just hope a happy medium all agree with can be found.

that occurred to me - presumably they play on until the ball goes dead or into an area where there is no prospect of a goal being scored - however, that does mean a counter attack would be halted at its beginning. still think that's a better option that what we are seeing at the moment where refs are still 'guessing' and bad decisions resulting which VAR wont overturn.

[Corky]

It will be interesting to see the first decision overturned not for offside or handball, I don't think we're going to see many at all for "fouls" with any sort of contact.