Much of the VAR protocol is based on trying to minimize its impact to the flow of the game for the most benefit. That is why is it limited to what they consider major incidents as it is what they believe the best way to balance fixing key decisions with the smallest impact on the game. I think one thing most people would agree with if assessed soberly, is that a protocol that gave VAR the freedom to intervene on every situation in the entire game would change the game to something utterly unrecognizable and unsatisfactory, and so if you donât want that you have to accept there will be some things out of the scope of the VAR review. I think yellow cards are an area that will always feel wrong - when VAR gets involved to downgrade a yellow it will feel like the game is being stopped too much, and when it doesnt it opens the door to something that feels so unfair as the Jota case. I genuinely dont know what the answer is.
It was not 35 seconds. It was literally about 2 seconds from the call being communicated to the ref and Spurs restarting. I donât think that mitigates Englandâs error though because what it means for the game to have restarted that quickly is that everyone was already set up for it to be a free kick rather than kick off. The visual difference between these two situations is pretty obvious with even a quick glance, and this further points to the lack of satisfactory answers over how England could have understood it to have been given as a goal on the pitch.
The biggest issue though is once they realized what a fuck up they had just caused they hid behind process rather than doing the right thing. Part of the VAR protocol is that its scope to intervene is closed once the game restarts. So they will claim their hands were tied in what they could do to correct things. Yet that protocol is not written with such an absurd mistake in mind. The impact would have been far less had they acknowledged the mistake as soon as it was realized and enforced the right action, and they fact they didnt is I think possibly the most insightful part of this whole pathetic shit showâŚthe commitment to process even when producing utterly absurd outcomes that no one finds satisfactory. Someone so disconnected with how humans respond to that sort of decision should be anywhere near a job where humans are involved.
It would be very unfair. Of all the shithousery that happened on Saturday, Spurs played the game in good faith. If you reversed the situation and we had won with Spurs having been shat over would you want us to have to play it again?
What we do need is a massive improvement in the way the matches are run. There are several WTAF things to do with this game but I think Paul Joyceâs revelations about UAE top it.
I donât think VAR should review yellows but it might be worth a panel post game to be asked to review it.
Goldbridge is right on Jones to be fair, was there anything concrete that makes that into a red? No. Once it was given on the field as a yellow it should have stayed one.
Though I do feel we should probably get rid of it all and just stick to semi automated offside and Goal Line tech and if a ref feel he needs to review a goal or something like mistaken identity it is available to him.
I do feel that the offside on Saturday was just the absolute basics of VAR. If it feels it has to intervene on that Jones tackle then it should be doing the basics on offsides.
I was against Mic refs but after watching the Rugby I donât see the harm in it. As in Cricket they clearly ask the Video assistant to review what decision and state their current position.
The assistant then comes back eithier via the screen or in Cricket when they say âstay with your original decision of Not out/Outâ
Probably the bend in Bissoumaâs leg. That is often taken as a defacto demonstration of the excessive force required to make it a red and the images very clearly show that. It also goes to explain how a ref can argue that Kaneâs on Robboâs wasnt excessive force, simply because Robbo did well enough to get out of the way of it that the impact was largely missed. Despite it being an awful awful challenge. However, back to the Jones one, itâs difficult to see these sorts of physical distortions in real time and without that tackles landing that high will often be treated as just a yellow. If the conversation between the ref and VAR focused on the force of impact then it makes sense of the VAR to focus on the still frames.
They are supposed to show the full sequence in real time, but they are allowed to supplement that with more focused images
FWIW, I still think it was an incredibly unlucky red and think the impact was a consequence of what happened to Jonesâ foot on the ball not on what Jones did with the challenge. I think that should mitigate the punishment and a lot of times it would. But itâs a judgement call and one that under normal circumstance is incredibly unlikely to be over turned simply because there is a rational argument the ref can make for it given the way YBâs leg bent.
I honestly canât really fathom why refereeing is done on impact rather than the actual action. You end up having all sorts of absurd scenarios where a player might not have done anything wrong, but by sheer bad luck, they end up getting penalised for it, whereas in other obviously malicious cases, nothing gets done because thereâs no impact, e.g. the many cases involving Salah.
I think the answer is largely down to an attempt to produce as much consistency as is possible. If you can point to something demosntrable it gives the ref a way to be more confident that their yes or no response is one his brethren will rally around in agreement over.
It is the understandable response to such intense criticism over the âneed for consistencyâ but it has a tendency to produce terrible outcomes. Not because it penalizes tackles like Jonesâ that arguably shouldnât be punished, but because it fails to identify the problem with ones like Kane on Robbo 2 years ago. Or Skippâs on Robbo. Fuck, the fact Robbo was brought up on Irn Bru and has metal girders for leg bones means its essentially impossible for anyone to get sent off his kick him because his bones dont bend. What the process focused refs then do is see a wild lunging challenge and wave it away because it lacked the visible leg bending they have cowardly leaned as on the requirement for giving a red
You are lucky, you havenât seen me in Psycho state :triumph,. I am still teed off from I was last night.
I work in Catholic school now, every time i am about to use offensive word in my head, i see the statue of Jesus or Mother Mary staring at me, then I relent.
Nuthin from nuthin, but studies have confirmed that swearing/expleting works to lower stress in people. Curse away, @Maria!!! You deserve it. The saints will understand, I promise.
But these cards are down to Tubby GrantâŚat least 3 of emâŚCurtis, Jota,Robbo were his mindset of booking/carding as many LFC players as possâŚso send the bill to himâŚwe shouldnât have to payâŚ
Webb retired from refereeing because at an age 2 years under the forced retirement age, at a stage in his career where is was unlikely to get any more big assignments having already had the big ones once, the head technical job at the PGMOL came available. His decision was to retire 2 years early but go into a post-refereeing job, or play out the last 2 years and then hope something good comes available. It was a very understandable decision and puts his decision to subsequently leave the PGMOL and go to Saudi in a different light.
They are claiming that it is no different than a ref officiating a Europa League game on a thursday. Except it totally is. As members of the PGMOL they are UEFA affiliated and doing those games is part of the defined career progression representing UEFA in the biggest club and international games. Going off to ref in a different conference is somewhat covered by their status as independent contractors to the PGMOL not employees, but is very clearly a different proposition.
It also just shines another light on the problems caused to the game as a whole by having state actors being involved in the club game as owners. This supposedly acceptable source of side income for the refs would not be a problem if their paymasters did not have a vested interest in how they do their day job
Amusingly the spurs fans are arguing this demonstrates they were just as unlucky as us and weâre just moaning. Not shown here is that the defender did get a little nick on the ball with his leading right foot, but as shown here then went through Gapko with his trailing leg, which is a pretty inarguable careless challenge that meets the definition of a yellow. We then scored from the resulting free kick and they are crying saying that these were wrong decisions and balances out the diaz incident
I honestly think this is a big part of why the refs are such shit bags. There is so much terrible discourse around refs and their decisions that I can imagine it becomes impossible for them to think how to engage in good faith. The result is they take an us vs the world mentality, become insular and shut out even legitimate concerns and criticisms of them
I thought VAR was supposed to address clear and obvious errors, not adjudicate on the inside of a fart.
It is being deployed far more now than in its first phase. It actually is real time appeal process in which the clubs have no say. As soon humans are involved errors and the issue of corruption arises. Its nothing like what it was outlined to be. They should give clubs a challenge like in tennis. If they FA can raise an in game review, then why cannot the club?
In rugby a key question with head clashes is whether there are any mitigating factors. Anything that made it a more accidental impact. They even have specific key words theyâre looking for almost like trigger points or a tick list. Itâs still a judgement call but it is at least a big piece of the whole protocol for reviewing an incident. No such thing in football which makes an absurdity of the whole thing.
Yet again the biggest sport in the world years behind others.
Still doesnât explain Englandâs decision to lead the referee down the route he did though.
Except I donât think it really did. It blew over in the press, but that day (2-2 vs Arsenal) appears to have been an inflection point for how badly our games have been reffed. The Klopp vs Tiereny incident was a couple of weeks afterwards but you look at how the other officials rallied around Tiereny and while that is something they were likely to do anyway to a degree, it definitely felt it was done in the context of a collective attitude of âfuck these guysâ. You look at yellow cards like the one Robbo got and its difficult to understand without a premeditated attitude of refs looking for any opportunity to book one of our players.
A suggestion on VAR use would be to automate as much as possible, so offside is not a judgment call and people are not involved in making a decision. Similar to the ball crossing the line.
Then beyond that, the only people who can activate a VAR review are the managers, or designated person alongside the manager.
If something looks wrong to them, challenge it. Maybe two challenges per half?
And the people who review the challenges need to be changed as well, not PGMOL, but perhaps former players? They know the spirit of the game much better and can see whatâs a bad challenge, and so on.
What we have right now is a shitshow, and we were just robbed of top spot and also have the repercussions of injuries and red cards to deal with.
I posted in another thread a footage of former ref Halsey saying theyâre not following IFAB protocols with regards to use of VAR and just using it as and when they please to re-referee games. Itâs crazy how far behind the guys in this country are when everybody started at the same time.
5 years down the line and I can safely say refereeing has never been this bad, use of VAR needs to be binned or at least suspended until we have some actual fucking technology work linked, tested and proven. VAR was not sold on the idea that other refereeâs would be sat in an office drawing their own lines.
Rewind the clock even before the wrongly called offside goal, without VAR the game is still played 11v11 and no doubt in my mind we fuck those Londoners up and go home with the 3 pointsâŚno one complains and furthermore thereâs probably no still image of the Jones tackle circulating around social media.
I think the other issue is Simon Hooperâs refereeing of the second half. You donât want refs trying to equalize decisions. But he arguably got even worse in the second half after having been informed that he and his team had made a catastrophic error. It was a performance that in retrospect looks every bit a conscious effort to not be seen to have been swayed by his earlier action and in turn just went bonkers giving everything he could against us just to prove how steadfast and honest and fair he is.
After VAR told him (off mike) he should have awarded the Diaz goal, in the interval, it might have been playing on his mind, and âcabbagedâ his head due to the shitstorm that was about to descend upon him after the game. The same shit storm he and his cronies created.
. I am still teed off from I was last night.