I remember Keith Hackett giving a free kick for it in the opener of the 88 Euros much to everyone’s confusion and anger. I dont think I’ve seen it since
1 Like
Also happened against Mignolet in European game
Dale Johnson’s explanation for the Grealish decision is that refs have deemphasized punishing players when they are bringing their arms back into their body to make themselves smaller, which he describes the actions Grealish was taking. But none of this makes sense…
This was the justification given for not giving us the pen against Arsenal, but the independent panel and the PGMOL both ruled that to be a wrong decision. So what is the right take on these situations then? 
He also gives grealish mitigation because he was in a wall and started with his hand in the shoulder of the guy standing next to him. How is that a mitigating factor if you’ve chosen to raise your arms like that and the ball hits you while moving your arm towards the ball before you’ve got it back in to your body?
So I come back to the idea that the refs have made the rules so complicated that they are now impossible to apply in a sensible and consistent way
1 Like
It should have been a corner if he thinks he touched it but it didn’t constitute a handball. Either he didn’t see it (and VAR should have called him back) or it’s their usual post-hoc rationalisation which will be completely different next week when they have to bullshit their way out of another bizarre decision. Of course none of this makes sense. It never can make sense.
The ref clearly didnt see the contact with the arm hence him giving a goal kick. But for VAR to get involved they have to both see something the ref didnt, and think that thing constituted a foul. This argument for why this was not a handball then applies to the VAR not finding enough reason to draw the ref’s attention to something he missed in real time.
The PGMOL has found itself in a position of being so concerned with receiving criticism for “a man in a van 100s of miles away rerefereeing games” that they are now falling over themselves to find ways for the VAR to back the ref’s original decision even when it is wrong. They have created a situation in which they have created an expectation of better decision making with the use of technology yet offered the refs only a trivial level of support compared to the pre-VAR days.It’s pretty much the worst possible application of video reply technology right now, all made even worse by how much of an indecipherable mess the rules have become.
2 Likes
One thing that I notice quite regularly in Bundesliga games is that a referee is called to a monitor to check something but will then dismiss it if they feel it doesn’t cross their threshold for whatever the offence was. I can’t recall the last time I saw that in the EPL.
1 Like
I think it has only happened once or twice all season and that is a reflection of how high the PGMOL have made the bar for VAR to recommend a review. I think it’s probably right that the correct protocol would result in few declined interventions. But just not this few when such clearly bad decisions are being allowed to stand.
1 Like
Whatever happened to players covering their ‘Town Halls’ with their hands when facing a free kick is what I want to know - waving their arms about is bound to get them in trouble :0)
Is it up to VAR to make that call for the ref? It’s not so much as re-refereeing games as not refereeing them.
That’s what I don’t get. It is acknowledged that Oliver didn’t have a great view of what happened with Doku yet they still gave so much deference to his interpretation that was only possible with a blocked view of the incident. VAR approached the review like he was looking at a magic eye picture and trying to see what someone else had told them they saw…“yeah, probably not what I would have described, but I guess I can see how you saw it that way.”
Like I’ve said before, I understand that VAR has the potential to ruin the game if used too liberally and so they have to find a way to have a light touch with it, but the approach they have landed on just doesnt work. It is providing almost zero support to refs and leaving fans rightfully angry and let down over the times it is not used. I think that is the issue far more than the outcomes.
I think you can address the issue of the ref not being well supported by changing the narrative and allowing the refs to use it like they do in rugby, to call out the things they aren’t sure about and want someone to have another look at, but think that likely breaks up the game too much. The only other alternative I see is to put it in the hands of the teams, the captain or the manager. You see something you don’t agree with and think it significant enough then ask for a review.
2 Likes
By all accounts the referees don’t even want their colleagues to suggest a review, I can’t imagine they would respond in a productive manner to a challenge system.
It works in cricket and hockey. It would work in football. One appeal per half allowed per team.
Depending on the criteria of course and there is always the danger of a team blowing their appeal in the first few minutes on a disputed corner.
Yeah, definite consideration, but I think it at least cuts out the biggest obstacle we have currently for the tech being used to correct an incorrect decision. Right now they seem content to hide behind the original decision. If you can bring in a process that at least gets it to be used when it should be to reconsider bad decisions its a step forward, and if we see refs just content to stick to their original decision despite evidence to the contrary then we’ll at least have someone to hold accountable rather than this process now where we can admit a decision was wrong but VAR was used correctly to ensure we didnt get the right decision.
We keep making excuses for poor refereeing from VAR and talk about having teams challenge a decision and are using the Grealish handball.
If a ref on a VAR screen cannot adjudge the Grealish handball as not being worthy of a penalty then they should be sacked, simple, make them accountable!!!
1 Like
im against a limited appeal system.
just another layer for either a manager or a captain to consider.
why not just correctly enforce the rules and review the moments as they happen.
im not opposed to VAR in its current format, i dont think the system needs to change, its the operators.
as mentioned above, the mindset needs to change, you can even see it in the language, ‘the officiating team’, ‘the PGMOL’, theres not three teams out there, theres two teams and an adjudicator of the rules.
the absolute mental gymnastics it takes to understand why the rules about ‘once play has began again, theres nothing we can do’ must be adhered to more strictly than admitting a mistake …its just mind boggling.
the other one which has dissappeared quickly in the rearview mirror is the yellow card TAA got for throwing the ball when Gordon shunted him into the hoardings…if you compare Gordons behavior to Trents in that situation its mental to come to conclusion that TAA should be seeing yellow…
you can also look at the Gordon shove and compare it to the Jones or mCalister (rescinded) red cards…
its not the rules, or the system, its the operators…
and as much as i rate Limiescouses reading and input of the situation, the bigger picture of ‘the rules are a bit grey’ isnt a justification/adequate excuse for the lack of common sense, if anything it should allow it to be applied better…
1 Like
-
Two umpires per match. Each only bothering for his half of the pitch. Should in theory allow them more time than to say I was un sighted.
-
All the communications between VAR and the on field umpire to be shown in real time.
-
Get better umpires.
-
No PL umpire to be allowed on the payroll of other league’s etc.
-
Each umpiring decision(cards) to be decided by VAR and incorrect yellows (especially if the opposing player has done a cheap Bruno dive) to be reversed instantly.
-
Strikes rule for the umpires. Three mistakes within a particular period of time means he’s banned from officiating in the PL
- disagree, just keep it simple, youll get two people officiating the same moment on the halfway line
2-5. the only thing i oppose is you calling the ‘umpires’
6.shouldnt be required, just another layer to confuse…what constitutes a ‘strike’, i think we can accept a referee making a real time mistake, nothing wrong with that in theory, they arent robots, they need some wiggle room to error and improve
Anything as blatantly wrong as the diaz non goal. The officials need to have sterner punishment.
Depends on how the ball is being played, if it’s a quick counterattack and one official is on the other side of the pitch, the umpire who’s at the half way line has the ownership in case the foul is done near the half line.
1 Like