The Footie Thread

Orikoru

Tour Winner
Joined
Nov 1, 2016
Messages
19,166
Location
Watford
One thing they could change is .
While VAR are looking at an incident the ref could just go and look for himself.
He is just standing on the pitch being harassed by players usually while the game is stopped.
If there needs to be a referral to the monitor he has already seen it again.
He could then make his decision based on what HE thinks not VAR.
In this blatant hair pull he could give a yellow and a foul not a corner.
I've said it before but I hate the Stockley Park nonsense. In my opinion VAR should have simply been the screen at the side that gives the referee the opportunity to rewatch something if he decides he needs to. Not somebody sat in an office who's not managing the game telling him what to do.
 

clubchamp98

Journeyman Pro
Joined
Jan 23, 2014
Messages
12,037
Location
Liverpool
I've said it before but I hate the Stockley Park nonsense. In my opinion VAR should have simply been the screen at the side that gives the referee the opportunity to rewatch something if he decides he needs to. Not somebody sat in an office who's not managing the game telling him what to do.
But if he dosnt see something he needs backup to bring his attention to it.
So a hybrid of what we have.
But the ref should have the last say I agree.
 

GB72

Money List Winner
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
12,844
Location
Rutland
Not being able to hear the conversation between the ref and VAR does not help as it is difficult to understand the reasoning behing any decision. In rugby it is a constant dialogue as the match goes on but the ref is clearly in control. The video ref can bring things to hte attention of the ref and the ref can ask for play to be checked whilst the game continues and it can be used for anything that the ref was unsure off or did not see. When it comes to important decisions though, the question the ref asks the VAR to check is important as it will often tell who will get the benefit of the doubt if the outcome is unclear. The rugby system as a whole may not work due to the difference in pace of the game but from what I have seen of VAR, it seems to be far to disparate from what is happpening at the ground and the person watching the video and the ref do not appear to act as a team. In rugby the video is a tool to aid the ref and not something to take the decisions away from them
 

Bdill93

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
2,250
Only villa could sign a much needed new CB and lose him for the season after 2 games 😂

Wesley all over again!

Still it could be worse - could be United 😂
 

Swango1980

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
5,651
I've said it before but I hate the Stockley Park nonsense. In my opinion VAR should have simply been the screen at the side that gives the referee the opportunity to rewatch something if he decides he needs to. Not somebody sat in an office who's not managing the game telling him what to do.
That wouldn't work very well. Pretty much, by definition, if the referee didn't give it the first time he didn't see it. Or, he did see it. but from his angle whatever decision he made he was happy with. So, why would he then go and review his own decision? By the screams of the fans or the shouting of the players? It is bad enough now, but you'd have players shouting and screaming at refs, making him doubt himself every time, that he would have to double check. More often than not, his original decision would have been just fine anyway. Or, if he didn't decide to review it, there will be times he blatantly made a wrong decision based on other camera angles.

The VAR referee is a qualified referee as well. It isn't a robot. So, we need to rely on their judgement just as much as the guy we see on the pitch. The key is how it is implemented, so that it doesn't completely destroy the flow of the game where they are looking at every single moment of contact, whilst ensuring players don't get away with red card challenges or goals are not wrongly allowed or disallowed
 

Swango1980

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
5,651
Not being able to hear the conversation between the ref and VAR does not help as it is difficult to understand the reasoning behing any decision. In rugby it is a constant dialogue as the match goes on but the ref is clearly in control. The video ref can bring things to hte attention of the ref and the ref can ask for play to be checked whilst the game continues and it can be used for anything that the ref was unsure off or did not see. When it comes to important decisions though, the question the ref asks the VAR to check is important as it will often tell who will get the benefit of the doubt if the outcome is unclear. The rugby system as a whole may not work due to the difference in pace of the game but from what I have seen of VAR, it seems to be far to disparate from what is happpening at the ground and the person watching the video and the ref do not appear to act as a team. In rugby the video is a tool to aid the ref and not something to take the decisions away from them
The commentators can hear the discussion between VAR and the ref. Neville and Carragher were discussing this pre-season. They said it was really good and professional, they just couldn't understand why that could not be opened up for the viewers to hear as well. They reckon it would improve perception of VAR rather than hinder it.
 

GB72

Money List Winner
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
12,844
Location
Rutland
The commentators can hear the discussion between VAR and the ref. Neville and Carragher were discussing this pre-season. They said it was really good and professional, they just couldn't understand why that could not be opened up for the viewers to hear as well. They reckon it would improve perception of VAR rather than hinder it.
Totally agree, in rugby we have that and even the crowd can buy a ref mike to tune in to what they are saying. Makes it far easier to understand what is going on and what it causing any delay.
 

Yorkhacker

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
302
Thanks, I hope I haven't just ruined that perception above. :LOL:
No at all. You are definitely the most unbiased (insert team here) fan I've come across. I remember you writing, that you don't let being a Spurs supporter define you. I guess that helps you be less emotive when discussing football.
 

Swango1980

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
5,651
Totally agree, in rugby we have that and even the crowd can buy a ref mike to tune in to what they are saying. Makes it far easier to understand what is going on and what it causing any delay.
And another way for someone to make money. Everyone is a winner.
 

clubchamp98

Journeyman Pro
Joined
Jan 23, 2014
Messages
12,037
Location
Liverpool
That wouldn't work very well. Pretty much, by definition, if the referee didn't give it the first time he didn't see it. Or, he did see it. but from his angle whatever decision he made he was happy with. So, why would he then go and review his own decision? By the screams of the fans or the shouting of the players? It is bad enough now, but you'd have players shouting and screaming at refs, making him doubt himself every time, that he would have to double check. More often than not, his original decision would have been just fine anyway. Or, if he didn't decide to review it, there will be times he blatantly made a wrong decision based on other camera angles.

The VAR referee is a qualified referee as well. It isn't a robot. So, we need to rely on their judgement just as much as the guy we see on the pitch. The key is how it is implemented, so that it doesn't completely destroy the flow of the game where they are looking at every single moment of contact, whilst ensuring players don't get away with red card challenges or goals are not wrongly allowed or disallowed
Yes but I think it was Mike Dean in VAR.
Might be better with a robot.
 

GB72

Money List Winner
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
12,844
Location
Rutland
The commentators can hear the discussion between VAR and the ref. Neville and Carragher were discussing this pre-season. They said it was really good and professional, they just couldn't understand why that could not be opened up for the viewers to hear as well. They reckon it would improve perception of VAR rather than hinder it.
Again, hate to sound like a stuck record but in rugby the video ref simply tells the ref that they are checking foul play over his earpiece of they see something whilst the match plays on and then tell the ref to stop play if they see something decisive. Again, would need tweaking for the pace in football but a simple message stating they have seen something and what it is that they are looking at should be all that is needed. Again, access to the link between the video ref and ref means we can see this is going on.

Rugby uses the video as an extra set of eyes for the ref to use how they wish and that seems better than having regimented uses and decisions basically being made on their behalf.
 

Blue in Munich

Professional Yeti Impersonator
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Messages
13,543
Location
Worcester Park
This lot saves me writing it as a neutral and it is quite refreshing to read a post where a fan of said club has not put there rose tinted glasses on.
Re the hair pull, it once more showed the failings of VAR. Stockley park saw the hair pull, they saw the player pulled to the floor, it was intentional, yet not deemed a red. How’s that, it was stupid and if he had walked there was only one person to blame. Yet because VAR rules cannot give a yellow, the Corner stands. advantage Spurs and goal.
If Spurs had not scored, we would be hardly having this discussion. They did and now all of a sudden the ref is a Tit.
No, not all of a sudden; Anthony Taylor has made a number of ridiculous decisions over the years against Chelsea. He sent Kovacic off in the last FA Cup final against Arsenal for having his foot stamped on by an Arsenal player; he allowed a goal that should have been given offside in the previous FA Cup Final against Arsenal to stand; he saw absolutely nothing wrong with Harry Maguire driving his studs into Michy Batshuayi's groin in a petulant kick out; and perhaps the finest example was his yellow carding of Marcus Alonso for being karate kicked in the head by Gazzaniga. And there are other examples, all of which have been held up by pundits & retired referees, not just irritated fans. The only saving grace about the last example was that VAR actually overturned that one.

Yet VAR put him in that position.
No, he put himself in that position; the incident happened right in front of him, he should have seen enough of it to award the foul at the bare minimum. The fact that Mike "It's all about me" Dean didn't decide that VAR should intervene just rubs salt into the wound.

I thought the ref had a good game in which player shithousery was taken to another level. I await the next time a players hair is pulled and the “ Perp” is sent off then we can have a 10 page discussion re consistency or inconsistency of referee decisions.
We don't have to wait for the next time; Robert Huth received a respective 3 match ban in 2016 for pulling Marouane Fellaini's hair, so the precedent has been set.

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...-huth-manchester-united-leicester-city-banned

I've been watching football long enough to know that sometimes things go your way & sometimes they don't, but the number of times that they have gone against with this ref involved appears to be much more frequent than the law of averages would suggest.
 

IanM

Journeyman Pro
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
9,270
Location
Monmouthshire, UK via Guildford!
Football has a culture of not accepting the ref's decisions to the extent that doesn't exist in other sports. The mess being made of video technology isn't helped by this. The fact that we saw a ref run over to a screen yesterday with thousands of baying yobs behind it shows how daft the application of it is. (And that is regardless of the rights an wrongs of the decisions in the match)
 

BiMGuy

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 9, 2020
Messages
3,720
Maybe the ref was just fed up of Chelsea players begging for a free kick every time they fell over 🤷🏼‍♂️

The diving and screaming was almost at Arsenal pandemic level.
 

Piece

Tour Winner
Joined
May 16, 2011
Messages
6,707
Location
South West Surrey
We don't have to wait for the next time; Robert Huth received a respective 3 match ban in 2016 for pulling Marouane Fellaini's hair, so the precedent has been set.

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...-huth-manchester-united-leicester-city-banned

I've been watching football long enough to know that sometimes things go your way & sometimes they don't, but the number of times that they have gone against with this ref involved appears to be much more frequent than the law of averages would suggest.
The irony of that one is that two years later...
https://www.skysports.com/football/...ive-action-for-pulling-matteo-guendouzis-hair
 

Swango1980

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
5,651
Football has a culture of not accepting the ref's decisions to the extent that doesn't exist in other sports. The mess being made of video technology isn't helped by this. The fact that we saw a ref run over to a screen yesterday with thousands of baying yobs behind it shows how daft the application of it is. (And that is regardless of the rights an wrongs of the decisions in the match)
Absolutely agree. I couldn't believe it when I saw the ref go over to the monitor, to have one set of fans immediately behind the screen yelling at him, and giving him all sorts of abuse (if the overturned decision was likely to go against them) and all sorts of encouragement (if the overturn would work in their favour).

Surely there must be an area where the screen could be placed to avoid this.

I don't think the people in charge, especially of refereeing, help themselves. There seems to be a culture of 100% defence of many of the worst decisions made, with zero accountability (unless a ref has made an absolute howler like 3 yellow cards to one player). Any decision that has any sort of subjectivity, the referees association back the decision as absolutely correct, no more to say. Then the exact opposite decision will be made to following week for a similar incident, again that decision is backed as being 100% correct. Meanwhile, we have players, fans, pundits and journalists absolutely slating these decisions, with no counter argument from the ref, except for the generic statement that comes out from his bosses.

The end result is extreme mistrust from many, and automatically blaming the referee for any decision that went against them, especially if the result did not go their way. I'm sure, for example, Chelsea fans will happily slate Taylor for all the decisions that went against them. However, they will not give him any credit for any decisions he made in their favour. I am guessing, over the years, Taylor will have awarded a decision Chelsea's way, much to the anger of the opposition.

If we could hear VAR and the ref speak, at least we could hear their reasoning over any decision. It also puts more accountability on the VAR ref. Assuming their bosses believe in their ability and professionalism, then I can only see this being a positive step forward. It would also be nice to hear an adult conversation in amongst all the theatrics from players and managers.
 

Orikoru

Tour Winner
Joined
Nov 1, 2016
Messages
19,166
Location
Watford
We don't have to wait for the next time; Robert Huth received a respective 3 match ban in 2016 for pulling Marouane Fellaini's hair, so the precedent has been set.

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...-huth-manchester-united-leicester-city-banned
That just makes it more baffling really. I can't imagine they'll review it again here and apply the same punishment, as that would be admitting that the initial VAR review got it wrong, and lord knows they hate admitting that!
 
Top