If you're a fan of rugby and just saw the red card in the WC final then you see how that standard never can continue with video review. There are just too many more decisions that meet the "90%+ refs agree on a call" then the higher standard. It always shifts to a lower standard for video review.
If you're a fan of rugby and just saw the red card in the WC final then you see how that standard never can continue with video review. There are just too many more decisions that meet the "90%+ refs agree on a call" then the higher standard. It always shifts to a lower standard for video review.
Yeah it never could be...Henry incidents happen a handful of times a season
Rugby 'var' process sh*ts all over football. So much we could learn/take
Be an interesting 2nd half now...
So's this forum!
Fundamentally, I think the in the moment decision should always be the one supported, otherwise why have a referee on the pitch?
And rightly so because it is not a penalty and looks like a dive too me. The PL says any contact has to have a consequence for a penalty and if there is slight contact, it was not the reason why Schar fell over, he was already on his way down before that.
VAR pointless then.
Kes
I'll Decide ...
The only contact for me was initiated by the Newcastle player. The Wolves player certainly didn't kick him ....If there's a contact on the Newcastle player (which I think there is) I'm stunned that folks dont think it's a pen..
"A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following
offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be
careless, reckless or using excessive force:
...
• kicks or attempts to kick"
He is attempting to kick the ball, the Newcastle player nicks in ahead, defender attempts to pull out of kicking attempt and is just not quick enough to prevent the kick on opponent. I think the uproar here is the punishment (PK) seems harsh for what was clearly not intentional, but for me it's a pen.
Rightly or wrongly VAR is set up to operate a certain way (this season) - it would be fundamentally wrong to change that mid-season and open a whole host of legal cases about previous decisions that should/should not have been changed.
I don't think it was a penalty yesterday, but the threshold this season is whether it's a clear and obvious error by the referee - ie was there no contact.
We can debate where that threshold should be until the cows come home, it ain't changing mid-season.
I don't think it was a penalty yesterday, but the threshold this season is whether it's a clear and obvious error by the referee - ie was there no contact.
We can debate where that threshold should be until the cows come home, it ain't changing mid-season.
My take is, can our top referees stop giving ‘soft‘ penalties? At my grass roots level I take the view I have a higher threshold for a penalty than a free kick outside the penalty area. A penalty not given is quickly forgotten, whereas one given is match changing & creates a controversial discussion post game.
It stems from Euro 2020 (read 2021) when Rosetti (head of refereeing for UEFA) said "we don't want to give soft penalties" or words to that effect!
‘The laws cannot deal with every possible situation, so where there is no direct provision in the Laws, The IFAB expects the referee to make a decision within the ‘spirit’ of the game and the Laws – this often involves asking the question, “what would football want/expect?’
Above from IFAB.
Imho, under spirit and philosophy, this gives referees ability within reason to manage our application of the laws, our aim should be to facilitate a match where the participants feel we have fairly & consistently administered control and application of the laws.
Does having a higher threshold for penalties come under what football wants/expects?
Not based on the retorts that I get ..
I think we have to be careful calling for managers and players to ‘know the laws’ better balanced with.. well my player was caught in the penalty area, that would have been a free kick outside but because it’s inside it’s not. Reasoning.. (which I have heard some high level reds say to managers) ‘there is a higher threshold for penalties’ .. personally I try and stay away from that phrase.
I think we have to be careful calling for managers and players to ‘know the laws’ better balanced with.. well my player was caught in the penalty area, that would have been a free kick outside but because it’s inside it’s not. Reasoning.. (which I have heard some high level reds say to managers) ‘there is a higher threshold for penalties’ .. personally I try and stay away from that phrase.
Why don't they update the VAR rules then?
Remove any notion of C&O and clearly state that all Match Changing Situations must be re-refereed with forensic slow motion and freeze frames
Why do the rules always have to play catchup with the way the game is actually refereed? Why does the tail wag the dog in football in this way?
It's a recurring theme (HB for example), whereby the PGMOL valiantly cling on to the book whilst the ROTW make it up before the book and the PGMOL play catch up. This culture has always troubled me
Last edited:
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
The protocol is an indefensible laughing stock at this point. Talksh*** did a 5 min skit recreation earlier. Awful. Insulting.
ladbroke8745
RefChat Addict
R
Runner-Ref
Guest
Ultimately there won't ever be a system that makes everyone happy. PGMOL seem to change their system almost month to month on how high or low the threshold is for a VAR intervention. Just look at the pen given in the Manchester derby; my group chats can't decide whether they think it was a pen or not.
I'd still like them to just introduce a challenge system, similar to tennis. Then it's on the clubs whether they get incidents checked or not (of course you would need to set limits on what can or can't be challenged)
I'm not a rugby fan and had absolutely no idea what was going on, but I watched the final yesterday. The way they do their system is interesting and I'd love to see it adopted in football, I just don't think it would transfer across
I'd still like them to just introduce a challenge system, similar to tennis. Then it's on the clubs whether they get incidents checked or not (of course you would need to set limits on what can or can't be challenged)
I'm not a rugby fan and had absolutely no idea what was going on, but I watched the final yesterday. The way they do their system is interesting and I'd love to see it adopted in football, I just don't think it would transfer across
By all means re-referee it with endless forensics to reach the right outcome, but update the rules to mandate that before doing so. Tell us what VAR really is. Tell us that the VAR is refereeing all Match Changing Situations and it makes no odds what the Ref decides. Why take us for fools? They want to take the on-field referee out the game much as possible, but they also want to conceal that intention
Last edited: