The Ref Stop

Tottenham v Rochdale

The Ref Stop
I'm really unsure on calling Son's run up incomplete

He makes forward movement, stops completely (doesn't stagger) and his very next motion is to taken the PK, there is nothing between him feinting and taking the kick
 
JD1 said:
I'm really unsure on calling Son's run up incomplete

He makes forward movement, stops completely (doesn't stagger) and his very next motion is to taken the PK, there is nothing between him feinting and taking the kick
Click to expand...

I think the laws should be written in a way that Son's PK is illegal. I just don't see how they are currently written in a way that it was illegal.
 
Chris Foy did explain the clear and obvious misnomer well though. That only applies when it is the VAR telling the referee he has got something wrong, it has to be a clear and obvious error. Whereas for goals they check every one routinely, and if there is any infringement, no matter how minor, it will be taken into account.

Although the pundits still replied to that by saying "but it wasn't clear and obvious", I'm sure I saw his eyes roll ...!
 
RustyRef said:
Whereas for goals they check every one routinely, and if there is any infringement, no matter how minor, it will be taken into account.
Click to expand...

Which is a huge problem. A minor foul will (like Llorente being held) will NEVER result in a PK given by VAR. But a minor foul by the attacker during the build-up will result in a goal ruled out.
 
People demanded video replays due to perceived refereeing errors and injustice, now it's here people are still complaining, in some cases justifiably. I for one always thought given modern technology and blanket tv coverage of top flight games a man in the stand with a TV would be a big help to the referee, however it's application so far has been at times questionable at best. Reviews take far to long to confirm/change decisions for starters. OK it's still early days, but it has to improve and quickly!
 
cwyeary said:
Which is a huge problem. A minor foul will (like Llorente being held) will NEVER result in a PK given by VAR. But a minor foul by the attacker during the build-up will result in a goal ruled out.
Click to expand...
Exactly - for me, the first foul was the fairly minor pull by the attacker. You then have the choice of giving a PK for that, or playing advantage and allowing the goal based on Llorente's push-back being too minor to be an offence.

A defensive FK shouldn't be an option there, unless you're actually saying that fouls to give a PK have to be more significant than fouls to give a DFK. That might be something referees do in practice, but isn't supported by the laws and can't be supported by VAR.
 
There's not a lot you can do if the people using the technology interpret the laws wrongly - using the old IT acronym PICNIC - problem in chair not in computer ... :)

A lot of the problem is people don't know what the operating procedures are. As an example I had no idea that clear and obvious error only applied to VAR telling referee of a mistake, not goals, and I doubt may other people did. Then the communication of what is going on is non-existent, they need to find a way of informing the crowd and viewing audience like other sports.

In terms of decisions, it can't really be denied that the disallowed goal and turning the free kick into a penalty were correct. The disallowed penalty is a mess, despite what several referees are trying to claim (not on here) Son had in no way completed his run-up, but as I said you can't blame the technology for this.

What worries me most is FIFA have said this will be used at the World Cup regardless of how the trials go, as to me it is nowhere near ready enough for the World's biggest tournament.
 
Was very amusing where Paul Tierney got his spray out late'ish in the game, took one look at the pitch shook his head and put it away again.

Can only assume there is something wrong at Wembley, I can't remember seeing snow settle on a top level pitch like that for some time. I'm not far from Wembley, and whilst it has been snowing it isn't really anything that heavy. Perhaps it is just too cold for the undersoil heating to work fully?
 
Only seen abrupted highlights, was the 6th Spuds goal offside or have I got my wrong glasses on, the pitch colour doesn't help either?? Was it confirmed on??
 
Just a point on 'clear and obvious', the protocol only requires it to be 'clear'. They are not exactly the same thing. A decision can be clearly wrong without being obvious (e.g. when an attacker encroaches the PA before the ball leaves the PA in a goal kick). Anywho, its just semantics.

RustyRef said:
Chris Foy did explain the clear and obvious misnomer well though. That only applies when it is the VAR telling the referee he has got something wrong, it has to be a clear and obvious error. Whereas for goals they check every one routinely, and if there is any infringement, no matter how minor, it will be taken into account.
Click to expand...

Not quite so
1519865222451.png

I mentioned this in another thread. One of the problems with VAR system is that every VAR/referee uses it the way they think it should be used rather that just following protocol (or at best interpret protocol wrongly to their own ways). The vast majority of VAR mistakes in Australia are because they are not following protocol.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top