The Ref Stop

United spurs.

The Ref Stop
es1 said:
You'd need 10 refs to decide if it's a clear and obvious error in your system. We have 1 var and 1 avar.
Click to expand...
The numbers were to show a general consensus, not how many people we would literally need in the VAR booth.

But I’ve given you my (and others in here) definition of C&O. But you haven’t been able to define who decides what football expects. It isn’t the fans, so who else is it?
 
Runner Ref said:
The numbers were to show a general consensus, not how many people we would literally need in the VAR booth.

But I’ve given you my (and others in here) definition of C&O. But you haven’t been able to define who decides what football is expects. It isn’t the fans, so who else is it?
Click to expand...
The system is sh*t. It's sh*t for fans, players and refs. We should be aiming for better. There's many other better systems in different sports that work well (field hockey in particular).
 
es1 said:
The system is sh*t. It's sh*t for fans, players and refs. We should be aiming for better. There's many other better systems in different sports that work well (field hockey in particular).
Click to expand...
But what are those solutions? This is what I was asking you earlier.

If people are going to say they can do better and/or criticise ,show how it can be done better. I have absolutely no knowledge of field hockey, so I don’t know what their process it.
 
Runner Ref said:
But what are those solutions? This is what I was asking you earlier.

If people are going to say they can do better and/or criticise ,show how it can be done better. I have absolutely no knowledge of field hockey, so I don’t know what their process it.
Click to expand...
The field hockey system is a solution.

Challenges are a solution.
 
es1 said:
The field hockey system is a solution.

Challenges are a solution.
Click to expand...
So that answers one question, but you still haven’t answered what does football expect mean and who decides what it expects.

Not just throwing this question as you, throwing it at anyone who vaguely throws it out there during a discussion. Of which, it happens a lot here!
 
Runner Ref said:
So that answers one question, but you still haven’t answered what does football expect mean and who decides what it expects.

Not just throwing this question as you, throwing it at anyone who vaguely throws it out there during a discussion. Of which, it happens a lot here!
Click to expand...
Football expects isn't easy to define, obviously.

As I mentioned at the start, the 'most' right decision is how I see it. That'll give you, more often than not, a decision that football expects.

Clearly have to be scenarios where lotg supercedes all of that mind
 
es1 said:
Football expects isn't easy to define, obviously.

As I mentioned at the start, the 'most' right decision is how I see it. That'll give you, more often than not, a decision that football expects.

Clearly have to be scenarios where lotg supercedes all of that mind
Click to expand...
That’s fair enough. I don’t necessarily agree with it (the phrase) but fair play for providing an interpretation 🙂
 
  • Like
Reactions: es1
deusex said:
Ditch the "Clear and obvious" standard.
It's so ambiguous and varies from person to person.

The objective should simply be "Make the right decision".
In the few occasions it could go either way just get the referee to the monitor! I don't care if it takes 2 minutes to get a RC decision right!
Much easier to stomach than the current VAR lottery.
Click to expand...
How would that work though? We regularly see on here that we are split 50/50 on decisions, it isn't 50/50 for this incident but some, myself included, think it should have been red. Granted I would never have been anywhere near a VAR booth, but Peter Walton would have been and he thought it was red.

Games would never end if every decision had to be forensically checked, and you'd have repeated situations where referees went to the monitor after a lengthy delay and just stuck with their original decision. We have to remember the original purpose of VAR, it was to prevent absolute clangers like the Thierry Handball vs Ireland, you show that to 100 referees and all 100 say it was a mistake by the officials. Unfortunately when it was first implemented the VARs got way too involved, probably a bit like you've got a new toy so you are going to use it, but now they are getting towards only getting involved when a clanger has been dropped.
 
It will be interesting if this one gets featured on the mic'd up programme and see what was said which may of influenced Peter Bankes decision not to get involved.

I don't personally mind the higher bar but that shouldn't prevent intervention when it needs too. I state the point in my previous posts but a red card is a big game changer at any level and I think it's more black and white in terms of subjectivity than a yellow card which could be a red because the criteria for a red card is whether it's SFP/VC or not. Whereas reckless(yellow) could be a bit more open to interpretation.
 
I am interested on stats of the % of red cards 'overturned' in EPL. And a comparison to other top leagues. It does feel relatively high and it points to a problem somewhere, either in lotg, applying them by referees, leagues complying with them or the review process.

Also I don't like the term 'overturned'. Once the player is sent off and takes no further part in the game, the send off can not be really overturned. Unless the game is replayed form that moment onwards. All the review panel is deciding is no further action is taken against the player such as fine or suspension.
 
Last edited:
Y'know the most annoying thing about this whole saga ? The thing that really rattles me ? Maddison holding his shin, when VAR is showing he probably got caught on the ankle. There lies the biggest problem ! Players playacting to get a player sent off and getting away with it
 
BCMilan said:
Y'know the most annoying thing about this whole saga ? The thing that really rattles me ? Maddison holding his shin, when VAR is showing he probably got caught on the ankle. There lies the biggest problem ! Players playacting to get a player sent off and getting away with it
Click to expand...
Sadly it’s part of the game. Him and Fernandes even had a smile and a chat with each other after the red was shown. Apparently Maddison told Fernandes he didn’t think it was red- a very noble thing to do after you’ve rolled round to get him sent off.
 
Very dangerous action, though I don't think much happens without the defender going down like he's been shot then jumping up when the red came out.
 
ladbroke8745 said:
Well, he can't appeal this latest red (v Porto).
Click to expand...
Yep, even if he'd got a straight red, and it was only millimetres from being that, there'd be no right of appeal in Europe like there is in the EPL.

Alarm bells should be ringing, as that's now two games in a row when they have played much better after their captain has been sent off.
 
RustyRef said:
Yep, even if he'd got a straight red, and it was only millimetres from being that, there'd be no right of appeal in Europe like there is in the EPL.

Alarm bells should be ringing, as that's now two games in a row when they have played much better after their captain has been sent off.
Click to expand...
Why alarm bells. If he has made his team play better then he has done his job, no?
 
Listening to the audio on the referee's mic'd up programme and I don't think it reflects well on the VAR unfortunately. Peter Bankes acknowledges it was not a tackle with studs, he questions whether it rakes down the leg but doesn't answer his own question and references that it's deliberate and then quickly went with the "refs call" terminology. I mean it just feels like he went with the safe option and just backed the referee and gave no opinion whether it's an error or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top