Liverpool Vs Bournemouth

RustyRef said:

Given Webb has released audio and video before that has completely chucked the match officials under the bus I'm struggling to see why anything would be covered up, he's certainly the most open and transparent head of the PGMOL. Have to see whether this one features on the show I guess.

Click to expand...

So the entire defence is that at some point, they might realise their cover up isn't going to pass muster and so might pivot in order to specifically chuck VAR Michael "golden boy" Oliver under the bus?

At the moment, the balance of probability seems to be that we are being fed bullshit. Until that changes, the idea that they might at some point stop trying to feed us bullshit is just irrelevant speculation.

In reality, they could and probably should start releasing VAR audio quicker. Rather than in 3-4 snippets a year.

I don’t really see any reason why they can’t. Editing any bad language wouldn’t take any time at all

GraemeS said:

So the entire defence is that at some point, they might realise their cover up isn't going to pass muster and so might pivot in order to specifically chuck VAR Michael "golden boy" Oliver under the bus?

At the moment, the balance of probability seems to be that we are being fed bullshit. Until that changes, the idea that they might at some point stop trying to feed us bullshit is just irrelevant speculation.

Click to expand...

Out of interest, what specifically makes you think that they are "feeding us bullshit"?

RustyRef said:

Out of interest, what specifically makes you think that they are "feeding us bullshit"?

Click to expand...

I think I've explained it pretty well in this thread.

If that doesn't pass your threshold for "there's an inconsistency between what we see and what we're told to see, and it stinks", then that's a problem with you and your willingness to accept what PGMOL say, not with my explanation.

GraemeS said:

View attachment 8303
From the Dale article, screenshot at the moment the ball hits the defenders hand - I'm not buying that the other defender is remotely relevant there. Distance is irrelevant if there is room to run into, which there is - take the handballing defender out (who handballs because he's off balance and isn't set to run in the way Ekitike is) and it's trivial for a PL striker to run 30 yards with a ball and take a 1-on-1 OGSO.

The only reasonable question is control, and then it comes does to what extent we "ignore" the fouling defender. You obviously should ignore the handball touch, which is specifically what flicks it away from Ekitike and causes him to lose control. So that aside, do we think that he'd be able to control a ball that has been popped up in front of him, exactly in the direction he wants to go? I'm saying yes on that. Or do we ignore that touch as well, in which case the ball would have just rolled into his path quite happily.

Click to expand...

This is my bad, the only angle I'd seen makes that defender look MUCH closer!

Runner Ref said:

In reality, they could and probably should start releasing VAR audio quicker. Rather than in 3-4 snippets a year.

I don’t really see any reason why they can’t. Editing any bad language wouldn’t take any time at all

Click to expand...

Agree with this completely BTW. As far as I understand it, the rules have changed such that they could in theory, release 90+ minutes of audio the moment the final whistle goes for every single game.

I do understand the arguments for a little more restraint than that, we've all seen people on twitter take things out of context. But Sky do a Monday lunchtime refwatch show, Dale tends to put his weekly article out around then as well - there's no good reason the VAR audio shouldn't be available for those reputable users to clip/quote.

GraemeS said:

I think I've explained it pretty well in this thread.

If that doesn't pass your threshold for "there's an inconsistency between what we see and what we're told to see, and it stinks", then that's a problem with you and your willingness to accept what PGMOL say, not with my explanation.

Click to expand...

Fair enough, as long as that is your view as a referee and not a Liverpool fan. I don't get it personally, this PGMOL regime are more open than any of the previous ones. They don't cover up mistakes as far as I can see, and have admitted errors even when doing so has been very critical of the officials involved. They haven't shied away from any of the controversial decisions, as far as I can recall they have all been featured on the show even when the outcome was wrong.

Could they release more audio, yes, probably. But as you say, without qualification it could easily be taken out of context, even by the more reputable operators. They would have to release it in the same format as it is released for Mic'd Up, otherwise no one would have a clue who was saying what and that would definitely lead to it being misinterpreted. To prepare it in that format I would guess takes a lot of time and effort, so to do that for every game might not be feasible.

RustyRef said:

Fair enough, as long as that is your view as a referee and not a Liverpool fan. I don't get it personally, this PGMOL regime are more open than any of the previous ones. They don't cover up mistakes as far as I can see, and have admitted errors even when doing so has been very critical of the officials involved. They haven't shied away from any of the controversial decisions, as far as I can recall they have all been featured on the show even when the outcome was wrong.

Could they release more audio, yes, probably. But as you say, without qualification it could easily be taken out of context, even by the more reputable operators. They would have to release it in the same format as it is released for Mic'd Up, otherwise no one would have a clue who was saying what and that would definitely lead to it being misinterpreted. To prepare it in that format I would guess takes a lot of time and effort, so to do that for every game might not be feasible.

Click to expand...

La Liga release all the VAR audio weekly.

bester said:

La Liga release all the VAR audio weekly.

Click to expand...

With any kind of commentary as to who said what? Genuine question, I've never listened to any of their audio, not that I'd understand it anyway.

From the EPL audio we hear on the Mic'd Up show there is a lot of chatter. If you watched it with your eyes closes there is no way, save for guessing at accents, whether comments made were from referee, AR1, AR2 or VAR. I'm struggling to see the benefit of that, I struggle to understand it even with the captions.

I'm fairly sure they only release it when VAR recommends an on field review.

bester said:

I'm fairly sure they only release it when VAR recommends an on field review.

Click to expand...

Makes sense. There are lots of periods of silence in that though, so I think it is only the VAR we can hear, which if so kind of makes it a bit pointless. We wouldn't know what impact the referee and ARs had on the original decision.

Also wouldn't help in the topic being discussed here as there was no on field review.

Discussion is heard on most of the clips.
Generally there's far less talking across each other when you hear non-English VAR.

bester said:

Discussion is heard on most of the clips.
Generally there's far less talking across each other when you hear non-English VAR.

Click to expand...

Yeah, that is what they would have to do, it must clearly visualise who is speaking.

Hope that's an old clip as that certainly wouldn't be an offence now, even if it actually hit his arm which I am far from convinced about.

Last season.

Spain has always gone it's own way on handball interpretation, although a Spanish ref would probably say the same about English footballs handball interpretation!

bester said:

Last season.

Spain has always gone it's own way on handball interpretation, although a Spanish ref would probably say the same about English footballs handball interpretation!

Click to expand...

That's not interpretation though, under last season's laws there's no way on earth that can be penalised for handball. The goal was scored 12 seconds after the handling and the ball touched by two other players. It would even be a stretch under the previous law.

I'm fairly certain it was given as arm in an unnatural position handball.

RustyRef said:

Fair enough, as long as that is your view as a referee and not a Liverpool fan. I don't get it personally, this PGMOL regime are more open than any of the previous ones. They don't cover up mistakes as far as I can see, and have admitted errors even when doing so has been very critical of the officials involved. They haven't shied away from any of the controversial decisions, as far as I can recall they have all been featured on the show even when the outcome was wrong.

Click to expand...

The instinct to cover mistakes seemingly still persists. I'm not going to re-litigate, but it seems very likely that in this specific incident, one mistake happened and a different (IMO, still incorrect, but whatever) decision was claimed almost immediately.

It might be the case that by the time it gets to Webb and he knows he's going to be put in front of cameras and asked questions, he has a better understanding of what is indefensible than whoever runs the PGMOL twitter account. And I won't be surprised if we then at that point get an admission that MO rushed the check and missed the second touch. But I'm not rushing to give them credit for realising that they can't defend the lie after analysing and preparing to discuss it, when I'd much rather they were just honest in the first place.

RustyRef said:

Could they release more audio, yes, probably. But as you say, without qualification it could easily be taken out of context, even by the more reputable operators. They would have to release it in the same format as it is released for Mic'd Up, otherwise no one would have a clue who was saying what and that would definitely lead to it being misinterpreted. To prepare it in that format I would guess takes a lot of time and effort, so to do that for every game might not be feasible.

Click to expand...

My suggestion of releasing audio to select partners (Sky, Dale Johnson etc.) doesn't have this issue. Especially if you say "you can quote this audio, but cannot actually play it until we have a chance to label it up and clarify who is who". Or if they do play it, the presenters are required to clarify. Regardless of exactly how you do it, the overall point remains - there is still obvious room to be more open with VAR discussions.

GraemeS said:

The instinct to cover mistakes seemingly still persists. I'm not going to re-litigate, but it seems very likely that in this specific incident, one mistake happened and a different (IMO, still incorrect, but whatever) decision was claimed almost immediately.

It might be the case that by the time it gets to Webb and he knows he's going to be put in front of cameras and asked questions, he has a better understanding of what is indefensible than whoever runs the PGMOL twitter account. And I won't be surprised if we then at that point get an admission that MO rushed the check and missed the second touch. But I'm not rushing to give them credit for realising that they can't defend the lie after analysing and preparing to discuss it, when I'd much rather they were just honest in the first place.


My suggestion of releasing audio to select partners (Sky, Dale Johnson etc.) doesn't have this issue. Especially if you say "you can quote this audio, but cannot actually play it until we have a chance to label it up and clarify who is who". Or if they do play it, the presenters are required to clarify. Regardless of exactly how you do it, the overall point remains - there is still obvious room to be more open with VAR discussions.

Click to expand...

That is the obvious problem of the Twitter / X account, the person making the posts needs to interpret what he or she has heard. I don't believe it is a senior referee, so not beyond the realms of possibility that they heard the exchange and interpreted it incorrectly. Some of the posts haven't really made much sense and I'd put it down to just that.

Even if they gave the footage to the trusted media, how are they going to know who is talking? If there's notable accents they could probably use an educated guess, but if you have 3 or 4 officials from the same part of the country, not implausible given the vast majority of them are from the North, they'd have no chance without also having the Mic'd Up style video identifying each speaker.

RustyRef said:

That is the obvious problem of the Twitter / X account, the person making the posts needs to interpret what he or she has heard. I don't believe it is a senior referee, so not beyond the realms of possibility that they heard the exchange and interpreted it incorrectly. Some of the posts haven't really made much sense and I'd put it down to just that.

Even if they gave the footage to the trusted media, how are they going to know who is talking? If there's notable accents they could probably use an educated guess, but if you have 3 or 4 officials from the same part of the country, not implausible given the vast majority of them are from the North, they'd have no chance without also having the Mic'd Up style video identifying each speaker.

Click to expand...

It’s 2025, I’m sure it would take no time at all to add subtitles for what is being said and by whom

RustyRef said:

That is the obvious problem of the Twitter / X account, the person making the posts needs to interpret what he or she has heard. I don't believe it is a senior referee, so not beyond the realms of possibility that they heard the exchange and interpreted it incorrectly. Some of the posts haven't really made much sense and I'd put it down to just that.

Click to expand...

I don't see any reason why I should be expected to dismiss that statement just because it suddenly doesn't suit your argument. Up until the point an additional "clarifying" statement is made or Webb chooses to go on TV and clarify in the next international break, that represents the most official position of PGMOL regarding why this incident didn't result in a VAR recommendation and red card.

Whether tweets are dictated word-for-word by Webb, interpreted from a detailed discussion with the VAR in question, or made up by a 18 year old intern with no refereeing experience who sits vaguely near the hub doesn't really matter. That is for now what PGMOL are telling us. And I think it's obvious rubbish, and worthy of scrutiny as to why they feel it's appropriate to leave that statement standing.

RustyRef said:

Even if they gave the footage to the trusted media, how are they going to know who is talking? If there's notable accents they could probably use an educated guess, but if you have 3 or 4 officials from the same part of the country, not implausible given the vast majority of them are from the North, they'd have no chance without also having the Mic'd Up style video identifying each speaker.

Click to expand...

This is going to sound facetious, but having listened to a handful of Mic'd Up clips, I genuinely think you're overstating how difficult it will be to work out from context who's who.

Take this incident as an example.
The ref will be the guy shouting "no handball" at the start of the clip and then telling the Liverpool players to go away.
The AR will be the one who chips in to confirm Ekitike wasn't offside.
The RO will be offering camera angles.
The VAR will be asking the ref to delay and then discussing those camera angles (and also in this case, is Michael Oliver who absolutely has a distinctive accent).
Aside from one example I remember where Sian Massey-Ellis chipped in to point out something the VAR missed, most of the time the AVAR will be the one who you only hear going "yeah, I agree" at the end of the clip.

The question here will be very simple - did he actually consider the second arm/hand contact or did he miss it? It's hard to imagine VAR audio and a replay of their screen that is so cluttered that it wouldn't clarify that question, especially given it's only really the VAR and the RO who we need to listen to in order to work that out.