To add to this, red card decisions get reviewed regardless of whether the referee dishes out a yellow or red. Why would they go for the ‘wrong’ card on purpose?
Arsenal vs Leeds
- Thread starter Joshref
- Start date
- Status
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
I think the stats do point to at least unconscious bias. but part of the problem is that it probably means that some red cards that w be the preferred call are probably not being given as Rs hold back, but the error is not clear And therefore not touched by VAR. I do think on wobblers many refs would prefer to err on the side of yellow than red—as those won’t be fixed by VAR, it does at least subtly direct refs to err on the side of giving yellow instead of red. (But I agree it is unlikely to be a conscious choice unless the ratings changed to forgive missed reds that are corrected by VAR. I know the MLS at least used to give back most of the lost points if corrected with VAR.
As Big Cat said i think there are clear situations where refs are giving a yellow and are happy to be referrred to VAR to overturn thier own decision.
I think refs don't want to show a red, see the incident again and downgrade to yellow but are happy to do the reverse.
Why would any decent ref see this incident as a yellow to start with?
I think refs don't want to show a red, see the incident again and downgrade to yellow but are happy to do the reverse.
Why would any decent ref see this incident as a yellow to start with?
I think the stats have shown this is definitely a factor, it’s very hard to argue against it.
I feel it’s a conscious decision or even a directive but at the very least, refs are not giving red cards they would normally. Unconscious decision I will allow to be argued but I can’t see any other way these stats can be explained
I feel it’s a conscious decision or even a directive but at the very least, refs are not giving red cards they would normally. Unconscious decision I will allow to be argued but I can’t see any other way these stats can be explained
Perhaps CK will be appraised to have followed his instructions out correctly and will therefore be 'marked up'
We don't know the exact criteria SG1 R's are assessed against. More to it than mere LOTG
It is almost gets to the point where if I check the scores and see there's been a straight red card in the game, I expect to find out that red is given via VAR.
It would be interesting too see how the stats fare with other leagues though, see if it is a PL issue or if its across the board. I do feel the more newer referees in the PL are more lenient when it comes to SFP(no doubt an instruction to keep it 11 against 11) and this seems a classic example of that and VAR has exposed this.
It would be interesting too see how the stats fare with other leagues though, see if it is a PL issue or if its across the board. I do feel the more newer referees in the PL are more lenient when it comes to SFP(no doubt an instruction to keep it 11 against 11) and this seems a classic example of that and VAR has exposed this.
Which is clear confirmation bias, given that Joshref has already posted the stats and it's around 50/50 last season - which certainly isn't great, but also by definition isn't such a majority that it should be expected.
And that's a huge part of the problem really, people have a tendency to ignore the boring bits of the data and only really recall the interesting ones that tend to support their arguments.
Also, with regards to your second paragraph, newer SG1 referees tend to spend more time as VAR rather than being visibly in the middle - so they're often the ones recommending the red card via VAR. Which doesn't match the idea they're being trained to be lenient.
Peter Grove
RefChat Addict
I'm going to play devil's advocate here and present a counter argument. I'm going to propose that you can't get meaningful statistics by looking only at games played since VAR was brought in.
To get a proper comparison according to this point of view, you would have to go back to a similar number of EPL games played before VAR was brought in, have them reviewed by a qualified VAR and see how many yellow cards would have been sent for on-field review and (almost certainly) upgrade to red if VAR had been in use at the time.
It's purely subjective but I seem to remember plenty of incidents in pre-VAR games where a large percentage of people on here were saying words to the effect of, "I can't believe that was only a yellow, it should definitely have been red."
Kes
I'll Decide ...
Heard it from the bloke himself last week.
"Whatever happens, when you're told something is being VAR checked, the last thing you want is being told to run over to the screen".
Hence the PL threshold for straight red cards(compared to most leagues in Europe) could well be exposed by VAR.
I guess in one way, at least its not the other way round and there is a huge percentage of reds downgraded to a yellow as that seems more of a major error as it means you saw something in a tackle that was not there. At least with a yellow upgrading to a red, you could argue(maybe like in this case) your angle did not make you fully realise just how bad of a tackle it was. Either way, the numbers do seem too many as whichever way you look at it, it's a (suppose) clear and obvious error if your overturning your original decision
I wouldn't know.... Only been to one EPL game since the introduction of VAR. Put me off going for sureHeard it from the bloke himself last week.
"Whatever happens, when you're told something is being VAR checked, the last thing you want is being told to run over to the screen".
Although I guess every goal gives you a good few minutes to get another Scrumpy Jack down ur neck as there's bound to be sufficient 'check time'
See this is a huge part of the problem, well-reasoned complaints get lost in nonsense like this.
Yes, checks can take a long time, that's a 100% valid complaint, made worse by the insistence on not communicating the process meaning you're just sat there confused for a minute or two. Compare with Tennis, Cricket, Rugby etc where a review is an entertaining and tense moment that adds to the atmosphere rather than subtracting from it. But suggesting it's "every goal" just makes you look ignorant and hides the very fair points you do make.
There are enough perfectly reasonable issues and concerns to have around VAR that you shouldn't need to make up more reasons or lie about their frequency! And by framing your point with the incorrect exaggerations, it makes the whole post come across as "old man shakes fist at clouds", which is a real shame when it's frustratingly close to an excellent point that can be engaged with.
The problem you have, is you can't identify when I'm using 'tongue & cheek'. Not every post needs to be 'wooden' and taken literally. The only comment that's 'black'n'white', is the fact that I've stopped going to EPL games because VAR has contributed to the overall circus of 'modern day' professional football. Note, my enthusiasm had waned before the advent of VAR for numerous other reasons
I'd have thought that I've been around the forum long enough for regular members to know when to take my comments seriously
I was merely picturing whether I could down a quick jar during 'checks' to alleviate any irritation incurred whilst the R takes orders from his 'main man' in Stockley Park
Last edited:
Kes
I'll Decide ...
He and his AR sidekick (Dan Robathan?) came down and gave us a really good pres on VAR and how it works last week.
Like I said, his words ...
You constantly making the same tired old generalisation is exactly why that post got taken seriously! Many a truth said in jest - make the same "joke" over and over, it's going to get lodged in people's head as your actual opinion, especially given we're communicating in writing which doesn't convey tone.
Well, you'll just have to live with it
I'll change my rhetoric when there's a reason to do so (IMO)
Oh, so you do believe what you're saying then? So the "joke" backing down from the initial statement was actually the joke?Well, you'll just have to live with it
I'll change my rhetoric when there's a reason to do so (IMO)
Jokes are an exaggeration of reality. So my rhetoric and jest will change to reflect what I believe in
Just get over it... I don't really care that we're on different sides of the coin. Nor should you. It ain't gonna change WRT to the VAR subject
Last edited:
I mean....that's literally exactly the point I was making? So just so we're clear - you stated an opinion, I challenged it and then rather than either accepting or disputing that, you decided to try and pretend it was a joke?
Great work, you've completely derailed the thread. Hilarious.
- Status