Brig v Man Utd

[GraemeS]

I have also been a long time Advocate of a review system.
Although, it would still seem unjust if a team were out of reviews, particularly if the lost reviews were subjective decisions, where, say you and I had a differing opinion on what offence, if any was committed.
I really don't think there is a perfect system.. Whatever protocol is in place, there would be some fault with it, where some team or other would face unjust consequences.
I agree with all your sentiments though, but, whilst the current debacle is avoidable by changing the system, any alternative systems I have seen suggested tend to have their own difficulties and challenges (no pun intended) as well.

I certainly see the risks with a review system, however I think the main benefit is that regardless of those risks, it takes the burden off the referee!

I've seen quite a lot of use of the review system in cricket - and one thing that's very common is for commentators to criticise the captain/batsman for making a bad review. Games have been won and lost because captains have used up their chances in a speculative manner. But even when the umpire makes a howler later on, it's the captain who is criticised for his decisions that led him to a position where he didn't have a review available when he really needed it. As a referee, that's WAAAAAAY better than the current system where anything and everything comes down to "f****ing VAR"!

 

[Sheffields Finest]

But do you not see what he is saying? Your comment was ‘they are making this s**t up as they go along’ despite it because a totally correct decision based on VAR protocol. We all disagree with certain elements of the LOTG and the decisions referees make, but we discuss why we believe it’s wrong. You just seem to say lines like the one above which isn’t productive or insightful, it’s a one line comment which is factually inaccurate because you simply don’t like VAR.

Thanks, but apart from the constantly benefitting teams who actually likes VAR in this format, it swings from I must get involved in minute detail to we can’t get involved when it’s bloody obvious that something has gone astray. You seem to be an apologist for complete ineptitude at one level OR an ability to close your eyes and say la la la when something whiffs or a mistake... if the protocols are wrong or badly worded then blooming change them, they charge £10k a match, it’s not like it’s a charity begging for funds. No doubt Old mother Riley will spout up with some bogus stats on how things are rosy in his garden but it’s amazing how some teams are just luckier with these decisions than others!

 

[QuaverRef]

Thanks, but apart from the constantly benefitting teams who actually likes VAR in this format, it swings from I must get involved in minute detail to we can’t get involved when it’s bloody obvious that something has gone astray. You seem to be an apologist for complete ineptitude at one level OR an ability to close your eyes and say la la la when something whiffs or a mistake... if the protocols are wrong or badly worded then blooming change them, they charge £10k a match, it’s not like it’s a charity begging for funds. No doubt Ild mother Riley will spout up with some bogus stats on how things are rosy in his garden but it’s amazing how some teams are just luckier with these decisions than others!

This is what we mean. This is all just the rantings of somebody who hates VAR. This isn’t discussion points or you coming up with different suggestions on how to improve it. I think you’ve got confused between the differences of a refereeing forum and the Sheffield United Twitter page to be honest. I’ll end the discussion here as I’m now ironically going of topic as well.

 

[JamesL]

Thanks, but apart from the constantly benefitting teams who actually likes VAR in this format, it swings from I must get involved in minute detail to we can’t get involved when it’s bloody obvious that something has gone astray. You seem to be an apologist for complete ineptitude at one level OR an ability to close your eyes and say la la la when something whiffs or a mistake... if the protocols are wrong or badly worded then blooming change them, they charge £10k a match, it’s not like it’s a charity begging for funds. No doubt Old mother Riley will spout up with some bogus stats on how things are rosy in his garden but it’s amazing how some teams are just luckier with these decisions than others!

The problem with your, they charge 10k per match is that the folks that are charging the money are not the folks writing the LOTG or the protocol so it's not really a stick with which they can be beaten

 

[JamesL]

I certainly see the risks with a review system, however I think the main benefit is that regardless of those risks, it takes the burden off the referee!

I've seen quite a lot of use of the review system in cricket - and one thing that's very common is for commentators to criticise the captain/batsman for making a bad review. Games have been won and lost because captains have used up their chances in a speculative manner. But even when the umpire makes a howler later on, it's the captain who is criticised for his decisions that led him to a position where he didn't have a review available when he really needed it. As a referee, that's WAAAAAAY better than the current system where anything and everything comes down to "f****ing VAR"!

Yep, until the referee makes an absolute howler, then he'll be the worst referee in the league again.
I just don't see football, fans, players and pundits ever being able to look past a refereeing error, and blaming someone else.
Particularly if one review was lost and 60% of folk disagreed with the review decision. The microscopic referee dissection would just move elsewhere in the process.
Of course its all just surmising, and I do think the idea merits some kind of trial.

 

[GraemeS]

Yep, until the referee makes an absolute howler, then he'll be the worst referee in the league again.
I just don't see football, fans, players and pundits ever being able to look past a refereeing error, and blaming someone else.
Particularly if one review was lost and 60% of folk disagreed with the review decision. The microscopic referee dissection would just move elsewhere in the process.
Of course its all just surmising, and I do think the idea merits some kind of trial.

I'm not personally someone who believes that football fans are intrinsically worse people than cricket fans. If they can accept "Umpires Call", I think we can as well*. And although it will require some buy-in from commentators to accept the idea of review availability being something a coach needs to manage, I do genuinely believe we would get there fairly quickly, as has been seen in other sports.

*It's worth also highlighting at this point that I also think VAR needs to make improvements on how it communicates this concept as well. Currently, I think the vast majority of football fans are under the impression that once there's a VAR review underway, the VAR will make a decision either way. In reality, more often than not, what happens is the VAR shrugs and goes "I can't prove you wrong, so get on with it". But what gets flashed up on the screen is "No penalty" or "No red card", which implies a more positive decision. I think it's much easier to accept "umpire's call" if that's what we're actually told: that the VAR has found no conclusive evidence either way, so we're sticking with the initial decision.

 

[JamesL]

I'm not personally someone who believes that football fans are intrinsically worse people than cricket fans. If they can accept "Umpires Call", I think we can as well*. And although it will require some buy-in from commentators to accept the idea of review availability being something a coach needs to manage, I do genuinely believe we would get there fairly quickly, as has been seen in other sports.

*It's worth also highlighting at this point that I also think VAR needs to make improvements on how it communicates this concept as well. Currently, I think the vast majority of football fans are under the impression that once there's a VAR review underway, the VAR will make a decision either way. In reality, more often than not, what happens is the VAR shrugs and goes "I can't prove you wrong, so get on with it". But what gets flashed up on the screen is "No penalty" or "No red card", which implies a more positive decision. I think it's much easier to accept "umpire's call" if that's what we're actually told that the VAR has found no conclusive evidence either way, so we're sticking with the initial decision.

I also don't think that football fans are worse than cricket fans. But it's a culture issue. As spectators we immerse ourself in the culture of the sport.
The culture of cricket is the players generally accept the decisions of the umpire and treat them with respect, generally. This then extends to the management teams and laterally to the spectators.
Conversely, we don't see this is in football, we see players show hostility towards the match official, publicly disagree wihh his decisions, this extends to the management team and then to the spectators.
And that's where the issue is.
I can guarantee there are lads out there, that play cricket and football, who treat the umpire with respect and the referee with disdain, because that is the cultures of the sports. Football has this inherent, blame someone else culture, which unfortunately, usually falls on the match official, despite losing 1-0 but having more possessionand shots than your opposition. Its not because the number 9 missed an open goal, and a couple fo sitters along the way, its the referee never gave us a penalty in the 2nd minute, or he shouldn't have awarded the opposition x y or z.
Until you fix that culture issue (where do you start?) I think the default position will be as is now, blame the refs.

 

[Sheffields Finest]

Ones text clearly backs up my point, did it go out of play?? Yes/no, if it did then it’s something that he can communicate to the referee... cut the waffle about fandom, that’s a smokescreen for you defending the indefensible... I ain’t no West Ham fan, I want to see fairness for all!

 

[Big Cat]

subsequent play

This is not defined. Could mean half an hour, depending on which team is affected

genuine question, do you actually enjoy watching football

I don't enjoy the EPL. Top level football is a shadow of its former self. I watch the Geordies, but I'm past caring that much about it. One of the reasons I'm happy to referee, is that I stopped going to games every week... about 10 years ago
I do however like the Championship, EFL and non-league. Absence of diving and cheating
My suggestion, punish cheats and scrap VAR. I for one am entitled to bleat about these things repetitively

 

[Sheffields Finest]

This is what we mean. This is all just the rantings of somebody who hates VAR. This isn’t discussion points or you coming up with different suggestions on how to improve it. I think you’ve got confused between the differences of a refereeing forum and the Sheffield United Twitter page to be honest. I’ll end the discussion here as I’m now ironically going of topic as well.

BTW, I haven't mentioned my team in this thread, another smokescreen when you're losing an argument.... muddy the waters!!!

 

[JamesL]

BTW, I haven't mentioned my team in this thread, another smokescreen when you're losing an argument.... muddy the waters!!!

They quite happily went back 2 phases of play to check whether Lunstrams toe was offside at Thfc v Sufc to rule it out, why aren’t big teams immune to this and seem to benefit from bad line calls??

Urrhhh... Technically you did...

 

[Sheffields Finest]

Not as a fandom though, it was reflecting the frustration that they are doing their best to find issues when they want to yet duck under the duvet and eat crisps when the choose not to. You can’t have it both ways! Either VAR is all encompassing and checks everything or it does the opposite and looks for the obvious errors, like it was supposed to. Now, some teams have been robbed all season and some teams they seem to have one eye closed when the tough calls come. I’m actually a fan of the idea of VAR but the way, but the way it’s being done is at best amateur and at worst very biased for some teams so far and extremely helpful to others. We as referees shouldn’t care about results but games are being changed for the worse with this hamfisted amateur efforts of SP.

 

[GraemeS]

Not as a fandom though, it was reflecting the frustration that they are doing their best to find issues when they want to yet duck under the duvet and eat crisps when the choose not to. You can’t have it both ways! Either VAR is all encompassing and checks everything or it does the opposite and looks for the obvious errors, like it was supposed to. Now, some teams have been robbed all season and some teams they seem to have one eye closed when the tough calls come. I’m actually a fan of the idea of VAR but the way, but the way it’s being done is at best amateur and at worst very biased for some teams so far and extremely helpful to others. We as referees shouldn’t care about results but games are being changed for the worse with this hamfisted amateur efforts of SP.

But this is exactly the discussion we're having. The only difference between what you're demanding and what's actually happening is the precise definition of which errors are obvious and important. The rational discussion you want to have is going on here, you just seem to ignore those posts in favour of ones that can spark a rant....

 

[PinnerPaul]

It’s a binary decision though, and the assistant went IN. Boils my piss when commentators bang on about a referee or lino “not being sure...” so they “couldn’t have given” or whatever. They were sure. It either was or wasn’t a foul, in/out, offside, goal etc.

Sure, they can be wrong... but no one’s guessing.

Not relating to this incident, but that accusation 'He guessed that one' really annoys me as well!

 

[Sheffields Finest]

But this is exactly the discussion we're having. The only difference between what you're demanding and what's actually happening is the precise definition of which errors are obvious and important. The rational discussion you want to have is going on here, you just seem to ignore those posts in favour of ones that can spark a rant....

Mmmm, If they are calling everything then it should be fair to all, it certainly hasn't been.... If they are selectively calling certain protocols then it should be fair to all, it certainly certainly hasn't been..... Certain refs on their day off seem to be more stringent than others who seem to let stuff go so there is zero consistency. Some seem to be otherwise engaged when the sh1t hits the fan!

The whole pretext to VAR was a softly softy in the background SG referee just ironing out the clear and obvious mistakes, yet they've found a whole set of protocol horse crap to abscond them of blame when anything goes wrong. And, if that dosen't work old Mother Riley pops up and apologises if he can be arsed! Most football fans think its crap, I'm sure a good percentage on here think its crap, I really wish it worked, I just want fairness for all!!

 

[Big Cat]

Mmmm, If they are calling everything then it should be fair to all, it certainly hasn't been.... If they are selectively calling certain protocols then it should be fair to all, it certainly certainly hasn't been..... Certain refs on their day off seem to be more stringent than others who seem to let stuff go so there is zero consistency. Some seem to be otherwise engaged when the sh1t hits the fan!

The whole pretext to VAR was a softly softy in the background SG referee just ironing out the clear and obvious mistakes, yet they've found a whole set of protocol horse crap to abscond them of blame when anything goes wrong. And, if that dosen't work old Mother Riley pops up and apologises if he can be arsed! Most football fans think its crap, I'm sure a good percentage on here think its crap, I really wish it worked, I just want fairness for all!!

It was (apparently) suggested by some of the experienced retired refs, that it is they who should've been the VAR
I think you're right, one problem with VAR, is that the personnel changes every game (constantly rotating between on and off field) with the more junior ref, usually the one to occupy the shipping container. Having a small consistent pool of VARs may have helped, but that's just one of countless flaws

 

[JamesL]

It was (apparently) suggested by some of the experienced retired refs, that it is they who should've been the VAR
I think you're right, one problem with VAR, is that the personnel changes every game (constantly rotating between on and off field) with the more junior ref, usually the one to occupy the shipping container. Having a small consistent pool of VARs may have helped, but that's just one of countless flaws

Is that the same ex refs that constantly slag off the current crop on social media all of the time, like they were perfect and never made any errors?
Would have made for interesting viewing that's for sure.

 

[Ciley Myrus]

It was (apparently) suggested by some of the experienced retired refs, that it is they who should've been the VAR
I think you're right, one problem with VAR, is that the personnel changes every game (constantly rotating between on and off field) with the more junior ref, usually the one to occupy the shipping container. Having a small consistent pool of VARs may have helped, but that's just one of countless flaws

am for this, I get the rotation and understand it useful to gain more knowledge to all but having say, the same refs operating VAR should surely only improve its use
It would also eliminate the superiority complex issue which no matter what anybody says, is rife and there has been examples of it, its not really surprising though as its human nature
David Coote is simply not going to be comfortable ' over ruling' Antony Taylor and, Taylor is going to be at worst, sceptical of Cootes opinion,
If there were 3 or 4 guys who were solely on VAR duty, hopefully in time, the standard, trust, and consistency would improve.
Same as they try match ref to ar and so on.....team work.

 

[one]

The whole problem here exists because VAR was set up to pander to people who were panicking over the idea of there being "too much VAR". There's no other possible reason for why we are now discussing if this is "reviewable" or not. That's the reason for the restriction that only incidents leading up to a goal can be reviewed, and when IFAB then go on to poorly define what that actually means....you end up here.

It's another reason why I'm personally in favour of a challenge system - either the manager chooses to challenge this, in which case it's reviewable, or he doesn't, in which case it's not. No faffing around with "phase of play" discussions, take that question entirely out of the refereeing team's hands.

A challenge review system does not fix this situation though. Say it is challenged and review determines ball did go out of play. What next? What if the ball goes out of play in the first minute without play stopping until the 25th minute when a goal is scored. Would a challenge nullify the goal?

The actual problem is not if it can be reviewed but what is the measure to use on how far back you go. And that measure has to be clearly defined and non-debatible. Once we have that any review system would work, the existing one or a challenge based one.

 

[GraemeS]

Certain refs on their day off seem to be more stringent than others who seem to let stuff go so there is zero consistency. Some seem to be otherwise engaged when the sh1t hits the fan!

Sorry, is this a sentence about VAR or about every other referee that's existed since the beginning of football?