A&H

Chelsea v Ars CC

What an absolute Dogs Dinner of a system so far...... Surely a bloke in the stand who sees something blatant off the ball, he should be able to tell the ref!!! What the ref does with that info is up to him!!! Whats the point of him being there otherwise!!! So far it sounds like a system tailored to back up refs decisions and not change them too often!!
 
The Referee Store
As I said it semantics. If the VAR sees something he can tell the ref (something like "I think i have seen a possible red. You might want to review this"). But the review has not started yet. The review starts when/if the ref says yes and either stops play or holds game in the net stoppage.
 
Regardless of the procedure in place, it does appear slighly bizarre that shoving someone with enough force to bowl them over is picked up by a guy who is ultimatley in place to ensure correct decisions are made yet no yellow card is forthcoming

Take it to the n th degree and that player later is guilty of simulation which is correctly assessed by var. He surely should be dismissed for his second yellow but wont be.

As a prev poster says, it gives off the impression its ok to do it and it makes it very awkward to caution a grass roots player for it this weekend.

With or without VAR, imo, a yellow card for adopting an aggressive attitude was required. You simply cannot, or should not, be permitted to walk up to a player and push them over and not recieve a card.
 
Ciley Myrus said:
Regardless of the procedure in place, it does appear slighly bizarre that shoving someone with enough force to bowl them over is picked up by a guy who is ultimatley in place to ensure correct decisions are made yet no yellow card is forthcoming

Take it to the n th degree and that player later is guilty of simulation which is correctly assessed by var. He surely should be dismissed for his second yellow but wont be.

As a prev poster says, it gives off the impression its ok to do it and it makes it very awkward to caution a grass roots player for it this weekend.

With or without VAR, imo, a yellow card for adopting an aggressive attitude was required. You simply cannot, or should not, be permitted to walk up to a player and push them over and not recieve a card.
Click to expand...
My understanding is that you can't review for simulation even if it is a second yellow. As per above, if you are reviewing for a goal/pen/red card you detect a simulation then you can caution.
 
Sheffields Finest said:
What an absolute Dogs Dinner of a system so far...... Surely a bloke in the stand who sees something blatant off the ball, he should be able to tell the ref!!! What the ref does with that info is up to him!!! Whats the point of him being there otherwise!!! So far it sounds like a system tailored to back up refs decisions and not change them too often!!
Click to expand...

Not quite in the stands, VAR was somewhere near Heathrow apparently...
 
one said:
My understanding is that you can't review for simulation even if it is a second yellow. As per above, if you are reviewing for a goal/pen/red card you detect a simulation then you can caution.
Click to expand...


Sorry thats what I meant, a pen call which turns out to be simulation..
 
If they iron it out, it will be a good system. It doesn't even seem that complicated, they're just getting used to it I suppose. The theory behind it is fine they just need to cut out minutes of talking with no outcome like in this game, that's what ruins it. VAR should look at a call and say either "Ref I think it was a penalty, you should take a look" or nothing at all. What's hard about that?
 
Josh it can get complicated. Lets say seconds before that possible penalty that wasn't given (which is possibly not a penalty) there was an offside that was missed by AR. What do you do then?

The protocol is a 67 page document. IMO there are more problems with implementing it when it gets complicated than there are with the protocol itself.
 
one said:
Josh it can get complicated. Lets say seconds before that possible penalty that wasn't given (which is possibly not a penalty) there was an offside that was missed by AR. What do you do then?

The protocol is a 67 page document. IMO there are more problems with implementing it when it gets complicated than there are with the protocol itself.
Click to expand...

Obviously it's not *that* simple but it certainly looked like they were making it more complicated than they needed to.

In that case, the penalty would be looked at by the VAR and they would also look at anything that could have happened in the attacking phase of play that led to the penalty. Offside would be spotted and it would be brought back for offside as it occurred before the penalty incident (if it was a penalty). If they decided it wasn't a pen, would they bring it back? Not so sure...

It's the dialogue I'm saying needs to be simplistic, Atkinson had a couple of lengthy conversations - there's no need.
 
Josh H said:
Obviously it's not *that* simple but it certainly looked like they were making it more complicated than they needed to.

In that case, the penalty would be looked at by the VAR and they would also look at anything that could have happened in the attacking phase of play that led to the penalty. Offside would be spotted and it would be brought back for offside as it occurred before the penalty incident (if it was a penalty). If they decided it wasn't a pen, would they bring it back? Not so sure...

It's the dialogue I'm saying needs to be simplistic, Atkinson had a couple of lengthy conversations - there's no need.
Click to expand...
But this is the problem, to go all the way back to any potential offside I expect you're talking about 30-60 seconds of play that needs to be reviewed from multiple angles, with perhaps certain sections of it also viewed in slow-mo. I can easily see how that adds up to 3 minutes - and if the VAR then goes on to decide he's not sure and would like the ref to take another look, that could easily become 5. A huge chunk of which would have basically nothing happening as far as the fans in the stadium are concerned, and nothing for them to look at or watch, as big-screen replays of the relevant decision aren't allowed (as they are in rugby, cricket, NFL etc)

As I've said before, I'm a big fan of the concept of VAR, but I think the system they've come up with is an awful implementation of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top