The Ref Stop

Chelsea vs West Ham - Inappropriate VAR Use?

RustyRef

Administrator
Staff member
As we know, the commentators can hear the VAR discussions but not the audio from the on-field officials. Given this there were two very strange things tonight, firstly the commentator said that VAR (Michael Salisbury) had told Stuart Attwell to hold a restart as there were training cones on or near to the touchline. Sure enough Attwell then went to remove them, but given they were on the touchline of AR2 (Natalie Aspinall) I'm baffled as to how VAR had to get involved. Not long after the commentator said that VAR had told Attwell that Cole Palmer had moved the ball at a ceremonial free kick, he had, but again this was right in front of AR2, and as is normal referees ask the active AR to monitor free kick ball placement as they mark the wall out, it shouldn't need VAR to tell them.

This comes off the back of what I heard in the Wolves vs Villa game, where the commentator said that VAR (Matt Donohue) had asked the referee to hold the restart as they were worried a sub had come on without anyone going off (they hadn't, the replaced player was sitting in the benches out of view). Somewhat ironic given the situation in the Netherlands around the same time. I don't understand how VAR are having these discussions with referees, they don't fall under any of the 4 allowable VAR interventions, so feels like we might be slipping back to VAR in England playing by their own rules.

Somewhat ironically tonight, when VAR did need to get involved they ruled that they couldn't. Jared Bowen was absolutely taken out before Chelsea's equalising goal, a very clear foul, but VAR ruled they couldn't get involved as it wasn't in the attacking phase of play. Not entirely sure I agree with that as they immediately broke and scored, but felt like VAR was helping the referee during play rather than doing what the protocol allows them to and then when it came to a big decision they ducked it.
 
The Ref Stop
I wish we the audience could hear the comms because I don't trust the commentators to decipher and accurately tell us what's actually going on. Efan Eloku and Danny Murphy are especially terrible at it.
 
I have conflicting views on the small stuff. It removes accountability. Why be alert as a good referee/AR should be? VAR is there and will take care of it for you.

On the other hand they are not about changing decisions. VAR is there, why not use them as you would use the AR. But it has to go into the protocol.
 
yeah I heard this too...and thought of you (how sad!)
assuming this is what happened it's a very sensible use of VAR - albeit clearly outside of the current scope
hopefully the protocols are rewritten to expressly permit this type of information being relayed
 
Is there a possibility that the commentators can hear all the comms and were confusing AR2's input with the VAR, given what you've said above?
(I haven't seen any of it, but I'm just asking based on your post)
 
Is there a possibility that the commentators can hear all the comms and were confusing AR2's input with the VAR, given what you've said above?
(I haven't seen any of it, but I'm just asking based on your post)
That would be possible but the differing genders and therefore very likely difference in voice tones is likely to bomb that as a theory.
 
That would be possible but the differing genders and therefore very likely difference in voice tones is likely to bomb that as a theory.
I did think that, but a) commentators can be very stupid and b) are they may have not realised that VAR was a male. Just a possibility 😆
 
Regarding the potential foul before the build up, I wonder if it's harder to intervene on this because the West Ham player didn't have possession of the ball so it did not affect the APP. If Bowen had the ball at his feet and was fouled like that and it went to the keeper which started the move off which lead to the goal then I think West Ham would have every right to be annoyed if the VAR used it was too far back to get involved as an excuse not to intervene.
 
Great post. I was watching and it was weird!

The other moment that struck me for RefChat analysis was: throw in taken, second ball is thrown on the field, not interfering with play, whistle blows, throw in is retaken.

Wrong in law as should be a dropped ball right? Unless we think the referee has decided to stop play retrospectively before the whistle was blown. 🤩🤗
 
Anyone else think it was weird that it took them 35mins (I think, correct me if sooner) to realise a cone was on the pitch anyway?
 
  • Like
Reactions: es1
A similar incident (ie use outside of protocol) happened in the women’s World Cup final in 2023. Ball goes out, AR and ref have no idea whether it’s a corner or goal kick, go one way and VAR pipes up with “caution, caution, caution”. Clearly telling them they got it wrong without explicitly doing so. I’d guess it’s just a thing that VARs do, whether allowed or not. I personally don’t see the issue, and I think the protocol should be rewritten to allow this as it is beneficial to the on field team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: es1
As we know, the commentators can hear the VAR discussions but not the audio from the on-field officials. Given this there were two very strange things tonight, firstly the commentator said that VAR (Michael Salisbury) had told Stuart Attwell to hold a restart as there were training cones on or near to the touchline. Sure enough Attwell then went to remove them, but given they were on the touchline of AR2 (Natalie Aspinall) I'm baffled as to how VAR had to get involved. Not long after the commentator said that VAR had told Attwell that Cole Palmer had moved the ball at a ceremonial free kick, he had, but again this was right in front of AR2, and as is normal referees ask the active AR to monitor free kick ball placement as they mark the wall out, it shouldn't need VAR to tell them.

This comes off the back of what I heard in the Wolves vs Villa game, where the commentator said that VAR (Matt Donohue) had asked the referee to hold the restart as they were worried a sub had come on without anyone going off (they hadn't, the replaced player was sitting in the benches out of view). Somewhat ironic given the situation in the Netherlands around the same time. I don't understand how VAR are having these discussions with referees, they don't fall under any of the 4 allowable VAR interventions, so feels like we might be slipping back to VAR in England playing by their own rules.

Somewhat ironically tonight, when VAR did need to get involved they ruled that they couldn't. Jared Bowen was absolutely taken out before Chelsea's equalising goal, a very clear foul, but VAR ruled they couldn't get involved as it wasn't in the attacking phase of play. Not entirely sure I agree with that as they immediately broke and scored, but felt like VAR was helping the referee during play rather than doing what the protocol allows them to and then when it came to a big decision they ducked it.
I've always felt that VAR would become a Genie released from the bottle. The remit of VAR will always trend towards refereeing the game. It's the natural course of such things. I've always felt that any Referee in favour of VAR is a Referee in favour of the game being officiated remotely, especially as the inevitable direction of travel is to look at use-cases of AI
I'm conservative by nature. I don't like change. I suppose I've always been anti-VAR (only since it came in) because fundamentally I want the game to be a sport and not sanitized into science. Sport inherently involves human error and the 'rub of the green' (a term defined in the Rules of Golf to refer to 'luck'! The term, because it's 'defined' is used throughout the book such is the ethos of sport)
 
I'm a West Ham fan, but even I was surprised that Jarod Bowen clearly told the referee to "f**k off" and faced no consequences. Didn't need to be a genius lip reader either. When stuff like that goes unpunished I don't care what anyone says it filters down and we have to pick up the pieces.

I see that as dissent. The initiative to clamp down on player behaviour is running the same course as most historic campaigns. Dwindling
The players always win in the end and everything returns to how it was. It gets left with the rest of us to implement, which is impossible when every player just copies what they see on TV
It's 'Stadium Refereeing'. If the dissent or abuse is not abundantly apparent to everyone in the stadium, it's allowed
 
I see that as dissent. The initiative to clamp down on player behaviour is running the same course as most historic campaigns. Dwindling
The players always win in the end and everything returns to how it was. It gets left with the rest of us to implement, which is impossible when every player just copies what they see on TV
It's 'Stadium Refereeing'. If the dissent or abuse is not abundantly apparent to everyone in the stadium, it's allowed
Agreed. I was amazed he wasn't YC'd.
 
I see that as dissent. The initiative to clamp down on player behaviour is running the same course as most historic campaigns. Dwindling
The players always win in the end and everything returns to how it was. It gets left with the rest of us to implement, which is impossible when every player just copies what they see on TV
It's 'Stadium Refereeing'. If the dissent or abuse is not abundantly apparent to everyone in the stadium, it's allowed
This is what infuriates everyone.
Arsenal, for all the bashing even I've given their fans for their moaning, probably have a right to moan about the very early season cards for DTR but rarely see one these days as moans and groans were made earlier and the refs/pgmol dont want the moans so stopped it and only give for absolute howling ones.

What really gets me is the shirt pulling and grappling in the area at corners and free kicks and the constant chats.
Tell them once, if you must, at the first set piece and if they do it again and again then penalise the one you've seen first. Whether a penalty or free kick. This will stop that. But again, it'll happen for 2 weeks and then stop as people moan about it ruining the game.

People like the laws as they were 20 years ago, longer for the older generation (hence Hackett piping up all the time and saying current refs are wrong). They dont like change. But if we stick with something then it needs to stick. Whole season. Eventually players get used it to.
 
Is there a possibility that the commentators can hear all the comms and were confusing AR2's input with the VAR, given what you've said above?
(I haven't seen any of it, but I'm just asking based on your post)
The commentators can only hear the VAR, they can't hear discussions between the on-pitch officials.
 
fundamentally I want the game to be a sport and not sanitized into science.
I agree that this is a problem. However the reason it is happening is that sport has become a business. Once it being sport takes priority over it being a business, the organisational decisions would be made in the interst of the sport and not the business (when they conflict).

Making 'business priority decision' is not just ruining the game from VAR front, cheating, abuse, etc are only dealt with superficially or when therebis no noticable impact to the bottom line.
 
Back
Top