Denmark - Peru

[Sheffields Finest]

No you aren't, you are taking things off topic / spamming / deliberately getting things wrong. Please desist ….

That’s poor advice RR, I’m stimulating good debate, you learn more from not been spoon fed the answer! That’s what’s wrong with modern learning today! Young refs need to learn stuff from different angles and not just be given a question and have to recite something parrot fashion!

 

[JamesL]

Stop on the penalty run up?? YC?

No

 

[bester]

No

Unless Paul Tierney is ref'ing. Did the PGMO ever come out and say he was wrong?

 

[RobOda]

Unless Paul Tierney is ref'ing. Did the PGMO ever come out and say he was wrong?

Was that Spurs and Son?

Because I had players having to double-check they could stutter in the run up in the weeks after that decision.

 

[one]

47th minute - An example of the delayed offside flag. The World doesn't stop contrary to popular belief.

Its also a good example of a poor application of it. The flag should have never been delayed. Again nowhere near a tight call, for either of the two PIOP.

 

[one]

The right decision was made for the pen review but the OFR's (On Field Review) first two replays were in slow motion. Surly best practice dictates to look at it in normal speed first and if not sure of point of contact then look at an slow mo. Not following best practice and good processes will bite you on the backside at some point.

 

[Deleted member 3014]

The right decision was made for the pen review but the OFR's (On Field Review) first two replays were in slow motion. Surly best practice dictates to look at it in normal speed first and if not sure of point of contact then look at an slow mo. Not following best practice and good processes will bite you on the backside at some point.

View attachment 2072

I disagree one, if you’ve stopped the game (which is bad enough imo already) why muck about trying to be all politically correct just slow it down with the technology at hand get the decision correct as quick as possible.
I mean after all the ref missed it in real time anyway & in most cases you need it in slow mo to be 100% sure, point of contact was it in or out of the box etc.

Can’t see anything wrong in showing it in slow motion.

& your not beating me with lotg this time pal

 

[one]

Can’t see anything wrong in showing it in slow motion.

It is an accepted fact (researched) that viewing an incident in slow mo makes it look more severe than it actually is.

Why have it in your protocol if you are not going to follow it (its not about political correctness, its about accuracy of judgement).

& your not beating me with lotg this time pal

No i'll beat you with IFAB VAR protocol

 

[Deleted member 3014]

It is an accepted fact (researched) that viewing an incident in slow mo makes it look more severe than it actually is.

Why have it in your protocol if you are not going to follow it (its not about political correctness, its about accuracy of judgement).

View attachment 2073



No i'll beat you with IFAB VAR protocol

Yeah I know the whole slow mo argument & making something look worse than it is but just give the ref the best quickest chance of making a decision and crack on with the game.

And by the way I’ll see your IFAB and raise you a

 

[Peter Grove]

I would agree with @one (and the IFAB) that in terms of judging the intensity of an offence, slow motion replays should not be used. However I think there's an argument to be made that slow motion might have been used simply to establish in the first instance, if there was in fact, any contact at all.

 

[Sheffields Finest]

Pepe got up sheepishly quick after his play acting ruse failed to con the ref and a few on here!

He’s no stranger to violence so I surprised his actions weren’t laughed at by the TV audience and his fellow players!

 

[GraemeS]

I would agree with @one (and the IFAB) that in terms of judging the intensity of an offence, slow motion replays should not be used. However I think there's an argument to be made that slow motion might have been used simply to establish in the first instance, if there was in fact, any contact at all.

I feel like there are some things the VAR should be empowered to state and have accepted as fact. Point of contact is a good example - I can't see any reason an on-field referee would need to jog all the way over to the side of the pitch and waste time watching slow-mo replays in order to make a factual point of contact decision.

 

[Peter Grove]

I feel like there are some things the VAR should be empowered to state and have accepted as fact. Point of contact is a good example - I can't see any reason an on-field referee would need to jog all the way over to the side of the pitch and waste time watching slow-mo replays in order to make a factual point of contact decision.

They don't - point of contact is one of the things the VAR can simply inform the referee of, as a matter of fact. But for a penalty decision like this, point of contact is not the only consideration - the referee also has to judge whether the challenge was, at a minimum, careless (i.e. the intensity of the challenge). The VAR can't decide on that, the referee has to make that decision.

 

[GraemeS]

They don't - point of contact is one of the things the VAR can simply inform the referee of, as a matter of fact. But for a penalty decision like this, point of contact is not the only consideration - the referee also has to judge whether the challenge was, at a minimum, careless (i.e. the intensity of the challenge). The VAR can't decide on that, the referee has to make that decision.

But then the ref should only have been watching full-speed replays? If he's looking at slo-mo, he's either ignoring the VAR protocol or insisting on getting involved in a decision the VAR should be responsible for.

 

[one]

I would agree with @one (and the IFAB) that in terms of judging the intensity of an offence, slow motion replays should not be used. However I think there's an argument to be made that slow motion might have been used simply to establish in the first instance, if there was in fact, any contact at all.

In which case he should be looking at slow mo after looking at full speed to decide on intensity. Looking at slow mo first influences the perception on intensity even if full speed is looked at after.