A&H

Match Officials Mic'd Up 2024-25

C

CaptainsPlease

Level 5 and
Level 3W Referee
Let this thread serve as a notice that the first episode for the current season is on at 10:30 tonight, in anticipation of discussion to follow!
It will be interesting to see what incidents are covered and whether there are any changes to the format, and Webb's approach which I have criticised in the past for being overly evasive.
 
A&H International
The timing will be due to clashing with European and Domestic competitions. Euro games starting at 1730, EFL Trophy @ 1900 and EFL Cup from 1930. Maybe another day would have worked better but let's no forget it is also available on demand.
 
Incident 1: Everton v Brighton
On-field decision: Foul, penalty.
VAR: On-field review leading to decision overturned as attacker stepped on defender's foot.
Webb: Example of the 'referee's call' being clearly wrong and where VAR should intervene.

Incident 2: Chelsea v Manchester City
On-field decision: No handball, no penalty
VAR: Agreed with and confirmed on-field decision.
Webb: Penalty might have been given previously but now we are taking on board feedback that we were penalising too many handballs unfairly, in this case the arm position can be justified and the ball was played from close range.

Incident 3: Bournemouth v Newcastle
On-field decision: Goal, no handball by goalscorer.
VAR: Decided ball hit arm below armpit line and goal should be disallowed without an on-field review.
Webb: Ball strikes in shoulder/upper arm area but video evidence was not clear enough to show exactly where, so on-field decision should have stood.

Incident 4: Brighton v Arsenal
On-field decision: No sanction for Veltman kicking Rice (reviewable). Second caution for Rice delaying the restart having kicked the ball away from Veltman (not reviewable).
VAR: Agreed with and confirmed on-field decision as considered Veltman attempting to play the ball.
Webb: Rice's actions intended to delay restart so had to be cautioned even though the ball was moving. Agrees Veltman couldn't be sanctioned as ball was there to be played. Joao Pedro should have also been cautioned earlier in the game for delaying a restart.

Incident 5: Fulham v Leicester
On-field decision: No goal, offside due to another attacker interfering with GK.
VAR: Attacker has moved away from GK by time of header, still around GK's line of vision but moving away at time ball is headed into goal, GK can see ball and not impacted in ability to play the ball. On-field review leading to goal being awarded.
Webb: On-field decision was clearly and obviously wrong based on player's distance from GK and movement at the time the ball was headed into goal, so VAR intervention was correct.
 
With the handball one, I really don't get Webb's comments there's been too many handball penalties given, that's definitely not the case in the Premier League where the threshold is rightly higher than say La Liga for example.

I just hope we don't get a situation where nothing will be given by VAR for handball because the threshold is so high. I go back to the Chris Wood situation against Wolves, for me that is a clear handball and if that doesn't get given then basically nothing is handball in the VAR eyes unless it's on the goalline. Howard Webb seems more concerned what people think than the LOTG and I can't see that going down well with UEFA/FIFA and it may continue the reason why so few English officials are getting the big UEFA matches.

Also a bit surprised Howard kinda criticized Tim Robinson for awarding a factual handball in the Bournemouth game, it's not like the VAR/AVAR was uncertain where it hit, they were both quite certain of their decision. I'm not quite sure how you can stick with the on field call of a goal when clearly the referee/on field team did not spot the potential handball and there is video evidence of the ball hitting the arm. I do feel though when it's that close, it would be good to recommend a review and let the on field ref make a judgement for himself, at least it sells the decision more.
 
Paul_10 said:
With the handball one, I really don't get Webb's comments there's been too many handball penalties given, that's definitely not the case in the Premier League where the threshold is rightly higher than say La Liga for example.

I just hope we don't get a situation where nothing will be given by VAR for handball because the threshold is so high. I go back to the Chris Wood situation against Wolves, for me that is a clear handball and if that doesn't get given then basically nothing is handball in the VAR eyes unless it's on the goalline. Howard Webb seems more concerned what people think than the LOTG and I can't see that going down well with UEFA/FIFA and it may continue the reason why so few English officials are getting the big UEFA matches.

Also a bit surprised Howard kinda criticized Tim Robinson for awarding a factual handball in the Bournemouth game, it's not like the VAR/AVAR was uncertain where it hit, they were both quite certain of their decision. I'm not quite sure how you can stick with the on field call of a goal when clearly the referee/on field team did not spot the potential handball and there is video evidence of the ball hitting the arm. I do feel though when it's that close, it would be good to recommend a review and let the on field ref make a judgement for himself, at least it sells the decision more.
Click to expand...
Sounds like you're a 'more Handballs man'
I'm very much a 'less Handballs man'
Unfortunately, whilst we resisted the 'more Handballs trend' in the UK, we ultimately caved in
Handballs in the Penalty Area are almost always 'A Hand of God' because they're almost always completely accidental even when making the body unnaturally bigger. Therefore games are decided on strokes of luck

Anyway, despite being a Newcastle Supporter, I vehemently disagreed with VAR's interference with the Bournemouth goal. There was nothing at all factual about it and the on-field decision should have stood. Indeed, if VAR had not interfered, nobody would have mentioned Shouldergate
Conversely, I have it on good account that Neto is still receiving treatment for PTSD after Joelinton's unprovoked assault
 
Paul_10 said:
With the handball one, I really don't get Webb's comments there's been too many handball penalties given, that's definitely not the case in the Premier League where the threshold is rightly higher than say La Liga for example.

I just hope we don't get a situation where nothing will be given by VAR for handball because the threshold is so high. I go back to the Chris Wood situation against Wolves, for me that is a clear handball and if that doesn't get given then basically nothing is handball in the VAR eyes unless it's on the goalline. Howard Webb seems more concerned what people think than the LOTG and I can't see that going down well with UEFA/FIFA and it may continue the reason why so few English officials are getting the big UEFA matches.

Also a bit surprised Howard kinda criticized Tim Robinson for awarding a factual handball in the Bournemouth game, it's not like the VAR/AVAR was uncertain where it hit, they were both quite certain of their decision. I'm not quite sure how you can stick with the on field call of a goal when clearly the referee/on field team did not spot the potential handball and there is video evidence of the ball hitting the arm. I do feel though when it's that close, it would be good to recommend a review and let the on field ref make a judgement for himself, at least it sells the decision more.
Click to expand...
Not sure I agree with that, yes the threshold might be lower than La Liga, but there have been some ludicrous handball VAR interventions in recent seasons. Can't remember the game, but there was one where the ball was crossed, defender jumped and missed it, attacker then headed it from point blank distance against his arm which was coming back down from jumping. Nothing given on-pitch but VAR recommended a review and a penalty was given.

I know that is just one example, but there have been lots of very questionable handball VAR decisions where the defender really couldn't do anything to avoid the ball hitting his arm. I'm all for this raising of the bar.
 
RustyRef said:
Not sure I agree with that, yes the threshold might be lower than La Liga, but there have been some ludicrous handball VAR interventions in recent seasons. Can't remember the game, but there was one where the ball was crossed, defender jumped and missed it, attacker then headed it from point blank distance against his arm which was coming back down from jumping. Nothing given on-pitch but VAR recommended a review and a penalty was given.

I know that is just one example, but there have been lots of very questionable handball VAR decisions where the defender really couldn't do anything to avoid the ball hitting his arm. I'm all for this raising of the bar.
Click to expand...

Sounds like the Spurs v Newcastle game from the empty stadiums time which caused a huge backlash and the bar for handball at that point was much lower. Needless the say, it didn't last long and more "common sense" came into play.

I'm probably seeing it more of a fan point of view, I accept proximity when it comes to decisions and to a lesser extent natural positions for the arms but whilst not in the laws in terms of a defensive advantage, I don't feel its right that the ball can hit a outstretched arm and for it not to be punished especially when proximity is not a factor like in the Chris Wood case. It gives a defender a massive advantage as the ball hitting that arm may prevent it from reaching an attacking player for example. Also the more annoying thing, a similar situation outside the box is more likely to be penalised so why should it be any different.

I do feel the Premier League has got it more right than UEFA/some leagues mind but as I say, the bar shouldn't be so high that it prevents a VAR from intervening except if its on the goalline for example.
 
I know Danny Murphy picked the comment up from AR1, “Look after yourself mate”, probably not a good thing to say in the public domain.


Also still very matey in Comms, I notice the Scottish VAR operators are more formal using names Andrew etc not Tays, Bondy etc. I do think PGMOL should change, we wouldn’t use colleagues nicknames in a client business meeting.

Poor Jarred gets called Jarred not Gilly. 😂
 
DJIC said:
I know Danny Murphy picked the comment up from AR1, “Look after yourself mate”, probably not a good thing to say in the public domain.


Also still very matey in Comms, I notice the Scottish VAR operators are more formal using names Andrew etc not Tays, Bondy etc. I do think PGMOL should change, we wouldn’t use colleagues nicknames in a client business meeting.

Poor Jarred gets called Jarred not Gilly. 😂
Click to expand...
I disagree. I think football would far rather that these communications are clear and correct in meaning than formal. They're a team as well, and team mates will use nicknames. It's not a business meeting, it's them doing their job, and if they do it more comfortably by using less formal language then let them crack on and worry about getting things right.
Also don't see the issue with the AR saying 'look after yourself mate'. As we know, it's just advice that he has got to do the right thing even if he doesn't want to. It's just support for a colleague.

Edit: Obviously they must still be professional overall, but I feel like they are.
 
Last edited:
RefereeX said:
I disagree. I think football would far rather that these communications are clear and correct in meaning than formal. They're a team as well, and team mates will use nicknames. It's not a business meeting, it's them doing their job, and if they do it more comfortably by using less formal language then let them crack on and worry about getting things right.
Also don't see the issue with the AR saying 'look after yourself mate'. As we know, it's just advice that he has got to do the right thing even if he doesn't want to. It's just support for a colleague.

Edit: Obviously they must still be professional overall, but I feel like they are.
Click to expand...
Agree, it isn't a business meeting, the key thing is they need to be comfortable and if they refer to each other by nickname in training sessions it makes sense to do it over comms.

One thing that I don't agree with them doing is referring to players by names, it is an accident waiting to happen. Whilst they will know all of the names, it only needs someone to have a blank moment and think the discussion is about someone else and they've got a major issue. They should be using the numbers in my opinion
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top