Match officials mic'd up

[Paul_10]

Not sure if it's me or not but I can't help but feel this programme is losing a bit of a feel on what it should be about.

It feels like the vast majority of the time they are showing obviously correct interventions(like Palace v Brighton) to back up Howard Webb's belief VAR is a good thing and I think largely VAR is good for the game but they are reluctant to show the ones which causes a bit of a debate unless it involves the big clubs.

Instead of showing audio why a VAR thought the referee made an error of not showing a red card for DOGSO in the Palace Bournemouth game which the referee rejected at the screen or why a VAR did not correct a referees error of simulation in the Brentford Newcastle game, we were instead in the second part of the programme showed a pointless(at least to me as a fan which the show is largely aimed at) segment of John Brooks talking to players at different incidents including the DOGSO decision. We did not even get any subtitles on any of the audio either and it felt like a last minute decision for whatever reason to include this. This is something that could easily be put on the PGMO/Premier League social media outputs for those who are interested and let's face it, the segment has very little to do with referee/VAR decisions and just felt like pointless filler.

i also think the programme could be extended to 45/60 minutes longer so Owen could maybe challenge Webb more. In the Everton/Spurs scenario whilst it does seem a obvious offside interference, one argument could be is the keeper really impacted by having 2 players around him as he was Infront of the two Everton players from what I can remember instead of "I agree with that" after Webb's explanation.

 

[bester]

The Scottish version is so much better. Get through 15-20 incidents in an hour

Webb acts like a politician

 

[RustyRef]

Agree that the program needs to be longer, but they led on the Man City vs Liverpool offside decision and that has obviously split people on here.

I thought the John Brooks section was interesting, he's always struck me as one of the grumpier / stricter referees and it certainly came across. Not sure I'd advise up and coming referees to repeatedly shout "come here", but as he explained I suspect some EPL players need that level of force.

 

[Paul_10]

Agree that the program needs to be longer, but they led on the Man City vs Liverpool offside decision and that has obviously split people on here.

I thought the John Brooks section was interesting, he's always struck me as one of the grumpier / stricter referees and it certainly came across. Not sure I'd advise up and coming referees to repeatedly shout "come here", but as he explained I suspect some EPL players need that level of force.

Which is understandable and i got no issues with leading with that but whilst the last 3 to 4 weeks have largely been fairly uneventful controversy wise, I highlighted 2 incidents which I think might be interesting to hear the audio and Webb's opinion on.

I don't mind the Scottish VAR review and no doubt they get more incidents to cover as their threshold for intervention is clearly lower but it's obviously fairly cheaply made(no touchscreen, no fancy subtitles) compared to the PL version.

I just felt fairly disappointed with tonights show that they only showed one major incident and 2 other clips of fairly obvious correct interventions.

 

[one]

Webb acts like a politician

Couldn't be any more true. I haven't seen it but read an article.

At the risk of reigniting the City-Liv offside debate, his words to describe the incident were "did that clear action impact on Donnarumma". Only a politician spins words like that to support their own point which takes the focus away from impact and puts it solely on the action. The laws use "obvious action which clearly impacts". He also used other information that need fact checking . Unfortunately this is how "football expects" is formed.