Agree with this, the appeal would need to be for a specific reason, not just "can you check for any reason to disallow/allow a goal"
NEW LIV
- Thread starter TheFoodieReferee
- Start date
The issue that's solved is that it bins off C&O and a separate official having to make judgements and returns us to "what does the referee think is the correct decision?" I'm baffled that you seem to be minimising how clear a benefit that would be.
The rest of the concerns are valid, but not prohibitive. They might be issues, but they're also not beyond any possibility that they might be solved.
I'd rather have a "ref, challenge X" conflict over a "ref what the f*** are you seeing, are you f***ing blind" that seems to be common in the PL currently.
Determining what is being challenged involves.....talking to people, doesn't seem that hard?
Who shows what is an issue under the current system, so nothing new there.
And the other assorted questions are just that - questions, not impossible obstacles. Again, they need to be addressed, but that's it.
R
Runner-Ref
Guest
They would need to implement what can and can't be challenged. Throw ins as an example, don't let them challenge those. Similar to what VAR checks now- pens, red cards, offside (and whatever else- I can't think)
It's then down to the clubs to use their challenges wisely. It also gives them an element of accountability. If the referee doesn't agree with their opinion, then so be it. But at least its the referee who has made the initial and then final call. Which I know is technically how VAR should work, but in reality it doesn't.
Last edited by a moderator:
Russell Jones
RefChat Addict
Here's a radical thought. Accept that match officials, like all other participants in the game, are fallible human beings who, despite their very best efforts, will make mistakes. In that context, bin off VAR completely as something that was a well imagined effort but that was ultimately ill conceived and made things worse rather than better. Hey, a boy can dream .... 
Football doesn’t come to accept any limitations, that’s why this forum exists. It’s in its own world when it comes to sport
And what happens when you’ve used your challenges and then the referee makes a howler? Somehow I don’t see managers sitting quietly at their seat saying ‘oh well, it’s a shame I’ve run out of challenges’.
The issue which needs sorting is the decisions which are being made, not how we come to review them. The Jota dive was checked by a referee who agreed it was a penalty, all a challenge flag would do in this scenario is change an automatic review to a manual one
Where do I sign?Here's a radical thought. Accept that match officials, like all other participants in the game, are fallible human beings who, despite their very best efforts, will make mistakes. In that context, bin off VAR completely as something that was a well imagined effort but that was ultimately ill conceived and made things worse rather than better. Hey, a boy can dream ....
R
Runner-Ref
Guest
If it is a constant that teams are running out of challenges, then maybe they would need to alter how many challenges they get. Or maybe they would simply need to be careful with their challenges and not challenge for the sake of it. It may even make clubs make an actual effort to learn more of the LOTG to help them decide whether they need to challenge a decision or not. But ultimately if gives them an ounce of input & accountability.
The clubs will never ever be 100% satisfied. But anything has to be seen as an improvement on the current shambles we are seeing.
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
Bin it. Bin it.Here's a radical thought. Accept that match officials, like all other participants in the game, are fallible human beings who, despite their very best efforts, will make mistakes. In that context, bin off VAR completely as something that was a well imagined effort but that was ultimately ill conceived and made things worse rather than better. Hey, a boy can dream ....
Graun’s mid season review - fans overwhelmingly said bin it.
Last TalkVAR phone in on VAR fans overwhelmingly said bin it.
Bin it!
Last edited:
And then 6 months later once a few decisions had gone against their team the same people that wanted it scrapped would be demanding it back, as I've said before it is a circular argument. I know people have short memories, but can you not remember the constant bleating about every decision?
I give you this as a prime example.
Why not? Every other sport that's introduced a challenge system has had some teething pains and then fairly quickly, everyone realises that using challenges for guesses or 50/50 calls is stupid and so stops doing it. And if a manager/captain doesn't understand that, it's very common to see reporters/commentators talking about "wasted reviews" and accept that after multiple decisions being challenged and confirmed as right, one finally being wrong but unreviewable is what you should have saved the reviews for.
Football really isn't as special and unique as people seem to think. It works elsewhere, it will work here.
The Jota dive wasn't confirmed as a penalty, it was considered "not a clear and obvious error" by a referee that wasn't the match official. What does that actually mean? I don't know, no one does, that's the problem.
A challenge system doesn't fix human error, no system can. But a challenge system would make the question much simpler. No C&O, no different ref with different thresholds trying to guess what their colleague might think. Just the same official asked to confirm they're still happy with the original decision.
R
Runner-Ref
Guest
And this should mean we get greater consistency within games, as its will be the same person making the decision. We will never get consistency game to game, but we can at least aim for it within each game
If they used a challenge system and a club wasted their challenges before there was an absolute howler by the referee then it would be down to them. It happened in a cricket game not that long ago, a team wasted their challenges then the umpire got an LBW decision horrendously wrong, no challenge left because they'd frittered them away. Bad luck I'm afraid.
But I keep coming back to football is very different to any other sport that uses technology as the decisions, aside from offside, are subjective rather than factual. Doesn't matter whether it is the current VAR system or a challenge one, there will always be controversy. At the moment it is over what the C&O criteria is, with a challenge system it would be that "football expects" a penalty after a challenge but the referee sticks with his decision after reviewing it. Then we'd discuss it on here and 50% would say penalty and the other 50% no penalty, that just wouldn't happen in any other sport. There is no easy answer.
But I keep coming back to football is very different to any other sport that uses technology as the decisions, aside from offside, are subjective rather than factual. Doesn't matter whether it is the current VAR system or a challenge one, there will always be controversy. At the moment it is over what the C&O criteria is, with a challenge system it would be that "football expects" a penalty after a challenge but the referee sticks with his decision after reviewing it. Then we'd discuss it on here and 50% would say penalty and the other 50% no penalty, that just wouldn't happen in any other sport. There is no easy answer.
Yep, and it's still the refs fault they haven't got any challenges left because he didn't agree with the challenge.
R
Runner-Ref
Guest
But it gives the clubs an element of control and accountability.
I also think we'd see less 'C&O' errors. Not a chance the Diaz goal vs Spurs gets disallowed if the clubs were able to challenge.
Last edited by a moderator:
Not so sure on that, offside would probably have to stay with a remote VAR, the referee can hardly draw lines on a tiny TV screen. So the outcome for the Diaz goal would remain exactly the same. Unless you are suggesting that offsides would have to be appealed, in which case both teams would have used and lost all of their appeals by half time.
R
Runner-Ref
Guest
After a goal is scored, clubs get 30 seconds to appeal/use a challenge. The clubs get instant replays in the dugouts as it is, so this shouldn't be an issue. If they can't see a reason within that 30 seconds, C&O error hasn't occurred, so you go with onfield decision.
Incidents like the Diaz goal could be seen with the naked eye that it was onside, so the clubs could quickly appeal it. If the clubs want to gamble and appeal a potentially mm offside, that's their perogative. But it heightens their chance of losing a challenge.
If they challenge an offside, you can have an operator draw the relevant lines as they do now (Info fed to them from dugout 'we believe red 3 played blue 10 onside). If that means it needs doing under supervisor of an official, referee can go to the screen and speak with them whilst they do it.
Last edited by a moderator:
They aren't going to have the referee stood at the side of the pitch looking at a 14" screen with people screaming at him trying to direct a VAR operator where to draw the lines. They have multiple 50"+ TV screens at Stockley Park for a reason. For offside they would still need to have a VAR and potentially an AVAR in the hub. So I still don't think the outcome for the Diaz incident would be any different.
If clubs can only appeal for an offside after a goal was scored how far can they go back? What if they felt the offside was in a previous attack 2 minutes ago? APP works for VAR, but the on-pitch referee isn't going to have a clue what happened 2 minutes ago, and managers certainly won't understand APP. I'm not against reviews per se, but it would need a lot of thought and probably just add in as many consistencies as we have today with the current system. I certainly don't agree with comparing it to other sports that use review systems, as they are tennis and cricket which are factual decisions, might be other sports that I'm not aware of.
R
Runner-Ref
Guest
Simple, put a bigger pitchside monitor. Or if need be, have an AVAR in the hub. Or better yet, train the operators on where the lines should go. After all, they're the ones who actually put them there. And if that doesn't suit, train the AVAR on how to operate the system.
Well you keep it how it is now- AR may spots an offside, but withholds the flag until goal has been scored. This setup would have easily overruled the incorrect Diaz decision. There's not a chance Liverpool wouldnt have been switched on to that to not appeal it.
In terms of APP, this is something that would need to be discussed and agreed between clubs and IFAB/PGMOL etc.
The Everton game tonight is a prime example of how the current setup just does not work.
Last edited by a moderator: