A&H

Nor Vs Che

The Referee Store
They don't signal a goal with VAR in use, even if it is obvious that no offence took place. VAR checks every single goal, so the referee is going to look a bit daft it he makes some kind of goal signal and then has to undo that signal. Rather he will just walk away once has checked on what the players are doing, and then put finger to ear if VAR is telling him anything.
 
We’ve gone from one of the best, exiting sports and leagues on the planet to a game of peekaboo from a few blokes in West London where millions of pounds of talent and admission fees haven’t got a scooby do what’s happening or what, why, how decisions are made or even not made.

Football wasn’t perfect but this version of VAR is absolutely crap for all concerned!

It won’t be changes anytime soon I’m sure but it’s killing the actual soul of why fans actually turn up.
 
We’ve gone from one of the best, exiting sports and leagues on the planet to a game of peekaboo from a few blokes in West London where millions of pounds of talent and admission fees haven’t got a scooby do what’s happening or what, why, how decisions are made or even not made.

Football wasn’t perfect but this version of VAR is absolutely crap for all concerned!

It won’t be changes anytime soon I’m sure but it’s killing the actual soul of why fans actually turn up.
The club's are the ones who wanted it, and they couldn't care less about the fans.
 
The club's are the ones who wanted it, and they couldn't care less about the fans.

If City are robbed by Liverpool of the title because of a dodgy VAR decision imagine the blue noses on here.... they get the huff if one is scrubbed off in a 5-0 win!!!
 
They don't signal a goal with VAR in use, even if it is obvious that no offence took place. VAR checks every single goal, so the referee is going to look a bit daft it he makes some kind of goal signal and then has to undo that signal. Rather he will just walk away once has checked on what the players are doing, and then put finger to ear if VAR is telling him anything.
Completely disagree. This is pretty much saying if you don't know what the decision should be, wait for the VAR to tell you because you know he is checking it anyway. That would be fine if it is how VAR is supposed to operate but it is not (and there are good reasons for it).

And I think it is what happened here, he didn't know if there was a foul or not so he didn't commit to any decisions for fear of being wrong. That is what it looked like to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JH
If City are robbed by Liverpool of the title because of a dodgy VAR decision imagine the blue noses on here.... they get the huff if one is scrubbed off in a 5-0 win!!!

But it's unlikely that there will be many "dodgy" VAR decisions, mainly because VAR cannot make any decisions, that is the responsibility of the referee.

What is more lily to happen is that a decision will be made with the help of VAR that is 100% correct in law, but will be really tight, or something that would have been let go last season.

Whinging that just because Agueros toe was offside doesn't mean the goal shod have been ruled out, even though it is the correct decision.

Or a penalty being retaken because the goal keeper is a couple of inches off the line before the ball is kicked, again would be the correct decision, but people will whinge about it.
 
Completely disagree. This is pretty much saying if you don't know what the decision should be, wait for the VAR to tell you because you know he is checking it anyway. That would be fine if it is how VAR is supposed to operate but it is not (and there are good reasons for it).

And I think it is what happened here, he didn't know if there was a foul or not so he didn't commit to any decisions for fear of being wrong. That is what it looked like to me.

So what is the signal for a goal then? There are signals for lots of things on pages 70-72, but there is nothing for a goal.
 
So what is the signal for a goal then? There are signals for lots of things on pages 70-72, but there is nothing for a goal.
The answer to your question in isolation is, there is no formal signal for a goal. There is an almost universally accepted convention that is used. Point to the the center circle without blowing the whistle.

However there is a context here and as with everything context is very very important. The argument is not about a signal. It s about the referee making a decision and clearly communicating that decision to everyone before a check is made (signal or not). Not doing so breaks protocol as (at the very least it give the impression) that VAR is not checking for C&O but making a decision.

Then there is, if the system is down or there is no reliable angle available to make a call by VAR (it has happened before). Whatever the ref does/decide after that is responded with "you are just making it up since you didn't know what the decision was before going to VAR".
 
The answer to your question in isolation is, there is no formal signal for a goal. There is an almost universally accepted convention that is used. Point to the the center circle without blowing the whistle.

However there is a context here and as with everything context is very very important. The argument is not about a signal. It s about the referee making a decision and clearly communicating that decision to everyone before a check is made (signal or not). Not doing so breaks protocol as (at the very least it give the impression) that VAR is not checking for C&O but making a decision.

Then there is, if the system is down or there is no reliable angle available to make a call by VAR (it has happened before). Whatever the ref does/decide after that is responded with "you are just making it up since you didn't know what the decision was before going to VAR".
The ball went in the goal. The referee did not signal any other type of restart. Therefore, it's clear that the referee is allowing the goal to stand; they have made a decision by virtue of not deciding anything else to the contrary.
That the goal was then immediately checked and reviewed doesn't change this, especially when it was apparently verbally indicated to players and officials.
 
The ball went in the goal. The referee did not signal any other type of restart. Therefore, it's clear that the referee is allowing the goal to stand; they have made a decision by virtue of not deciding anything else to the contrary.
That the goal was then immediately checked and reviewed doesn't change this, especially when it was apparently verbally indicated to players and officials.
We can sugar coat this to justify what happened. But if I and a few others here think there was no commitment to any decision then there is sure to be many others. There are 'apparently' pundits who televised that the VAR told MA it was offside (clearly not).

We had a situation a couple of weeks back when the AR signaled a corner kick but the referee allowed a TI and a goal was scored. There was all sorts of justifications after the fact but the fact remains, the 3rd teams stuffed up. And one thing I have learnt from my many years of refereeing, if you have stuffed up, admitting to it gives you a lot more credibility than defending it.
 
If Mike Dean awarded a goal why did he walk towards the place that the incident took place, im convinced he didn't have a clue what had happened or at least didn't know what decision to give.
 
If Mike Dean awarded a goal why did he walk towards the place that the incident took place, im convinced he didn't have a clue what had happened or at least didn't know what decision to give.

So you've determined that a very experienced and respected match official didn't know what decision to give simply because of the direction he walked?

Give me a break. Weve already established that there is no official signal for a goal, and now people are clutching at straws to try and prove something that they will never be able to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nij
We can sugar coat this to justify what happened. But if I and a few others here think there was no commitment to any decision then there is sure to be many others. There are 'apparently' pundits who televised that the VAR told MA it was offside (clearly not).

We had a situation a couple of weeks back when the AR signaled a corner kick but the referee allowed a TI and a goal was scored. There was all sorts of justifications after the fact but the fact remains, the 3rd teams stuffed up. And one thing I have learnt from my many years of refereeing, if you have stuffed up, admitting to it gives you a lot more credibility than defending it.
But you have absolutely no proof whatsoever that anyone stuffed up here.

This is all conjecture based on, well nothing, people are guessing and making things up.
 
So you've determined that a very experienced and respected match official didn't know what decision to give simply because of the direction he walked?

Give me a break. Weve already established that there is no official signal for a goal, and now people are clutching at straws to try and prove something that they will never be able to.


We cant prove it no, not just the direction he walked but his body language suggested he was unsure on what had happened.
 
But you have absolutely no proof whatsoever that anyone stuffed up here.

This is all conjecture based on, well nothing, people are guessing and making things up.
The stuff up referred to the other incident. For OP I have said it from the start that this is what it looks like and what I think. However you are looking at this the wrong way. I shouldn't need proof that he didn't make a decision. The law requires him to make a decision and there is no proof or indication that he did.
 
The stuff up referred to the other incident. For OP I have said it from the start that this is what it looks like and what I think. However you are looking at this the wrong way. I shouldn't need proof that he didn't make a decision. The law requires him to make a decision and there is no proof or indication that he did.
What is the correct signal in the laws of the game for the referee to award a goal?
 
We cant prove it no, not just the direction he walked but his body language suggested he was unsure on what had happened.

Did it, or was he told, after the goal was scored that there was a review taking place?

What is the correct signal in the laws of the game for a referee to award a goal?
 
IMO VAR has created a situation wherein referees bottle big decisions, leaning on the fact that they can check it after the fact; that doesn't really work because the error the referee makes has to be "clear and obvious" in order for the VAR to recommend overturning it. This means that their non-decision on the pitch requires a fairly high standard of proof to overturn and it leads to incorrect decisions being taken. The more I see of VAR, the less and less I like it.
 
Back
Top