Palace v Man City FAC

[Big Cat]

I don't think this is how VAR involvement works. If there was a DOGSO and the referee was clearly and obviously wrong to not call it (regardless how wrong or twisted the reason behind the no call was), VAR has to recommend a review.

The reason VAR didn't get involved was because he didn't thing this was a clear and obvious DOGSO, again regardless of why the referee didn't call it. If he'd thought it was a clear DOGSO, then he'd call the ref to review, ref realizes his first handball mistake then judges the considerations for DOGSO.

VAR and ref shouldn't be having a meeting to discuss how a decision by the ref is reached. VAR is not to fix a KMI decision process, it's to fix the outcome if it is clearly and obviously wrong.

Yes, I make you right
In essence, the process doesn't accommodate the incident that occurred
There's a paradoxical problem. Either way, it all went wrong. I bet comms between Ref and VAR are a mess. Hard to stick rigidly to an unfit process when under pressure. Bet there was stuff said that came close to/and/or breached the process

 

[bloovee]

I don't think this is how VAR involvement works. If there was a DOGSO and the referee was clearly and obviously wrong to not call it (regardless how wrong or twisted the reason behind the no call was), VAR has to recommend a review.

The reason VAR didn't get involved was because he didn't thing this was a clear and obvious DOGSO, again regardless of why the referee didn't call it. If he'd thought it was a clear DOGSO, then he'd call the ref to review, ref realizes his first handball mistake then judges the considerations for DOGSO.

VAR and ref shouldn't be having a meeting to discuss how a decision by the ref is reached. VAR is not to fix a KMI decision process, it's to fix the outcome if it is clearly and obviously wrong.

I thought Big Cat was saying this is how it should work.

I think he's saying that calling SA for an onfield review would not be "re-refereeing" because SA had not made a decision. He hadn't made a decision because he didn't see that any decision needed to be made.

Instead the VAR is the one who makes the DOGSO decision.

If the principle is to have reviews of clear and obvious mistakes, then the VAR here was judge and jury, and SA could / should have had the chance to review the VAR's decision, and might have / would have concluded that the "wide area" where the ball was supposedly going was in fact less than 10 yards wide of the middle of an open goal.

(Where's the camera angle from behind the goal?)

 

[Runner Ref]

What would that fix? If they had that in the final then the 2 possible outcomes are:

- Palace don’t challenge
- Palace challenge and referees don’t overturn because they feel it’s not obvious

The debate of no red card continues

City would have challenged it. Referee checks the screen and makes a decision, and the vagueness of who has decided what is taken away that bit more.

It also adds an element of accountability. If City don't see it and dont challenge it, it's as much their fault as the officials

 

[Runner Ref]

Don't like the idea of a challenge based system. Once you encourage the idea that referee decisions can be challenged, I think you're treaded dangerous ground and it would be a nightmare at grassroots.

Why? Challenge based systems work fine in other sports and it doesnt upset grassroots. Why has football got to be different?

 

[one]

Yes, I make you right
In essence, the process doesn't accommodate the incident that occurred
There's a paradoxical problem. Either way, it all went wrong. I bet comms between Ref and VAR are a mess. Hard to stick rigidly to an unfit process when under pressure. Bet there was stuff said that came close to/and/or breached the process

I don't entirely blame the process here. Did VAR actually think this was DOGSO? If not everything else is irrelevant and he can't get involved.

The problem here is even people who think this was not dogso think it was bad enough for VAR to get involved. That's just not what VAR is made for.

 

[one]

I thought Big Cat was saying this is how it should work.

I think he's saying that calling SA for an onfield review would not be "re-refereeing" because SA had not made a decision. He hadn't made a decision because he didn't see that any decision needed to be made.

Instead the VAR is the one who makes the DOGSO decision.

If the principle is to have reviews of clear and obvious mistakes, then the VAR here was judge and jury, and SA could / should have had the chance to review the VAR's decision, and might have / would have concluded that the "wide area" where the ball was supposedly going was in fact less than 10 yards wide of the middle of an open goal.

(Where'd the camera angle from behind the goal?)

Yes we can decide to make it work this way. It will fix this incident but the concequence are much wider. It will be a knee jerk reaction to implemet something to give VAR much more power than they should have. It will become the basis for VAR being expected to rereferee the game.

 

[BCMilan]

Why? Challenge based systems work fine in other sports and it doesnt upset grassroots. Why has football got to be different?

Isn't it done with fact based decisions in other sports, though ? ie IN/OUT in tennis, hitting the stumps in cricket. Yes, the handball would have been fact based, but the penalty is still subjective. Also, how would city have known it was outside the area ? Would they have their own cameras dotted around the pitch, covering every angle ?

 

[Russell Jones]

I think we can all agree that the on field officials did not see / have confidence to give the handball offense (either because they believed it was instead played by Haaland or because they believed Henderson was in the area). But that the VAR video evidence factually showed a handball offense had occurred.

In that context, let's look at this another way. When VAR factually shows that a player is in an offside position, on marginal subjective decisions it's deemed to be important that it is then the on field official (rather than the VAR) that decides whether an offside offense has actually occurred. Why is it therefore impossible / inappropriate to view this type of Law 12 incident in the same way?

We can't have a situation where a protocol that aims to attempt to ensure that it is the referee that remains 'in charge', rather than VAR, ends up delivering a critical outcome that is the polar opposite

 

[Samuel]

I just wanted to add that, apart from the obvious controversial VAR decisions, I thought the officiating team had an incredible game. Attwell made it very clear what he thought of some of the theatrics by telling Doku to get up, and I thought he helped the game be one of the most entertaining FA cup final for a long while.

He really did show his class and why he got the final over some of the other officials who could have deserved it.

 

[Runner Ref]

Isn't it done with fact based decisions in other sports, though ? ie IN/OUT in tennis, hitting the stumps in cricket. Yes, the handball would have been fact based, but the penalty is still subjective. Also, how would city have known it was outside the area ? Would they have their own cameras dotted around the pitch, covering every angle ?

Clubs have instant replays available to them in the dugouts.

Simply give them X amount of challenges per game, have yo be called within a set time and for set criteria. Gives them accountability and they may bother to learn some law

 

[Runner Ref]

I just wanted to add that, apart from the obvious controversial VAR decisions, I thought the officiating team had an incredible game. Attwell made it very clear what he thought of some of the theatrics by telling Doku to get up, and I thought he helped the game be one of the most entertaining FA cup final for a long while.

He really did show his class and why he got the final over some of the other officials who could have deserved it.

Im not sure you can describe them as having an incredible game when they miss a DOGSO and pen was touch and go.

If that was you at L4 doing that, you wouldn't be getting an incredible mark

 

[BCMilan]

Clubs have instant replays available to them in thr dugouts.

Simply give them X amount of challenges per game, have yo be called within a set time and for set criteria. Gives them accountability and they may bother to learn some law

I think it'll be too start / stop doing that. It'll be like american football and will go on for 3 hours !

 

[Steve Fall]

This is quite a good definition from an American official - https://www.facebook.com/reel/3155991411218857

 

[Runner Ref]

I think it'll be too start / stop doing that. It'll be like american football and will go on for 3 hours !

Not really. You could give them 1 challenge per game if that was the case.

Currently we could potentially have unlimited VAR interventions. Some of which take 4+ minutes

 

[Samuel]

DOGSO and pen was touch and go

My thinking was the pen wasn't enough to overturn, so you would hope an observer would back you on that, and as for the DOGSO the ref would have to be in the perfect position to see that, and even then I don't think it would be clear enough to give. Question marks on the ar but other than that I thought they managed the game very well.

 

[Runner Ref]

My thinking was the pen wasn't enough to overturn, so you would hope an observer would back you on that, and as for the DOGSO the ref would have to be in the perfect position to see that, and even then I don't think it would be clear enough to give. Question marks on the ar but other than that I thought they managed the game very well.

once you get a missed KMD/KMI, that takes you down a peg from 'incredible'

Referees are ultimately judged on the big decisions. And if you don't get those correct for whatever reason, you can't be incredible.

 

[Samuel]

Maybe Incredible was a bit too strong but overall an entertaining performance to say the least

 

[Runner Ref]

Maybe Incredible was a bit too strong but overall an entertaining performance to say the least

We'll agree on entertaining

 

[es1]

Currently we could potentially have unlimited VAR interventions. Some of which take 4+ minutes

this is my biggest gripe with VAR. we check EVERYTHING and this leads to a lot of delay and confusion

 

[Runner Ref]

this is my biggest gripe with VAR. we check EVERYTHING and this leads to a lot of delay and confusion

Exactly. And challenge based system limits that by limiting the number of challenges teams get.