This rubbish has to stop...

[JamesL]

Here's a question... has there yet been an instance where a review of video has taken place where the on field referee has stuck with the original decision?
If there hasnt then it strengthens the case for accepting VAR decisions without review.

 

[Ciley Myrus]

enjoy ....

also, it looks to me like either the ref cautions the wrong player, or if he did not, then he certainly just waving a card in the air to 3 players.

 

[PinnerPaul]

They are only confused because of the lack of communication. If the referee publicly told everyone what they were looking at, and the VAR then publicly gave the reason for the decision, it would work a treat.

I can't see how having a penalty taken THREE minutes after the foul is 'working a treat'!

 

[jofusref]

i was a sceptic but i have started watching a bit of rugby and the refs on there make it very slick, ask for advice, take advice restart game boom

 

[jofusref]

i was a sceptic but i have started watching a bit of rugby and the refs on there make it very slick, ask for advice, take advice restart game boom

the idea of the match referee going to a monitor at the side of the pitch is a bad idea

 

[alexgr]

i was a sceptic but i have started watching a bit of rugby and the refs on there make it very slick, ask for advice, take advice restart game boom

Literally this. Baffles me why the ref doesn't take the advice of the VAR. They should be/are just as qualified. Could make the argument things aren't always black and white, but nor are they in rugby - the ref takes the TMO's assistant. Going to look at a monitor, whilst I understand it in terms of a credibility issue, slows everything down and belittles the process and the experience of the VAR.

 

[J79]

Only reason I can think of for setting it up like this is that all those commissions that decide on the procedure have retired (on-field) referees in them, and those people have difficulties accepting that the on-field referee would lose power.

And the only reason they now stick to the procedure is because they can't admit they messed up badly.

They should really go for the short pain and change it as soon as possible. You can't go into the World Cup with the current system. Well, you can, but it'd lead to a lot of complaints.

 

[RustyRef]

I can't see how having a penalty taken THREE minutes after the foul is 'working a treat'!

You've quoted me out of context here, as that post was made almost two months ago and in response to VARs in general rather than any specific incident.

 

[CapnBloodbeard]

Cricket and rugby isn't anywhere near as subjective as our sport though.
Although this one wasn't a tough call - this should have been the VAR's decision.

And yes, the VAR needs to be able to tell the ref to stop play in instances like this.

 

[Peter Grove]

I think if everybody read the VAR protocol before making comments it might be helpful.

Some of the questions and points raised here are covered in the VAR Protocol document issued by the IFAB.

For instance, there should be no delay in the VAR communicating to the referee that a review might be needed, nor does the referee have to wait for a stoppage to review incidents.

The VAR will automatically ‘check’ every situation/decision to see if a potential clear error has been made in a match-changing situation or if a serious incident/offence has been missed [...] If a ‘check’ indicates that an incident should be reviewed, the referee should be informed immediately.

[...]If the referee wants a review when play has not stopped, play should be stopped as soon as it is in a ‘neutral’ area i.e. when neither team has a good attacking possibility.

As I alluded to in another thread, it seems to me (and reading the protocol only seems to reinforce this view) that the IFAB is keen to avoid anything that could be seen as another official over-ruling the referee and overturning the basic principle that the referee is the sole judge of facts concerned with play.

 

[PinnerPaul]

I think if everybody read the VAR protocol before making comments it might be helpful.

Some of the questions and points raised here are covered in the VAR Protocol document issued by the IFAB.

For instance, there should be no delay in the VAR communicating to the referee that a review might be needed, nor does the referee have to wait for a stoppage to review incidents.



As I alluded to in another thread, it seems to me (and reading the protocol only seems to reinforce this view) that the IFAB is keen to avoid anything that could be seen as another official over-ruling the referee and overturning the basic principle that the referee is the sole judge of facts concerned with play.

Thanks Peter, that's interesting to read the protocol about stopping play.

However, in the latest example, on another day that could lead to a team having a chance of scoring denied - especially if referee reviews incident and decides he WAS correct anyway - however, as someone else has mentioned, has that ever happened yet?