A&H

Top VAR drama!

es1 said:
Agreed, this needs addressing
Click to expand...
Not sure it needs addressing as such, the referee should have known that as he'd blown for full time the penalty kick was over once it was scored or saved / missed. Its a human error for me rather than a gap in law, had they knocked in from the rebound that referee's career would have been in tatters, and they would probably be looking at replaying the game, or at least getting everyone back for one penalty. What a mess.
 
  • Like
Reactions: es1
The Referee Store
Furthermore, if players / managers / comentators would just shut the hell up and LISTEN to the officials rather than screaming at them that they're all cheating c**ts, then they'll have the answer.
 
RustyRef said:
Not sure it needs addressing as such, the referee should have known that as he'd blown for full time the penalty kick was over once it was scored or saved / missed. Its a human error for me rather than a gap in law, had they knocked in from the rebound that referee's career would have been in tatters, and they would probably be looking at replaying the game, or at least getting everyone back for one penalty. What a mess.
Click to expand...
Is this covered in the VAR protocol? As said earlier, if the referee gives it originally I don't suppose they would have forbidden a rebound so within the spirit of things it does not seem right to me if they do when VAR intervenes. But perhaps there is something covering this I am unaware of.
 
onthebrink said:
Is this covered in the VAR protocol? As said earlier, if the referee gives it originally I don't suppose they would have forbidden a rebound so within the spirit of things it does not seem right to me if they do when VAR intervenes. But perhaps there is something covering this I am unaware of.
Click to expand...

Yes?

the game is over, time is up, and time can only be extended for the taking of the pk

Only the kicker and-or gk can touch the ball
 
Are we of the view that if the VAR review was for DOGSO outside the area that they would not have come back for a freekick?
 
Last edited:
RustyRef said:
Not sure it needs addressing as such, the referee should have known that as he'd blown for full time the penalty kick was over once it was scored or saved / missed. Its a human error for me rather than a gap in law, had they knocked in from the rebound that referee's career would have been in tatters, and they would probably be looking at replaying the game, or at least getting everyone back for one penalty. What a mess.
Click to expand...
To me that's exactly why it needs addressing. To reinforce to everyone what's expected here
 
Redster said:
Are we if the view that if the VAR review was for DOGSO outside the area that they would not have come back for a freekick?
Click to expand...
Very good question. I certainly think the review would be completed for the red card to be shown. I'm not sure about restart. It has been a few years since I have read the full VAR protocol!
 
es1 said:
To me that's exactly why it needs addressing. To reinforce to everyone what's expected here
Click to expand...
Fair enough, I just think it is pretty clear already, and is no different to if time is extended to allow a penalty to be taken.
 
  • Like
Reactions: es1
Redster said:
Are we if the view that if the VAR review was for DOGSO outside the area that they would not have come back for a freekick?
Click to expand...
Really good question. I don't think such an event has happened yet. But I can't imagine the free kick not being allowed; and, I'm almost certain rebounds will be allowed regardless of what the laws say.
 
Ryanj91 said:
How is that handball? His arm is practically by his side. What else can he possibly do? Also it looks like it's on the sleeve?
Click to expand...
Yeah sorry I know we are focussed on the extra time after the penalty but that “handball” is the closest thing to objectively NOT a handball you can get without it not actually touching him. Absolutely shocking decision.
 
Max2 said:
Furthermore, if players / managers / comentators would just shut the hell up and LISTEN to the officials rather than screaming at them that they're all cheating c**ts, then they'll have the answer.
Click to expand...
This hits the nail on the head. People don't want an objective answer, they want the reason they can't have what they want (a decision, a win, a tight call) to be somebody's fault.

Even with increased consistency, we need referees because interpretation of the laws is often subjective, so someone has to do it. In more complex cases, like this, even where the decision is ultimately objective (ie. the law says you're offside in this case), players, managers and spectators still feel the answer itself is subjective and therefore arguable.
 
Martiju said:
This hits the nail on the head. People don't want an objective answer, they want the reason they can't have what they want (a decision, a win, a tight call) to be somebody's fault.

Even with increased consistency, we need referees because interpretation of the laws is often subjective, so someone has to do it. In more complex cases, like this, even where the decision is ultimately objective (ie. the law says you're offside in this case), players, managers and spectators still feel the answer itself is subjective and therefore arguable.
Click to expand...
The problem as I see it, is not that they feel the answer is subjective but that it is objective as a result of not knowing/understanding the law.

We've an example here of 2 players whom both hold in the wisdom a belief that you can't be Offside if the ball is played backwards. So they are saying the decision is wrong based on an objective view point not consistent with the law.

Reading comments online there are all manner of objective reasoning as to why the decision was wrong. Behind that is a misunderstanding of the rules. Plain and simple.

Where that stems from is likely LWR..I think before I became a ref I probably thought the same, so I'm not blaming them.
 
RustyRef said:
I'm lost for words. Eric Dier is caught on camera and audio arguing with the referee at full time saying that Kane cannot be offside as the ball was played backwards, Danny Makellie rightly laughs him off. And now in the studio Rio Ferdinand is saying that no footballer understands that it can still be offside if the ball is played backwards. These are people paid hundreds of thousands of pounds a week and they don't know a basic law, it is absolutely ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Be fair. This would have been onside before the laws distinguished between a defender "deflecting" or "playing" the ball. The only offside possible from a ball played back would be the attacker also coming back from nearer the goal line to interfere with play.

With a delayed VAR decision, is there a definitive answer to whether the clock should be rewound to when the decision should have been made?

Big Cat said:
In the first few pages of 'The Art of Refereeing', the Author talks about an unhealthy relationship between Referees and players (the wider football community). We're too keen to mock their lack of understanding of the Laws. It's the same in many disciplines and sports. All footballers want, is for us to show up and give the game a sense of fairness and promote the enjoyment as best we can. I don't blame them for not picking the book up. Besides, most Referees couldn't articulate the offside Law, so why should players be able to do so. Indeed, most Referees struggle with the book full-stop cos it's a jumbled mess of a pamphlet. Perhaps if the book was re-written from scratch (or two books re-written from scratch) by people who are competent at doing so, it would be more accessible and much easier to interpret by Refs and players alike

In a nutshell and having seen it from both sides, both players (and the wider footy community) and R's are guilty 'us & them' attitude
Click to expand...
Sir Stanley Rous concurs.

RustyRef said:
If you are a defender paid millions of pounds a year it is criminal that you don't know the law that you will encounter several times in every single game. The heating industry has a governing body, but a boiler engineer isn't going to get away with saying he didn't know about a regulation shortly after he's blown a house up. Don't try to defend the indefensible
Click to expand...
I'm trying to remember the boys' mag in the 60s (Wizard?) with a cartoon goalkeeper who knew the rules and if he was about to be charged would throw the ball away as you could only be charged when in possession of the ball. Not that it bothered Nat Lofthouse.

Most players know the GK now can't be touched when in possession but they also know the referee knows the six second rule and is ignoring it. Do we expect players to learn the laws and know when they can be disapplied?
 
bloovee said:
I'm trying to remember the boys' mag in the 60s (Wizard?) with a cartoon goalkeeper who knew the rules and if he was about to be charged would throw the ball away as you could only be charged when in possession of the ball. Not that it bothered Nat Lofthouse.

Most players know the GK now can't be touched when in possession but they also know the referee knows the six second rule and is ignoring it. Do we expect players to learn the laws and know when they can be disapplied?
Click to expand...

Its all about managing expectation.

As you rightly say, barge the gk, its expected to be a foul

Gk holds ball 14 secs, nobody expects a fk.

The players and coaches know fine well what expectations are.
 
bloovee said:
Be fair. This would have been onside before the laws distinguished between a defender "deflecting" or "playing" the ball. The only offside possible from a ball played back would be the attacker also coming back from nearer the goal line to interfere with play.
Click to expand...
I am being fair, I could be far harsher. If I was his manager he'd be getting fined 2 weeks wages and be facing a laws of the game test after those two weeks were up 😂

Football is seriously the only profession where it is deemed OK to not know the regulations that you operate under. It is totally nonsensical.
 
bloovee said:
I'm trying to remember the boys' mag in the 60s (Wizard?) with a cartoon goalkeeper who knew the rules and if he was about to be charged would throw the ball away as you could only be charged when in possession of the ball. Not that it bothered Nat Lofthouse.

Most players know the GK now can't be touched when in possession but they also know the referee knows the six second rule and is ignoring it. Do we expect players to learn the laws and know when they can be disapplied?
Click to expand...
Ah but zero players know that it is an offence …if the GK has any part of the arm touching the ball… and many other details… that really are simple to understand and vital to understand how football is officiated.

(Obvs the historical format of the law book has a lot to answer for!)
 
They shouldn't be operating two offside systems in the same game, especially with significantly different standard errors.

Astonished that they can't track the ball position.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top