Technically there is no breach of Law 4. The white is not applied externally to the sock - the sock has been cut off to expose the white sock underneath!
VAR England v Italy
- Thread starter Mintyref
- Start date
one
RefChat Addict
Only two days ago, Portugal vs Netherlands, Portugal player steps on Netherlands player's foot in a fairly similar incident. It was not only a foul, it was also a caution, second one for that matter, resulting in a send off. How the on from OP isn't a foul in the eyes of supposedly 7 out of 10 referee is beyond me.
https://streamable.com/isxc3
1:30 on the video
https://streamable.com/isxc3
1:30 on the video
Quite frankly if this were England in a World cup match, I'd rather it was reviewed and we were given a penalty although supposedly not clear and obvious rather than it never being reviewed and we don't get the penalty.
Clear and obvious is an opinion. It may be clear and obvious to VAR because of the angle they see the incident, they may have watched that in real time and spotted it straight away and deemed it clear and obvious. Just because there's a debate of should it/shouldn't it be a penalty doesn't mean that there's any less of a reason to actually review an incident because even without technology it still comes down to the opinion of one individual and that's the referee of that particular match.
Clear and obvious is an opinion. It may be clear and obvious to VAR because of the angle they see the incident, they may have watched that in real time and spotted it straight away and deemed it clear and obvious. Just because there's a debate of should it/shouldn't it be a penalty doesn't mean that there's any less of a reason to actually review an incident because even without technology it still comes down to the opinion of one individual and that's the referee of that particular match.
I am not in favour of VAR, except for ball in and out of play, but this seemed a fairly smooth application of the new system. You will inevitably see more penalties awarded because, as has been suggested, the presence of a foul (i.e. looking for that single detail) will take precedence over the question of whether it was enough to send the player down (i.e. the live holistic impression). I might have awarded that in real time anyway, as I remember calling it. Nevertheless, I wasn't surprised that it wasn't given initially; and moreover, I probably would have given it for the wrong reason!
Sorry GF there was nothing careless about having to put you foot on the floor at the end of a step, if he'd looked and decided not to avoid placing it on someone else's foot I'd give you that.
A couple of things that have come up reading some of the posts and bits on the news sites
1: Where does Alan Shearer get the 8 replays idea from. Was what was shown on TV actually what the referee saw or an attempt by broadcasters to be helpful a la the squiggly line?
2: Clear and obvious - upon being offered the chance to review the incident, the referee did so and decided that he HAD made a clear and obvious error and corrected it
1: Where does Alan Shearer get the 8 replays idea from. Was what was shown on TV actually what the referee saw or an attempt by broadcasters to be helpful a la the squiggly line?
2: Clear and obvious - upon being offered the chance to review the incident, the referee did so and decided that he HAD made a clear and obvious error and corrected it
PinnerPaul
RefChat Addict
Good viewpoints here - as usual!
However what hasn't been discussed, is the inconsistency that 'VAR decisions' such as this bring to the game.
I accept that, as per letter of the law, this was a foul.
However, in this match, is the VAR saying that NO careless holding, pushing etc went on at ANY corner kicks?
Was every throw taken from exactly the spot ball went out of play, was every free kick taken from exactly the spot of the offence?
Did both GKs release the ball after 6 seconds or less?
I could go on, but won't - you're be pleased to hear. My point is we referee matches within the framework of the laws as it were.
If we were to referee a match to the letter of the law, as is the case here with VAR review, then we wouldn't last 10 minutes before all 22 players and the managers would want to kill us!
To me VAR just adds inconsistency and delay to the game.
However what hasn't been discussed, is the inconsistency that 'VAR decisions' such as this bring to the game.
I accept that, as per letter of the law, this was a foul.
However, in this match, is the VAR saying that NO careless holding, pushing etc went on at ANY corner kicks?
Was every throw taken from exactly the spot ball went out of play, was every free kick taken from exactly the spot of the offence?
Did both GKs release the ball after 6 seconds or less?
I could go on, but won't - you're be pleased to hear. My point is we referee matches within the framework of the laws as it were.
If we were to referee a match to the letter of the law, as is the case here with VAR review, then we wouldn't last 10 minutes before all 22 players and the managers would want to kill us!
To me VAR just adds inconsistency and delay to the game.
A couple of things that have come up reading some of the posts and bits on the news sites
1: Where does Alan Shearer get the 8 replays idea from. Was what was shown on TV actually what the referee saw or an attempt by broadcasters to be helpful a la the squiggly line?
2: Clear and obvious - upon being offered the chance to review the incident, the referee did so and decided that he HAD made a clear and obvious error and corrected it
He may of thought it was a goal kick rather than a corner till some jobsworth blathered in his ear!!!
The referee doesn't have to look at the incident himself on the pitch side monitor, he can just take the advice of the VAR. My point here was once he looked at it, and I accept there was a faff and delay getting the screen up, he watched it once and immediately gave the penalty. He didn't need to watch it multiple times and from different angles, one angle was enough and he had no hesitation having seen that in giving the penalty.
Get your point about pushing and holding at corners, but throw in position, keeper handling the ball for more than 6 seconds, are not covered by VAR and even if the referee missed clear cases of these the VAR cannot intervene.
PinnerPaul
RefChat Addict
Re VAR giving decisions - are you sure that's correct for non fact based decisions, such as pens - can see that for offside but pens?
Re your last point - that's my point - so its letter of the law for some decisions and not others - regardless of whether its covered in VAR instructions or not - that is the new reality.
Re your last point - that's my point - so its letter of the law for some decisions and not others - regardless of whether its covered in VAR instructions or not - that is the new reality.
Yep, If the refs fecked up (which is not 100% clear in this case) then why does it take an equally qualified referee VAR to tell him that he 'may' of fecked up. He either has or he hasn't, the VAR is plenty qualified to make that call! Whats all this faffing about with the refs own screen. That smacks of Old school and not wanting to look out of control!!!
Rugby has this right, incident happens, Rugby VAR makes the call, not the referee on the pitch, crowd can see and understand the process and we get on with it. Crowd at Wembley hadn't a clue what was happening, right or wrong this process is an absolute mess!!
Rugby has this right, incident happens, Rugby VAR makes the call, not the referee on the pitch, crowd can see and understand the process and we get on with it. Crowd at Wembley hadn't a clue what was happening, right or wrong this process is an absolute mess!!
Covered by One's flowchart in the Laws of the game section, it is a subjective decision. It may be so obvious that the VAR simply tells him he is so wrong it is unreal, in which case the referee is going to look silly going over to the screen. We've all seen ludicrous penalty or non penalty decisions made, it doesn't need the referee to have a look at these.
I'd like to think if I was the referee I'd be trusting of the VAR. If he said to me "Rusty, you've dropped one there mate, it's a clear penalty" I'd be quite happy to accept this without having a look. Whereas if he said "You probably want to have a look at that one Rusty, he trod on his foot and to me it looks like a careless trip" then I would want to be having a look myself.
That all said, and I've said this many times before, I'd get rid of the pitch side monitor altogether. They don't need it in rugby and let the video referee make the call, and I don't think it is needed in football as they should just make sure that the VAR is the same level as the referee.
I'd like to think if I was the referee I'd be trusting of the VAR. If he said to me "Rusty, you've dropped one there mate, it's a clear penalty" I'd be quite happy to accept this without having a look. Whereas if he said "You probably want to have a look at that one Rusty, he trod on his foot and to me it looks like a careless trip" then I would want to be having a look myself.
That all said, and I've said this many times before, I'd get rid of the pitch side monitor altogether. They don't need it in rugby and let the video referee make the call, and I don't think it is needed in football as they should just make sure that the VAR is the same level as the referee.
I thought rugby tends to show what the TMO is seeing on the big screen at the same time? That way the VAR can make a recommendation and the referee can agree and just go with it, or query as he sees fit.
ladbroke8745
RefChat Addict
You can also buy earpieces to listen to what referees say to players and other refs.... another thing fans could do with to avoid doubt and confusion. In rugby, it's automatically connected to the tv so viewers at home and pub can hear too....
one
RefChat Addict
To add to Rusty's post, since VAR was introduced, I have not heard of a single OFR (On Field Review) by the referee that has gone against the VAR recommendation. Even when the recommendation was wrong (and we have had a few of those in A-League 
) . You can leave the screen on field just in case but it should be used far less often. 9/10 subjective decision recommendations should just be adapted by the referee.
EDIT: the bonus to that approach would be, VAR would feel more accountable and will not intervene unless they are reasonably certain of a clear error. Its no different to a offside call by an AR, the referee just goes with AR's call just about every time, even though the final decision is the referee's.
) . You can leave the screen on field just in case but it should be used far less often. 9/10 subjective decision recommendations should just be adapted by the referee.EDIT: the bonus to that approach would be, VAR would feel more accountable and will not intervene unless they are reasonably certain of a clear error. Its no different to a offside call by an AR, the referee just goes with AR's call just about every time, even though the final decision is the referee's.
Last edited:
Yampy
RefChat Addict
It looked to me as though there were Italy players encroaching into the penalty area before the kick was taken. Why wasn't that looked at?
The above may not be true because I haven't checked but it's a situation that will arise sooner or later. Imagine that in kicks from the penalty mark to decide a match?
Personally, the introduction of VAR is a dog's dinner. I don't want to see it, I don't think football needs it but the powers that be don't give a damn what you or I think. By the time the Ethics World Cup hits Qatar, every Tom, Dick and Harry will be able to vote with their red button or via a (subscription) website (obviously sponsored). Can't wait!
The above may not be true because I haven't checked but it's a situation that will arise sooner or later. Imagine that in kicks from the penalty mark to decide a match?
Personally, the introduction of VAR is a dog's dinner. I don't want to see it, I don't think football needs it but the powers that be don't give a damn what you or I think. By the time the Ethics World Cup hits Qatar, every Tom, Dick and Harry will be able to vote with their red button or via a (subscription) website (obviously sponsored). Can't wait!
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
I'm trying to imagine 19 players in the centre circle attempting to encroach into the penalty area... Peter Crouch loping across the acres perhaps?!?!
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
THIS!!!!
(Plus we are going to get punished for not having VAR in lower tiers-players and coaches and fans will use it against us)
One of the best things about refereeing football until recently was the fact we all had exactly the same tools......a set of laws.........no longer!