A&H

Webb’s VAR show starts Monday

The Referee Store
Great news! Bringing what he implemented in MLS to the Prem. Excited to tune in.

Any idea how we can tune in from outside the UK? Do we need a Sky subscription or something? Or will it go up on YouTube like MLS does it?
 
Last edited:
Sky are relatively good at putting clips up on youtube - I see loads of the current stuff with Dermot Gallaher go up on there. No guarantees or anything, but I wouldn't be surprised to see at least some clips on there.
 
Was a nice insight, but I’d like to have seen some slightly more controversial clips. Hopefully this is just a starting point for this stuff
 
  • Like
Reactions: es1
RustyRef said:
They only had a set amount of time so were obviously limited in what they could show. Thought it was really interesting personally, and very clear why Howard Webb was such a good referee as he is an outstanding communicator.
Click to expand...
This stood out to me more than the clips.
Very little if any use of gap words. All questions answered clear and concise.

The VAR audio itself.
-very surprised to only hear one clip calling the touches of the players
-Anthony Taylor being referred to as Tayls. Made me chuckle a bit
 
RustyRef said:
They only had a set amount of time so were obviously limited in what they could show. Thought it was really interesting personally, and very clear why Howard Webb was such a good referee as he is an outstanding communicator.
Click to expand...
Absolutely, great communicator. Shame about some of his decision making ;)

Agree with @Runner-Ref - it was great as an introduction to how the process works, but the real test will be how they handle explaining incidents where the process didn't work or where VAR makes a questionable call to get involved or not get involved.

We've seen with Dermot Gallaher for years, explaining decisions is relatively easy when there's a clearly correct action that's been carried out, even when it is based on obscure law. But Webb having to judge when and how to publicly slate referees (who are now effectively his subordinates) is going to be where we really see how committed to "transparency" they are.
 
I enjoyed watching the clips on social media of the process. Not sure why they choose the Chelsea Liverpool handball clip mind, that was pretty obvious and there wasn't anything insightful there.

Clearly the Newcastle pen overturn was more interesting but I'm not sure I agree with both the VAR/AVAR both saying out loud "I don't think that is a penalty" as Chris Kavanagh will hear that and it already placing the seeds into his head he must overturn even before seeing it again. At the end of the day it's the refs opinion and not the VAR's(and certainly not the AVAR).

I would of loved to of seen a clip of where the referee rejected a review and the communication behind that.
 
Great to get some insight here - credit to him for doing this and explaining the thought process so well.

I was surprised as I thought both (1) the Newcastle penalty and (2) HW’s suggestion that Toney should’ve been penalised for holding before the penalty incident against Bournemouth weren’t C&O errors, and it felt like re-refereeing the game (especially as in both cases the ref said what he saw on the field).

But maybe there’s nothing wrong with that and I just need to recalibrate what “clear and obvious” means in my head…
 
It was an interesting watch and would be good if made a regular thing, but it still had the feel of we will only show some carefully selected clips. What would be good to see/hear is the interaction between the officials of some situations where on first viewing there appears to have been a blatant foul or incident, nothing was given on-field, we hear in commentary it's been reviewed and play continues.

No doubt there will be some on here that will want to shoot me down for this, but I have an issue with expressions like not wanting to re-referee incidents, as for me the VAR process essentially does re-referee when the on-field decision ultimately gets reversed/overturned.
 
David F said:
Great to get some insight here - credit to him for doing this and explaining the thought process so well.

I was surprised as I thought both (1) the Newcastle penalty and (2) HW’s suggestion that Toney should’ve been penalised for holding before the penalty incident against Bournemouth weren’t C&O errors, and it felt like re-refereeing the game (especially as in both cases the ref said what he saw on the field).

But maybe there’s nothing wrong with that and I just need to recalibrate what “clear and obvious” means in my head…
Click to expand...
I think you are interpreting C&O as based on the referee's perception of the incident. C&O is based on whether the decision that has been made can be justified in law.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kes
Paul_10 said:
Clearly the Newcastle pen overturn was more interesting but I'm not sure I agree with both the VAR/AVAR both saying out loud "I don't think that is a penalty" as Chris Kavanagh will hear that and it already placing the seeds into his head he must overturn even before seeing it again. At the end of the day it's the refs opinion and not the VAR's(and certainly not the AVAR).
Click to expand...
I don’t believe Chris Kav hears that. Only hears the var conversation from when the button is pressed so from the moment of “Chris, its Michael”
 
Paul_10 said:
I enjoyed watching the clips on social media of the process. Not sure why they choose the Chelsea Liverpool handball clip mind, that was pretty obvious and there wasn't anything insightful there.

Clearly the Newcastle pen overturn was more interesting but I'm not sure I agree with both the VAR/AVAR both saying out loud "I don't think that is a penalty" as Chris Kavanagh will hear that and it already placing the seeds into his head he must overturn even before seeing it again. At the end of the day it's the refs opinion and not the VAR's(and certainly not the AVAR).

I would of loved to of seen a clip of where the referee rejected a review and the communication behind that.
Click to expand...
Would Kavanagh hear that part of the conversation or was that just the VAR/AVAR speaking amongst themselves? I know the VAR has a button to press when he wants to communicate with the referee as obviously there's no need/benefit for the referee to hear every comment the VAR might make at Stockley Park.

I guess the Chelsea V Liverpool game had the advantage of being fairly brief (timings important for TV purposes) and was a prety straightforward example of the on-field referee thinking he'd seen one thing and the VAR having evidence of something else. It was also an example of where an OFR isn't necessary so it was probably a useful introduction for someone who doesn't really follow refereeing/LOTG at all.

Some of the clips are included here if anyone's not seen them - the show on BT also included a red card shown in the Wolves V Leeds game which I don't think was shown on Sky
https://twitter.com/x/status/1658395590047219713
 
Degnann said:
I don’t believe Chris Kav hears that. Only hears the var conversation from when the button is pressed so from the moment of “Chris, its Michael”
Click to expand...

That's a fair point in fairness and could well be the case. Unfortunately people are going to think what we heard last night is what the referees hear and seemingly have an influence on a decision before seeing it again themselves, I think Carragher was kind of making that point also.
 
Paul_10 said:
That's a fair point in fairness and could well be the case. Unfortunately people are going to think what we heard last night is what the referees hear and seemingly have an influence on a decision before seeing it again themselves, I think Carragher was kind of making that point also.
Click to expand...
That is definitely the case. The communication to the referee is only made once they decide a check may be needed, that's why he said "Chris, it's Michael".

Carragher's point was more that the VAR was telling the referee what he had seen before showing him the angles. And he answered well, in that it was to avoid wasting time, if VAR have already spent a couple of minutes working out if there is a C&O error you don't want to referee spending the same amount of time at the screen.
 
The camera(s) never lie.
If the referee is making a KMD during a match based on the split second view and the angle that they have but the camera shows "otherwise" then VAR/AVAR intervention has to be a good thing.
As a Newcastle fan, I was delighted when Kav awarded the penalty, but as a referee, was totally content (if a little disappointed 😞) that the VAR bodies ensured the correct outcome was achieved.
 
Talk**** presenters failing to justify why having ex players or even current players in the room at Stockley pk. F***wits!
 
santa sangria said:
Talk**** presenters failing to justify why having ex players or even current players in the room at Stockley pk. F***wits!
Click to expand...
I’ve never really understood the ex-players argument. Some ex-pros have tried and failed to progress through the system

On top of that; being an ex-player doesn’t automatically make someone a good coach/manager (or pundit!)

I would love to see an ex-pro take charge of a National League or Football League game though
 
They might be able to help in judging player behaviour, e.g. whether the contact involved was enough to bring the player down, but they will never be able to make decisions as they don't know the laws. On MoTD the pundits were discussing the need for ex-pros to be in the VAR room, then 5 minutes later said that a goal disallowed for offside by VAR should have been allowed as the pass was played backwards. It was literally the worst ever job application and interview 😂
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top