Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Albion] Justice
- Thread starter Sheebo
- Start date
Buzzer
Languidly Clinical
- Oct 1, 2006
- 26,121
After that silly nonsense with Chelsea fans in our home end asking for shirts, it's great to see these pictures and really made up for young Theo. A moment to remember forever, well played.
el punal
Well-known member
This is all rather wonderful I know, but isn't it about time someone ran onto the pitch and asked for the ref's shirt? 
clippedgull
Hotdogs, extra onions
This is all rather wonderful I know, but isn't it about time someone ran onto the pitch and asked for the ref's shirt?
I'll
to that 
Especially if this is the ref on the day!I'll probably get a slap round the face instead though
But will they? Not unless the ref calls for VAR, is it not?
el punal
Well-known member
I'll
I'll probably get a slap round the face instead though
View attachment 94093
No pain! No gain!
clippedgull
Hotdogs, extra onions
Just pulled this from Wikipedia.. the referee can request a VAR review or the VAR can suggest a review even though the referee may not have asked for it. Referee has final decision.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_assistant_referee
I'll
I'll probably get a slap round the face instead though
View attachment 94093
When she gets promoted, does she throw her shorts into the crowd?
The laws of the game make the referee the ultimate authority of any given game. The laws are written such that something is a foul if, in the opinion of the referee, it's a foul (regardless of what anyone else thinks). Football authorities don't want to change this. They don't want to undermine the ref's authority by overruling him. It's why retrospective action is limited to incident the referee missed rather than anything the masses (or even the footballing authorities) disagree with (though the FA have introduced a proviso to circumvent this in extreme situations). It's why Dermot Gallagher, passing judgement on the weekend's decisions on SSN on a Monday, is so reluctant to say 'I wouldn't have given it' or 'he got that wrong' (though he will say the latter if there is an obvious error), instead frequently saying 'I can see why he's given it' (while explaining what the law is and why the commentators/pundits/fans are misunderstanding it).
Given this, I don't think it would be revisited by VAR. The referee had a clear view of the incident so wouldn't ask for it, and the video assistant isn't looking at the decision and asking 'would I have made that decision?' he's asking, much like Dermot Gallagher on a Monday morning, 'can I see why it was given?' As soft a it is, Stephens did have a hold of the guy, which you're not supposed to do. Yeah, I know it usually goes unpunished (and goals on sunday showed an almost identical incident earlier in the match when the stoke defender was holding Ulloa). Yes, the Stoke player was holding Stephens, too, but that doesn't mean Stephens wasn't holding him. As such the video assistant would say 'I can see why it's given' so wouldn't recommended a review (especially as he will also know the ref will have had a clear view of the incident and not be missing something). The VAR would have had the exact same response if, with the exact same incident, the ref had given it the other way, and if the ref had just waved it away as six and half a dozen.
VAR is not going to make the massive difference some people think (or at least the current iteration of it won't). A decision won't be looked at just because it's or soft, or not what 99/100 neutral football fans would give or what the pundits would give. There will be many decisions, and I think it would include yesterday's penalty, that won't be looked at again that will upset fans. Annoyingly, I suspect the Dunk challenge would have been looked at (ref was the wrong side of the box for a clear view, and VAR wouldn't be able to look at the challenge and easily understand why the ref didn't give it)
Razzoo
Well-known member
I have always felt this to be the case too.