[Football] "It's not VAR, it's the people running it"

[PILTDOWN MAN]

IFAB Law 7.4 - On duration of match
If a penalty kick has to be taken or retaken, the half is extended until the penalty kick is completed.

IFAB Law 2 also states: "If at the end of the half, the referee leaves the field of play to go to the referee review area (RRA) or to instruct the players to return to the field of play, this does not prevent a decision being changed for an incident which occurred before the end of the half."

https://www.skysports.com/football/...runo-fernandes-goal-after-final-whistle-stood

OK fine I'm wrong but the prick was playing fergie time.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I don't see that the referees themselves or as a group have any say in the way that VAR is run or have any power to protect their decision making position.

The PL quite rightly knows that for VAR to have any chance of acceptance from the football world, the primacy of the referee as the ultimate arbiter has to be maintained. Or at least the illusion of that primacy. That's why we have this pantomime of the refs going over to the monitor to double check "their" decision.

Alright. In which case I will hold my hand up and say I have no idea what's going on. I was under the impression that the refereeing rubric was the interpretation of the laws of the game by the association of referees, and implemented on the pitch by the referee of the day. By refereeing rubric I mean the process of decision making made by referees.

I would argue that the acceptance of VAR is not dependent on the EPL (or FIFA) believing that 'the footballing world' (do you mean the clubs, the fans, the players?) will not accept anything other than the primacy of the referees. Someone makes decisions. Who runs football? It isn't a beauty contest or a game show is it?

Anyway....I'm confused, now. Perhaps I need to replay the correspondence and put it through an algorithm

 

[Silverhatch]

Take away the emotion and the quality of the goal - Mwepu was interfering with play with his attempted overhead kick.

It was offside imho. A shame though

In real time - as the game was refereed, there was absolutely no reason to point out any clear and obvious area. Mwepu is a toenail offside and it’s virtually impossible to see if he’s made any contact with the ball. No one on the pitch appeals. 30000 people (including many Leicester fans) and a worldwide audience are deprived a possibly career-defining strike because of a complete and utter misuse of VAR. Hated the application of VAR from day one. Yesterday was the ultimate joy-sucking-passion-killing moment. BIN IT or prescribe application rules (not laws) that make the technology usable.

 

[Bozza]

If VAR can't decide and it requires the ref to check the monitor, surely by definition it means it's not a clear and obvious error?

Well, I guess there are two options...

1. VAR ref tells on-field ref: "I think you've made an error, please go and review it on the pitchside monitor", which is essentially what we have currently, or

2. VAR ref tells on-field ref: "You've made an error, please reverse your decision."

You seem to be advocating for 2.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

OK fine I'm wrong but the prick was playing fergie time.

The real VAR travesty of that game was the overturning of a cast iron penalty, Pogba on Connolly. Absolutely no chance that gets changed if it goes the other way. The big clubs will not want VAR removed.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Quite.

Using lines to determine if someone's pubic hair is offside isn't clear and obvious.

Once you bring it VAR for offsides, you are either off side or on - there is no middle ground.

Switch it all off till you find away to fix it and people to work it.

 

[Bozza]

Quite.

Using lines to determine if someone's pubic hair is offside isn't clear and obvious.

But it never has been.

Offside is binary. On or off. Black or white. It's never had anything to do with "clear and obvious error", which is why for offsides the referee doesn't review the pitchside monitor.

(Until yesterday of course, which is what confused us all. But, again, the on-field ref wasn't reviewing whether Mwepu was offside or not - that had been determined in the VAR box. If Mwepu had connected with his overhead kick and scored, the goal would have been disallowed by the VAR ref and the on-field ref would not have gone to the screen.

But, Mwepu didn't connect, so it seems the on-field ref was being asked to review that given Mwepu WAS offside, did he interfere with play sufficiently to rule the goal out.)

 

[wellquickwoody]

Take away the emotion and the quality of the goal - Mwepu was interfering with play with his attempted overhead kick.

It was offside imho. A shame though

I prefer taking part in, and enjoying the party. Not being one of the dullards in the kitchen.

 

[BadFish]

"It seems" makes it sound like something you're not entirely sure of. Someone saying something on 5Live doesn't make it true.

That is why I used that phrase. I am not suggesting anything is or isn't true, just adding to the discussion what I heard on 5live.

I've only had a quick google, but other leagues seem to be asking the same kind of questions that we are...

Germany - https://allnewspress.com/var-in-the-bundesliga-the-solutions-are-obvious-sport/ - "And yet, even after five years, every step of the decision-making process is still controversial: When will the VAR intervene? What exactly is checked? How is it argued? With super slow motion? Even with still images that make every contact a foul? Why does it take so long? And after all, who really decides, the referee on the field, or the assistant in front of the screen?"

Spain - https://en.as.com/en/2022/03/07/opinion/1646642765_222497.html - "VAR takes away LaLiga's credibility"

Italy - https://www.juvefc.com/frustration-growing-with-inconsistent-referee-and-var-decisions-in-serie-a/ - "Frustration growing with inconsistent referee and VAR decisions in Serie A"

Your use of "I've only had a quick google . . . " Surely serves the same purpose as 'it seems'

A quick click on your first link fills in a little of the context before your quote "Last season, the DFB recorded eight missing interventions and six wrong decisions in a total of 116 interventions in its statistics. That means: 110 prevented errors." Which kind of suggests that it is doing a reasonable job.

Maybe satisfaction is low with VAR across the leagues and the premier league are doing as good/bad job as everyone else.

Either way though you seem pretty set in your thoughts on this matter and don't see any benefit in looking into how the other countries are going things so I will leave it there.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

But it never has been.

Offside is binary. On or off. Black or white. It's never had anything to do with "clear and obvious error", which is why for offsides the referee doesn't review the pitchside monitor.

(Until yesterday of course, which is what confused us all. But, again, the on-field ref wasn't reviewing whether Mwepu was offside or not - that had been determined in the VAR box. If Mwepu had connected with his overhead kick and scored, the goal would have been disallowed by the VAR ref and the on-field ref would not have gone to the screen.

But, Mwepu didn't connect, so it seems the on-field ref was being asked to review that given Mwepu WAS offside, did he interfere with play sufficiently to rule the goal out.)

Correct.

And this is not a decision that was ever possible to make before VAR. So it should not be a decision that VAR should now be required to check, I would argue.

They are using VAR as a fishing expedition, like the Starr report on Clinton, and random trawling of private phone conversations by tabloid journalists. This is not what should be happening.

 

[Acker79]

Paul Field, who is the president of The Referees' Association, has been chatting about some of the issues in refereeing on BBC Radio 4 this morning. And delivered a strong line on the current state of affairs.

"The root of the problem frankly is if we really look at it the lack of funding in refereeing around this country is a disgrace. If we’ve got a national product – the cash rich Premier League – that has multi-million pound players.

"Why would a fourteen year old go referee on local parks when they have all this hassle? I do wonder how much talent we have lost over the years when it comes to refereeing in this country because of abuse.”


-the problem appears to be the the Referee's Association have no idea who or what to blame! Is it their funding, the player's income or the abuse? Or is it in fact that for years they have refused to take on criticism, having closed ranks to defend the, sometimes indefensible, mistakes made by their members and now paying the price of rewarding past incompetences.
.

I don't think that's a fair summary. You're presenting it as contradictions when it is all linked. Where does the ref's income come from? The funding. How much abuse would you be willing to accept? It depends on your income. He is saying fund the referees and they'll be able to give them the income that makes it worth dealing with a bunch of shouty sweary men every weekend.

 

[Icy Gull]

I had to laugh when I saw the FA's decision on Moyes outburst

They KNOW VAR fecked it up completely don't they?

No punishment for a man who couldn't have been more scathing about the VAR official if he'd tried

In the aftermath of those comments, the FA have investigated the comments, according to The Times reporter Tom Roddy. He states that the decision was made that the comments did not reach the threshold necessary for disciplinary action.


https://www.msn.com/en-gb/sport/foo...pc=U531&cvid=d556840b03ee4761a7e729e17cb8b49e

 

[Bozza]

But it never has been.

Offside is binary. On or off. Black or white. It's never had anything to do with "clear and obvious error", which is why for offsides the referee doesn't review the pitchside monitor.

Replying to myself...

I think there's certainly a discussion to be had about the forensic examination of offside positions that VAR has enabled. But that's not really a VAR failing, it's a rules-of-the-game failing. The rules of the game are very clear on what constitutes an offside position...

1. Offside position
It is not an offence to be in an offside position.

A player is in an offside position if:
- any part of the head, body or feet is in the opponents’ half (excluding the halfway line) and
- any part of the head, body or feet is nearer to the opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent

The hands and arms of all players, including the goalkeepers, are not considered. For the purposes of determining offside, the upper boundary of the arm is in line with the bottom of the armpit.
A player is not in an offside position if level with the:
- second-last opponent or
- last two opponents​

VAR has meant that where "the benefit of the doubt" could previously be given to an attacking player if he looks level, can no longer be done because freeze frames and lines allow a very detailed comparison to be made.

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

That is guess work

 

[BadFish]

View attachment 151566

That is guess work

Am I missing something? WHo does the blue line connect to I can't see a defender?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Am I missing something? WHo does the blue line connect to I can't see a defender?

My question as well. When I saw the pictures in real time it looked clear that Mwepu was offside....as it still does in this picture. The discussion was about whether he interferred with play with his misskick.

 

[Bozza]

Either way though you seem pretty set in your thoughts on this matter and don't see any benefit in looking into how the other countries are going things so I will leave it there.

I have no thoughts on the matter at all. Two hours ago I couldn't have told you anything about VAR in any other country, simply because my focus is entirely on football in this country.

Actually, then, I do have a thought on the matter. My thought on the matter is that most of us are predominantly focused on football in this country, and most of us are also frustrated with VAR and are thinking "surely it can be done better than this".

So, if we catch hold of something that suggests it's all hunky-dory everywhere else, and it's just us that have royally ****ed things up then it feels like something comforting to latch onto.

Maybe it is better everywhere else, or maybe it's broadly the same. A quick search - because I need to do that as, day-to-day, I pay little attention to other football leagues - suggests that at the very least some similar discussions have been and/or are happening around VAR implementations in other leagues.

 

[beorhthelm]

Quite.

Using lines to determine if someone's pubic hair is offside isn't clear and obvious.

i dont know why the "clear and obvious" was removed for offside. VAR has a place for obvious failures of linesman, if they are drawing lines its not obvious so dont use it. im sure we where promised it wouldnt be hawkeye for offside which is exactly what its become, forensically checking lines, which are inches wide, drawn from inconsistent points and arbitary angles, then still getting it wrong.

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

Am I missing something? WHo does the blue line connect to I can't see a defender?

Exactly, we can all see he looks offside but where does that line come from? Were they trying to get him inside but failed? Whatever they were doing they have completely guessed a decision which they tell us is a matter of fact until it isn't.

 

[BadFish]

My question as well. When I saw the pictures in real time it looked clear that Mwepu was offside....as it still does in this picture. The discussion was about whether he interferred with play with his misskick.

That is what I thought, I am not even getting into that though I don't understand the whole interferring with play thing. I always think that if you are in an around the ball you need to be monitored by the defenders so that is interfering with play. This isn't right though.