Topic: VAR! Video Assistant Referee & Shite Referees in General

[stoa]

Dermots a fucking liar too - he keeps saying the Protocols mean the ref cannot be sent to the screen by himself and blames IFAB for this. This is from the fucking IFAB website :-

The referee can initiate a ‘review’ for a potential ‘clear and obvious error’ or ‘serious missed incident’ when:

the VAR (or another match official) recommends a ‘review’

the referee suspects that something serious has been ‘missed’

https://www.theifab.com/laws/latest/video-assistant-referee-var-protocol/#procedures

Yates is sat on the floor yelling he's been punched and saying look at the screen. Hooper (the Spurs fan???) could, under the rules, ask to review the footage, as he, from the players reaction, may think that he might have missed something

Whenever they cite the 'VAR protocol' it makes my blood boil, because they only do it when it fits their narrative (like why nothing could be done about the not given Diaz goal and play had already restarted) or when they try and come up with a reason why a situation has not been reviewed (like this punch, the Endo offside, the Odegaard handball).

As you've pointed out, they don't even know the fucking process, but nobody in the media ever questions it. They all just take it at face-value, when the whole fucking protocol can be read in detail after a quick google search. What's even worse is that further down from the part you've quote the VAR protocol gives a pretty clear indication in what situations the ref should be going to look at the monitor. It's for 'subjective decisions' like did Maddison actually (try to) punch the other player or did Endo impede an attacking player in an offside position or did Odegaard deliberately play the ball with his hand. In neither of those situations did the ref go to the monitor, when according to VAR protocol he very much should have as it clearly says: "For subjective decisions, e.g. intensity of a foul challenge, interference at offside, handball considerations, an ‘on-field review’ (OFR) is appropriate". Again, this is nothing you need to be digging for in hundreds of pages of regulations. It's right there in the VAR protocol, which is about ten or eleven pages long.

[rob1966]

Why do you keep quoting rules, Rob, as if they matter? The acting rules are made on the fly...

Hopefully David Squires picks it up while browsing and sticks in in his strip.

Whenever they cite the 'VAR protocol' it makes my blood boil, because they only do it when it fits their narrative (like why nothing could be done about the not given Diaz goal and play had already restarted) or when they try and come up with a reason why a situation has not been reviewed (like this punch, the Endo offside, the Odegaard handball).

As you've pointed out, they don't even know the fucking process, but nobody in the media ever questions it. They all just take it at face-value, when the whole fucking protocol can be read in detail after a quick google search. What's even worse is that further down from the part you've quote the VAR protocol gives a pretty clear indication in what situations the ref should be going to look at the monitor. It's for 'subjective decisions' like did Maddison actually (try to) punch the other player or did Endo impede an attacking player in an offside position or did Odegaard deliberately play the ball with his hand. In neither of those situations did the ref go to the monitor, when according to VAR protocol he very much should have as it clearly says: "For subjective decisions, e.g. intensity of a foul challenge, interference at offside, handball considerations, an ‘on-field review’ (OFR) is appropriate". Again, this is nothing you need to be digging for in hundreds of pages of regulations. It's right there in the VAR protocol, which is about ten or eleven pages long.

I went looking for the bit I posted as I knew Dermot was lying, I've not read it all, which I think I will do now. I've been critical of the way they do VAR especially compared to Rugby League, but to find out that the protocols seem to have actually been well thought out is even more annoying, as its pointing to the PGMOL ignoring the protocols they fucking voted for This then casts even more doubt on the integrity of the PGMOL.

[stoa]

I went looking for the bit I posted as I knew Dermot was lying, I've not read it all, which I think I will do now. I've been critical of the way they do VAR especially compared to Rugby League, but to find out that the protocols seem to have actually been well thought out is even more annoying, as its pointing to the PGMOL ignoring the protocols they fucking voted for This then casts even more doubt on the integrity of the PGMOL.

That's what makes me angry. The protocol gives quite a good guideline on how VAR is supposed to work. It's the ref making the decisions and VAR is there to give him all the necessary information to do so, whether it's by confirming (or changing) objective decisions like was it offside or not or by showing him the video replay to make subjective decisions like was a player in an offside position interfering with play.

It should actually be pretty straightforward most of the time. Ref makes a decision then talks it over with the VAR to confirm what he thought he saw was correct or to decide he needs to take another look at it. Then when he has all the information he makes the call.

The Odegaard handball was the perfect situation for that. The ref saw Odegaard slipping and his hand moving. In his mind, the player was trying to keep himself from falling. The replay clearly shows he wasn't doing that. The ref said "His hand is on the floor". The replay clearly shows the hand was nowhere near the floor. The VAR should say "Mate, you said the hand is on the floor, but I see in the video it wasn't. Maybe you should take another look at it, to confirm what happened is what you saw". Instead, the VAR made another decision about it being a handball, which he shouldn't. His decision should be whether it was a probable clear and obvious error, which was clearly the case when the ref is describing something that never happened.

The thing is somehow the media, PGMOL and pundits have created this whole new layer in between. Suddenly the VAR isn't there to support the ref, he's there to make a decision himself. That's completely contrary to what the protocol says. The VAR isn't there to look at the Odegaard handball and say "This is or isn't a penalty". He's there to give the ref the information he needs to make the decision. At the same time, the refs need to be strong enough to say "Look, the way I saw it, it was a slip and therefore no handball, but I'm not 100 percent sure about it, let me see the video". The problem is they are operating in this environment where the VAR doesn't want to say anything about a decision maybe being wrong, because they don't want to make their mate look bad. And at the same time, we have refs who are used to being right, because they all come from a time where there was no VAR and the ref was always right, so they don't question themselves. Both those things need to change for VAR to work properly.

[Knight]

That's what makes me angry. The protocol gives quite a good guideline on how VAR is supposed to work. It's the ref making the decisions and VAR is there to give him all the necessary information to do so, whether it's by confirming (or changing) objective decisions like was it offside or not or by showing him the video replay to make subjective decisions like was a player in an offside position interfering with play.

It should actually be pretty straightforward most of the time. Ref makes a decision then talks it over with the VAR to confirm what he thought he saw was correct or to decide he needs to take another look at it. Then when he has all the information he makes the call.

The Odegaard handball was the perfect situation for that. The ref saw Odegaard slipping and his hand moving. In his mind, the player was trying to keep himself from falling. The replay clearly shows he wasn't doing that. The ref said "His hand is on the floor". The replay clearly shows the hand was nowhere near the floor. The VAR should say "Mate, you said the hand is on the floor, but I see in the video it wasn't. Maybe you should take another look at it, to confirm what happened is what you saw". Instead, the VAR made another decision about it being a handball, which he shouldn't. His decision should be whether it was a probable clear and obvious error, which was clearly the case when the ref is describing something that never happened.

The thing is somehow the media, PGMOL and pundits have created this whole new layer in between. Suddenly the VAR isn't there to support the ref, he's there to make a decision himself. That's completely contrary to what the protocol says. The VAR isn't there to look at the Odegaard handball and say "This is or isn't a penalty". He's there to give the ref the information he needs to make the decision. At the same time, the refs need to be strong enough to say "Look, the way I saw it, it was a slip and therefore no handball, but I'm not 100 percent sure about it, let me see the video". The problem is they are operating in this environment where the VAR doesn't want to say anything about a decision maybe being wrong, because they don't want to make their mate look bad. And at the same time, we have refs who are used to being right, because they all come from a time where there was no VAR and the ref was always right, so they don't question themselves. Both those things need to change for VAR to work properly.

This is a good post. The problem is that you'd be forced into many more times where a ref went to the monitor.

[Scottymuser]

This is a good post. The problem is that you'd be forced into many more times where a ref went to the monitor.

And?  Why is that a problem?  Surely we should *want*, when it is clear the refs are not good enough in this country to do what is a very challenging and highly pressured job, for them to do the job better and make fewer mistakes? 

[FlashGordon]

And?  Why is that a problem?  Surely we should *want*, when it is clear the refs are not good enough in this country to do what is a very challenging and highly pressured job, for them to do the job better and make fewer mistakes?

Because it's not a naturally stop start game.

[stoa]

This is a good post. The problem is that you'd be forced into many more times where a ref went to the monitor.

Is that worse than the VAR watching it over and over again for a minute and then coming to the conclusion that "Both players went in high"? I'm willing to take an additional break per game on average for the ref to go to the monitor, if it means we're five points (or whatever it should be) ahead now instead of level on points with Arsenal. And it's not as if it would necessarily be additional breaks in play. We already have breaks for VAR-checks. The problem is, they're still getting stuff massively wrong based on not following the proper procedure. It's even worse when you think that the top refs are supposed to make decisions in the high profile games, but with VAR you get fools like England, Coote or Hooper making those decisions.

[WhereAngelsPlay]

This is a good post. The problem is that you'd be forced into many more times where a ref went to the monitor.

We need to remove that part from the process, if the ref fucks up or misses something, then the VAR team take over and FOLLOW the fucking rules.

[4pool]

This is a good post. The problem is that you'd be forced into many more times where a ref went to the monitor.

Is that worse than the VAR watching it over and over again for a minute and then coming to the conclusion that "Both players went in high"? I'm willing to take an additional break per game on average for the ref to go to the monitor, if it means we're five points (or whatever it should be) ahead now instead of level on points with Arsenal. And it's not as if it would necessarily be additional breaks in play. We already have breaks for VAR-checks. The problem is, they're still getting stuff massively wrong based on not following the proper procedure. It's even worse when you think that the top refs are supposed to make decisions in the high profile games, but with VAR you get fools like England, Coote or Hooper making those decisions.

Here's what you're missing.

If the Ref, who was looking right at the high boot into the chest and doesn't want to give it, then the VAR comes up agreeing as he says he got the ball first, both players went in high... then the Ref goes to the monitor to appease the baying crowd... he's not going to change his opinion. It's only going to get reinforced as the "crew" sees what they want to see and justify that view.

Each time we've been screwed, except the one goal disallowed due to stupidity, the VAR crew has agreed with the Refs call. Like Odegaard handball as well. Which means the "crew" isn't going to change things. Sending the Ref to the monitor is only going to delay the inevitable of the call not being over turned.

[GreatEx]

I wonder if things would be better if the refs carried the monitor around as an oversized wrist watch. The spectacle of being summoned pitchside must be quite chastening for the old boys' club so you can see why they're reticent about doing it (not defending them, just saying I understand how their evil brains work). If the ref can just put his hand up and have a quick peek at his screen, without the crowd knowing who initiated the process, then he might be more willing to do so. It'll still be shit because they're unaccountable manc c*nts, but I'm looking for incremental grains of hope here.

[stoa]

Here's what you're missing.

If the Ref, who was looking right at the high boot into the chest and doesn't want to give it, then the VAR comes up agreeing as he says he got the ball first, both players went in high... then the Ref goes to the monitor to appease the baying crowd... he's not going to change his opinion. It's only going to get reinforced as the "crew" sees what they want to see and justify that view.

Each time we've been screwed, except the one goal disallowed due to stupidity, the VAR crew has agreed with the Refs call. Like Odegaard handball as well. Which means the "crew" isn't going to change things. Sending the Ref to the monitor is only going to delay the inevitable of the call not being over turned.

The thing is though, we don't know whether that would happen as we don't see VAR applied properly. We haven't seen Oliver going to the monitor and looking again at the boot to the chest and maybe going "Fucking hell, he really catches him with the boot". And we didn't see whoever the guy was for the Odegaard handball. Again he says in the video "His hand's on the floor, his hand's on the floor". That's the justification for not giving a penalty. And I can see why you wouldn't give a penalty, if a guy is slipping and he's putting his hand on the floor to steady himself. But the ref never saw that the hand was actually not on the floor and that Odegaard might have slipped, but the hand movement wasn't to balance himself it was to change the direction the ball is going.

That's my point. If the refs are shite then yeah this whole VAR thing is just pointless, but we simply don't know, if the refs wouldn't get to the right decision, if they actually followed the protocol, because they're not doing it. Then again just following the protocol isn't going to be enough, the refs/VARs also need to operate in an environment where getting the right decision is encouraged, especially by PGMOL, but also by the media, the clubs and the supporters. We don't need Howard Webb doing a show to justify every fuck up with the most blatant lies. We need a show where he acknowledges that mistakes happen, but they're trying everything to make as few of them as possible and to constantly improve. They don't do that. They just get out their message of "Everything is fine" and have their stooges in the media spread it.

[4pool]

Oliver saw it. It was right in front of him. He didn't want to know. Going to the monitor isn't going to change his mind. Especially when VAR is confirming no penalty.

But just for you Oliver goes over to the monitor. He sees it again. Real time, slow motion, and then thinks he did get him in the chest----just like i saw originally, but he got the ball first as VAR confirmed-- therefore no penalty.

You are just damn sure it was a pen and the Ref seeing it again will change the call. But why? Why would a Ref admit an error when the crew is already agreeing with him that it wasn't a penalty? It ain't going to happen. They've already decide it and have their excuses reasons lined up.

[rob1966]

Oliver saw it. It was right in front of him. He didn't want to know. Going to the monitor isn't going to change his mind. Especially when VAR is confirming no penalty.

But just for you Oliver goes over to the monitor. He sees it again. Real time, slow motion, and then thinks he did get him in the chest----just like i saw originally, but he got the ball first as VAR confirmed-- therefore no penalty.

You are just damn sure it was a pen and the Ref seeing it again will change the call. But why? Why would a Ref admit an error when the crew is already agreeing with him that it wasn't a penalty? It ain't going to happen. They've already decide it and have their excuses reasons lined up.

It's literally in the laws,getting the ball makes absolutely no difference, IFAB website

WHAT HAPPENS IF…


a high foot makes contact with an opponent?

A direct free kick is awarded (or penalty kick if the offence takes place in the offender’s penalty area) and the player may be shown a red or yellow card.

https://www.footballrules.com/offences-sanctions/fouls/#:~:text=a%20high%20foot%20makes%20contact,a%20red%20or%20yellow%20card.

FA Laws of the game, LAw 12 :-

PLAYING IN A DANGEROUS MANNER

Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the ball, threatens injury to someone (including the player themself) and includes preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury.

https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct



As Jay Bothroyd said on the Monday Ref Watch, anywhere else on the pitch, that's a free kick. He said Macallister turned as he knew he was going to get booted. There's no 50/50, under the laws, its a penalty

Oliver knows the Law, if he watches that back, he cannot, unless he is cheating, not give a penalty, because Law 12 says he has to and also book Doku.

[JRed]

It's literally in the laws,getting the ball makes absolutely no difference, IFAB website

WHAT HAPPENS IF…


a high foot makes contact with an opponent?

A direct free kick is awarded (or penalty kick if the offence takes place in the offender’s penalty area) and the player may be shown a red or yellow card.

https://www.footballrules.com/offences-sanctions/fouls/#:~:text=a%20high%20foot%20makes%20contact,a%20red%20or%20yellow%20card.

FA Laws of the game, LAw 12 :-

PLAYING IN A DANGEROUS MANNER

Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the ball, threatens injury to someone (including the player themself) and includes preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury.

https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct



As Jay Bothroyd said on the Monday Ref Watch, anywhere else on the pitch, that's a free kick. He said Macallister turned as he knew he was going to get booted. There's no 50/50, under the laws, its a penalty

Oliver knows the Law, if he watches that back, he cannot, unless he is cheating, not give a penalty, because Law 12 says he has to and also book Doku.

Seeing that picture again is more upsetting than seeing a picture of your girlfriend getting it on with your best mate!
It absolutely sickens me.
The most blatant penalty you could ever see and the officials did what they do. That’s almost as bad as the offside at spurs. Really makes me want to give up on football.

[rob1966]

very much so... as well as being out of control too:-

Casemiro ankle-high jump challenge on 90+7' (no VAR review?; yellow card) - https://streamin.one/v/861901be & https://twitter.com/Ballmegamind/status/1777013556879220995

Nothing to see here, good process boys

Jones does that, its get to the screen Anthony for a review , the contact from the second picture shown to baldy as he gets there and then a full speed "oh look its a leg breaker" and a 6 game ban

[Ski]

there's no mitigation here for Taylor whatsoever. he's right there, looking straight at it unobstructed. he sees how far Casemiro comes from, at what speed and with how much force and doesn't get the ball at all. yet he deems that worthy only of a yellow card.

even if he didn't have form for this kind of thing prior (which he does, lots of it), it's a red all day long.

my arse!

[Gerard00]

All things considered I think the ref in the Divers v Bayern match had a good game. I can understand the fume over Bayerns pen claim as technically its a penalty by the 'letter of the law' so as much as I would be seething if it had been given against us (and its the kind of thing that would happen to us) if its the laws of the game then so be it.  How many times has Webb tried to excuse shitty decisions because its 'by the letter of the law' - the problem is that its only applied when it suits them.

What infuriates me the most is that the potential impact of the decision gets to determine whether the law should be followed.  If that had happened outside the box does the ref give it or is it down to 'common sense' on that occasion? I can appreciate the point of view for the ref waving it off as a misunderstanding and it not being given but if thats the case then it needs to be consistent- everytime! I keep going back to Dokus kung fu kick and theres no doubt in my mind that the potential impact of giving that penalty influenced the outcome. It seems to me that theres a lot less scandal in not giving a right penalty than there is giving a wrong penalty.

[Egyptian36]

very much so... as well as being out of control too:-

Casemiro ankle-high jump challenge on 90+7' (no VAR review?; yellow card) - https://streamin.one/v/861901be & https://twitter.com/Ballmegamind/status/1777013556879220995

Surprised the VAR didn't reply it with -1 frames per millisecond like they did with Jones.
Good process boys

[Draex]

Finally some good progress.

https://theathletic.com/5039970/2024/04/11/premier-league-semi-automated-offside/?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=twitterfc&source=twitteruk

Premier League clubs have unanimously approved the use of semi-automated offside technology for the 2024-25 season.

The English top fight will use the same cameras and software that UEFA uses in the men’s Champions League.

[Redley]

Finally some good progress.

https://theathletic.com/5039970/2024/04/11/premier-league-semi-automated-offside/?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=twitterfc&source=twitteruk

Premier League clubs have unanimously approved the use of semi-automated offside technology for the 2024-25 season.

The English top fight will use the same cameras and software that UEFA uses in the men’s Champions League.

Used in the Europa too right? Cos....

[medley]

Used in the Europa too right? Cos....

May be the skynet AI system they use isn't a Liverpool fan?

[Draex]

Used in the Europa too right? Cos....

No my post literally says as used in the mens Champions League.

[swoopy]

Good! Should have been brought in sooner

[Redley]

No my post literally says as used in the mens Champions League.

Ahh excellent then

[Trump's tiny tiny hands]

Rejoice but a season too late for us.

[Barneylfc∗]

Can we get semi automated referees too?

[farawayred]

Can we get semi automated referees too?

No. We need fully automated ones.

[Ski]

the arrogance we already know all about but never ceases to amaze:

'SAOT will speed up decision-making'
Premier League Chief Football Officer Tony Scholes speaking about SAOT in February:

"We don't believe it will improve the accuracy of decision-making. What it will do is speed up the time of decision-making. It's extremely important in that regard.

[Dr. Beaker]

If we could get humans out of the process altogether, I could accept the mistakes a lot easier.

[farawayred]

Whatever PGMOL uses, they'll find a way to fuck it up. But even the foundations of every offside decision technology that has ever been proposed have been fundamentally flawed. Offside cannot be measured by an infinitely thin line. Every observable is measured within an error, absolutely everything. So the line associated with each player's position would have a thickness that will depend on (1) the accuracy of determining the moment at which the ball has been passed (which depends on frame rate, image resolution, ball elasticity, etc.) and (2) the evolution of the player's position at that time (which depends on the speed, acceleration, rotational inertia, etc.) By many estimates, that results in a line of 5-20 cm for one player. Same for the other player. What happens when the lines overlap?

Oh, I forgot, they don't, it's either or.

[Yorkykopite]

the arrogance we already know all about but never ceases to amaze:

'SAOT will speed up decision-making'
Premier League Chief Football Officer Tony Scholes speaking about SAOT in February:

"We don't believe it will improve the accuracy of decision-making. What it will do is speed up the time of decision-making. It's extremely important in that regard.

Translation: "We'll deliver our fuck-ups quicker".

[Kloppage Time]

Just saw the Maddison punch. Obviously he punches like a wet lettuce and it likely didn’t hurt the defender, but it was still a punch and a blatant red card. Spurs have had some very strange decisions this season.

Simon Hooper, same referee for the infamous disallowed Diaz goal v .......... SPURS!

[rob1966]

Finally some good progress.

https://theathletic.com/5039970/2024/04/11/premier-league-semi-automated-offside/?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=twitterfc&source=twitteruk

Premier League clubs have unanimously approved the use of semi-automated offside technology for the 2024-25 season.

The English top fight will use the same cameras and software that UEFA uses in the men’s Champions League.

Problem is, the AI only flags it up, we still need a PGMOL fuckwit to review and make the decision.

[rob1966]

Simon Hooper, same referee for the infamous disallowed Diaz goal v .......... SPURS!

And the pull back on Grealish v.........SPURS!

Bit of a pattern here........

[HardworkDedication]

Finally some good progress.

https://theathletic.com/5039970/2024/04/11/premier-league-semi-automated-offside/?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=twitterfc&source=twitteruk

Premier League clubs have unanimously approved the use of semi-automated offside technology for the 2024-25 season.

The English top fight will use the same cameras and software that UEFA uses in the men’s Champions League.

Any particular reason why the premier league aren't using the same technology as the one FIFA used in the world? I would have thought using the technology that requires a chip inside the ball would have been beneficial.

[oojason]

the arrogance we already know all about but never ceases to amaze:

'SAOT will speed up decision-making'
Premier League Chief Football Officer Tony Scholes speaking about SAOT in February:

"We don't believe it will improve the accuracy of decision-making. What it will do is speed up the time of decision-making. It's extremely important in that regard.

They may not 'believe' it - but given officials have on occasion forgot to draw the lines, have drawn them from the wrong place, or drawn them at a different frame to when the ball was kicked, for offsides... it is factually correct to say this will improve the accuracy of the decision making


I did like the statement from the Premier League about this - www.premierleague.com/news/3962262 - yet no reason given why they refused to implement it for the start of this season.

Hopefully images of the Semi-Automated Offside Technology decisions will also be made available to fans in the ground and watching on the TV asap - instead of having to take the word of inept or agenda-orientated match commentators, and waiting until half or full-time to see the images used in officials making decisions


2024: www.theguardian.com/football/2024/apr/11/premier-league-to-use-semi-automated-offside-speed-up-var-calls

2023: www.thetimes.co.uk/sport/football/article/no-automated-offside-in-the-premier-league-next-season-knlk26nfg - in full & free: https://archive.ph/wip/QCOyY

[owens_2k]

I remember the outcry after one of the first tight offside calls when VAR was introduced, think it was Son of Spurs. These lines and being offside by a toenail have become the norm now.
In reality the ref's assistants used to do a great job when you think about it. I can probably count on one hand the number of REALLY bad offside decisions from a ref assistant pre VAR.

[Draex]

Problem is, the AI only flags it up, we still need a PGMOL fuckwit to review and make the decision.

But they can't over-turn what the AI tells them, so it's a big step forward.

[farawayred]

But they can't over-turn what the AI tells them, so it's a big step forward.

They'll find a way. And I can guarantee, it will be a good process.

[rob1966]

But they can't over-turn what the AI tells them, so it's a big step forward.

They can, they can say its wrong and overrule it