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

[rushyman]

Anyone else believe the media have been briefed to give it an easy ride and not focus too much on any individual incidents/fuck ups? It seems to me that some of the lack of interventions from VAR have been given a ridiculously easy ride from Sky etc. Be interesting to see how they cover one when it happens in a big match, especially later on in the season.

It’s painfully obvious now

They don’t want to use it and undermine refs.

Refs wanted the pressure taken off them, they were given VAR. But now it’s a case of ‘fuck off im never wrong’ and the pressure has switched from them to the lack of use of VAR

The big elephant in the room is all these arseholes are household names and have egos the size of houses. Bin them

[4pool]

English refs doing a terrible job on the field and as VAR officlals..who could have predicted.

Who could have predicted Mike Rileys boys taking care of Mike Rileys boys...
( Said this years ago)

But again, it seems factual evidence that in Germany, Spain, Italy...supporters have protested against VAR.... falls on deaf ears in England and this forum. As if their Refs are far superior to Rileys lads. Or that they are better at utilizing VAR. If VAR was running smoothly, why the protests in other Countries?

Only VAR advocates persist with, well they overturn some errors so the game is better for it.

Now we have what VAR has a remit to do, correct clear and obvious errors, brought into question. As ever, it's about judgement on virtually all of VAR's remit except maybe the offside rule. And even that is different in various Leagues and Cups depending on when or if the Assistant Ref flags. It is not universally administered the same.

But, hey ho, VAR is here to stay for various reasons.

[redgriffin73]

Anyone else believe the media have been briefed to give it an easy ride and not focus too much on any individual incidents/fuck ups? It seems to me that some of the lack of interventions from VAR have been given a ridiculously easy ride from Sky etc. Be interesting to see how they cover one when it happens in a big match, especially later on in the season.

Certainly feels that way, all I can remember is Jenas I think having a rant on a MOTD a few weeks ago and since then it's like they've all been told to pipe down on it.

[rob1966]

OK sorry I must have conflated your view with others. Can definitely fully agree English refs are doing terribly. I'm just saying that some people are in denial that the system itself is also fatally flawed, even if operated by peak Collina clones

I don't get what you are arguing about when you say the system is fatally flawed? Its a load of cameras, with playback on screens that referees can watch, how is that flawed?

It’s painfully obvious now

They don’t want to use it and undermine refs.

Refs wanted the pressure taken off them, they were given VAR. But now it’s a case of ‘fuck off im never wrong’ and the pressure has switched from them to the lack of use of VAR

The big elephant in the room is all these arseholes are household names and have egos the size of houses. Bin them

The arrogance of these c*nts is unbelieveable. Its not like I'm some kid, I'm almost 53 and I don't get the kids obsession with devices, but fuck me, I can see the massive advantage of being able to say "god that happened that fast, I'm not sure, please check it for me". I work as a software developer, none of us are shy about asking the others for advice, or checking something. You make mistakes, its part of being human - I've had my boss, who knows far more than me, ask me why some code he has written isn't working and it's been a basic error. It is more annoying when people DONT ask for help.

[wenlock]

Anyone else believe the media have been briefed to give it an easy ride and not focus too much on any individual incidents/fuck ups? It seems to me that some of the lack of interventions from VAR have been given a ridiculously easy ride from Sky etc. Be interesting to see how they cover one when it happens in a big match, especially later on in the season.

I said that to my sons after the games yesterday. I am noticing moments of complete silence when usually I would hear an explanation of what I was seeing. They have either been briefed to give VAR and the refs leeway or they can see this is all bollocks and they wont lie about what we are seeing. The best they often seem capable of is posing an indirect question like 'I thought they said that would be a pen in the pre season rule change directives' or whatever.

We can all see these things and they can't really be avoided like they could before with all the briefing that we had. Having one of theirs (an ex ref) in the studio doesn't always help now either. They try their hardest to help their mates out and paint themselves in a corner explaining the finer points of the rule and its interpretation ....then the next game we see that incident being judged differently, how?

Rules that are as clear as fucking mud.

I had a few bets last year. I have always avoided betting on us even in our dominant years because of superstition but figured thats crap so grow up. Came in nicely with big ears and Mane/Salah bets.

I mulled over more bets before this season and the prices were so shit but the thing that put me off the most? These bent looking refs. I don't understand how anyone plans bets with these corrupt looking fuckers unless they are in the know.

The trouble with VAR is the refs. The team in the VAR booth should not be refs and should be totally independant of them. This is like the police investigating wrong doing by the police, they don't really do that for a reason.

[classycarra]

I don't get what you are arguing about when you say the system is fatally flawed? Its a load of cameras, with playback on screens that referees can watch, how is that flawed?

You keep saying the system is fine, the only problem is the refs. I've given you examples from just this season alone where VAR has failed and not because of the referee, but because of Hawkeye and the TV broadcasters who provide the footage.

If they can't sort out the camera streams and replays for something as simple as replaying three seconds before a goal (Newcaslte PL handball), or access an angle that shows Abraham dived over Adrian in that lengthy stoppage of play until ten minutes later (Super Cup), let alone avoid accidentally wasting four minutes during Arsenal game, then the easy part of the system (camera and editing tech is pretty established technology )  is pretty fundamentally flawed. That's all without mentioning the additional problems caused by the refs

[PhaseOfPlay]

I said that to my sons after the games yesterday. I am noticing moments of complete silence when usually I would hear an explanation of what I was seeing. They have either been briefed to give VAR and the refs leeway or they can see this is all bollocks and they wont lie about what we are seeing. The best they often seem capable of is posing an indirect question like 'I thought they said that would be a pen in the pre season rule change directives' or whatever.

We can all see these things and they can't really be avoided like they could before with all the briefing that we had. Having one of theirs (an ex ref) in the studio doesn't always help now either. They try their hardest to help their mates out and paint themselves in a corner explaining the finer points of the rule and its interpretation ....then the next game we see that incident being judged differently, how?

Rules that are as clear as fucking mud.

I had a few bets last year. I have always avoided betting on us even in our dominant years because of superstition but figured thats crap so grow up. Came in nicely with big ears and Mane/Salah bets.

I mulled over more bets before this season and the prices were so shit but the thing that put me off the most? These bent looking refs. I don't understand how anyone plans bets with these corrupt looking fuckers unless they are in the know.

The trouble with VAR is the refs. The team in the VAR booth should not be refs and should be totally independant of them. This is like the police investigating wrong doing by the police, they don't really do that for a reason.

Who should it be then? They have to have a thorough knowledge of the laws of the game. Which would mean being qualified referees. 

[farawayred]

Who should it be then? They have to have a thorough knowledge of the laws of the game. Which would mean being qualified referees. 

Except for the physical fitness tests. They don't need those when they sit in a chair. Retired referees could be an option.

[wenlock]

Who should it be then? They have to have a thorough knowledge of the laws of the game. Which would mean being qualified referees.

No Idea  but having refs policing refs wont work in my opinion. People can be trained, the jobs are different anyway to an extent. One requires fitness and keeping up with play while the other is more tech related.

Train them for their given job like any other proffession. It helps that footy is so popular anyway so people should be familiar with most of the rules.



Edited to add...

The beachball incident. I knew it should have been disallowed, didn't anyone that's ever played at sunday league or higher? Ref gave the goal and apparently didn't know that rule so his training got him nowhere there. Wasn't Bruce the manager, anyway he didnt know the rule either or Bent who I believe played the billiard shot with it. All those football people who didn't actually know the rules of their trade.

[4pool]

Being familiar with "most" of the rules is not the same as interpreting the Laws of the Game.

Years of experience on the pitch, making mistakes and having them reviewed so that you correct them, is why actual Refs are used as VAR assistants.

[PhaseOfPlay]

No Idea  but having refs policing refs wont work in my opinion. People can be trained, the jobs are different anyway to an extent. One requires fitness and keeping up with play while the other is more tech related.

Train them for their given job like any other proffession. It helps that footy is so popular anyway so people should be familiar with most of the rules.

They aren't though - you can see  that here every week when there's a contentious decision in one of the games.

On top of that, though, the VAR refs aren't "policing" the centre ref. They are assistants with a different point of view. The ref on the field is still supposed to be the final arbiter of the game right now.

[wenlock]

Being familiar with "most" of the rules is not the same as interpreting the Laws of the Game.

Years of experience on the pitch, making mistakes and having them reviewed so that you correct them, is why actual Refs are used as VAR assistants.

I disagree. Years of fine tuning SHOULD improve their decision making but doesn't, or else why are we even bothering with VAR? Surely there has to be a need to start with so they aren't doing a good job regardless of their years of training and review work.

[rob1966]

You keep saying the system is fine, the only problem is the refs. I've given you examples from just this season alone where VAR has failed and not because of the referee, but because of Hawkeye and the TV broadcasters who provide the footage.

If they can't sort out the camera streams and replays for something as simple as replaying three seconds before a goal (Newcaslte PL handball), or access an angle that shows Abraham dived over Adrian in that lengthy stoppage of play until ten minutes later (Super Cup), let alone avoid accidentally wasting four minutes during Arsenal game, then the easy part of the system (camera and editing tech is pretty established technology )  is pretty fundamentally flawed. That's all without mentioning the additional problems caused by the refs

Not being funny with you, but I've not seen any evidence that Hawkeye are doing this, do you have a link?

[wenlock]

They aren't though - you can see  that here every week when there's a contentious decision in one of the games.

On top of that, though, the VAR refs aren't "policing" the centre ref. They are assistants with a different point of view. The ref on the field is still supposed to be the final arbiter of the game right now.

My word but it fits in my opinion. Incidents are judged on pitch and also policed in the booth on a screen. If the booth overturns something it's been policed hasn't it? Maybe that's the confusion because there is no policing due to no VAR actions overturning even the most obvious incidents it seems.

[4pool]

I disagree. Years of fine tuning SHOULD improve their decision making but doesn't, or else why are we even bothering with VAR? Surely there has to be a need to start with so they aren't doing a good job regardless of their years of training and review work.

You have an "opinion" on pen-no pen. Red card offense or not. You'd make a great VAR official until such time as your rear hits the seat. Then you'll have millions disagree with you and claim you don't know what you're doin'.

[PhaseOfPlay]

My word but it fits in my opinion. Incidents are judged on pitch and also policed in the booth on a screen. If the booth overturns something it's been policed hasn't it? Maybe that's the confusion because there is no policing due to no VAR actions overturning even the most obvious incidents it seems.

The lotg clearly state, even in the newly added VAR section, that the decision of the centre ref is still final. So it's the centre ref you should be looking at, in that case. VAR isn't there to overturn decisions, it's to say "might want to rethink that"

[rob1966]

Who should it be then? They have to have a thorough knowledge of the laws of the game. Which would mean being qualified referees. 

How long does it take to qualify as a referee? I ask this as I cannot see why they couldn't have started a training programme as soon as they knew VAR was coming, where they taught the laws and you became a qualified referee at the end. There would be thousands (at least) of people who could learn the laws and do the job, but don't want to run around fields getting abused and attacked as part of their training.

[rob1966]

The lotg clearly state, even in the newly added VAR section, that the decision of the centre ref is still final. So it's the centre ref you should be looking at, in that case. VAR isn't there to overturn decisions, it's to say "might want to rethink that"

VAR shouldn't even be that. The on field officials should be competent enough and honest enough to use it when unsure, VAR shouldn't be telling them. That is how Rugby does it.

[classycarra]

Not being funny with you, but I've not seen any evidence that Hawkeye are doing this, do you have a link?

BT explained the Super Cup live on their footage, during the break in extra time. This article refers to the same thing, but with a different broadcaster (BEin sports) https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/var-slammed-another-flaw-after-18936760

The Arsenal game one I'm sure you don't need a link, you must have seen the footage after or during the game.

It's described in this minute by minute report of the game:
"35: There’s a VAR check for a potential red card at Anfield. They are checking to see whether David Luiz swung an elbow in the penalty area. We can’t actually see that - and nobody in the stadium knows what’s happening either."
https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/1169656/Liverpool-Arsenal-Premier-League-TV-Channel-Live-Stream-Kick-Off-Time-Nicolas-Pepe-Latest

Game kicked off three or four minutes later when it became apparent there was nothing even checked.

The Newcastle goal probably doesn't need a link, it's self-evident. The rule is entirely objective now, so if the ref is shown the replay that was eventually shown on Match of the Day highlights, he'd have disallowed it. But here's a link from a journalist for The Athletic who asked after the game https://twitter.com/AdamLeventhal/status/1167906093785202689 Mike Riley, when doing his PR managing of VAR's issues with shareholders, said that those four examples were issues with the VAR or with the process. Since this was the only one of the four that wasn't checked for a long time during a VAR pause I think it's a safe assumption that it's the one where 'the process' rather than the ref was the problem

[rob1966]

BT explained the Super Cup live on their footage, during the break in extra time. This article refers to the same thing, but with a different broadcaster (BEin sports) https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/var-slammed-another-flaw-after-18936760

The Arsenal game one I'm sure you don't need a link, you must have seen the footage after or during the game.

It's described in this minute by minute report of the game:
"35: There’s a VAR check for a potential red card at Anfield. They are checking to see whether David Luiz swung an elbow in the penalty area. We can’t actually see that - and nobody in the stadium knows what’s happening either."
https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/1169656/Liverpool-Arsenal-Premier-League-TV-Channel-Live-Stream-Kick-Off-Time-Nicolas-Pepe-Latest

Game kicked off three or four minutes later when it became apparent there was nothing even checked.

The Newcastle goal probably doesn't need a link, it's self-evident. The rule is entirely objective now, so if the ref is shown the replay that was eventually shown on Match of the Day highlights, he'd have disallowed it. But here's a link from a journalist for The Athletic who asked after the game https://twitter.com/AdamLeventhal/status/1167906093785202689 Mike Riley, when doing his PR managing of VAR's issues with shareholders, said that those four examples were issues with the VAR or with the process. Since this was the only one of the four that wasn't checked for a long time during a VAR pause I think it's a safe assumption that it's the one where 'the process' rather than the ref was the problem

Nothing there backs up your claims that Hawkeye are choosing what and what not to show in the VAR room. Andy Gray is making assumptions, based on what was shown on the telly, of what the VAR officials saw, when the truth is, he has no clue what they did or didn't see (and for the journalist, it is right decision, not write decision). In the pic below, there are 8 different angles on the desktop screen alone. The Premier League says there is a VAR (video assistant referee) and AVAR and a replay operator. From my experience of watching RL, the referee asks for the replay, so I would think that the VAR tells the Replay Operator how far back to go and what angles to show.



As for the Newcastle one, having read a few sites, I interpret that as the Video Assistant Referees, ie the human beings in the control room, simply missed the handball. There is nothing to suggest they weren't shown or saw that passage of play, but they just didn't, for whatever reason, see it. It;s not the technologies fault if the refs don't rewind far enough.

Again, human error, not flaws in the technology.

[classycarra]

Nothing there backs up your claims that Hawkeye are choosing what and what not to show in the VAR room.

Sorry but you have no credibility if that's your view. Go back and watch Carragher and Neville speaking to the refs and the hawkeye technicians before our game against Norwich. They introduce the system and show it in action. I'm not making a claim, it's simple fact. Do you really think premier league refs are also professional editors

You can read it from the horses mouth if you still somehow deny reality https://www.hawkeyeinnovations.com/products/smart/smart-replay

Andy Gray is making assumptions, based on what was shown on the telly, of what the VAR officials saw, when the truth is, he has no clue what they did or didn't see (and for the journalist, it is right decision, not write decision). In the pic below, there are 8 different angles on the desktop screen alone. The Premier League says there is a VAR (video assistant referee) and AVAR and a replay operator. From my experience of watching RL, the referee asks for the replay, so I would think that the VAR tells the Replay Operator how far back to go and what angles to show.

As for the Newcastle one, having read a few sites, I interpret that as the Video Assistant Referees, ie the human beings in the control room, simply missed the handball. There is nothing to suggest they weren't shown or saw that passage of play, but they just didn't, for whatever reason, see it. It;s not the technologies fault if the refs don't rewind far enough.

Again, human error, not flaws in the technology.

You're wrong about the BT/Andy Gray thing too. On TV they showed us the angles the ref saw for the penalty. Then ten minutes later BT said during the interval they had just found a new angle.

For your proof-less assumption that the Newcastle one was the refs fault, here's Riley quoted:
"Riley also highlighted an error of judgment in not sending off Leicester City’s Youri Tielemans for a studs up foul on Callum Wilson, as well as a “process” error that saw them miss Isaac Hayden’s handball in the build-up to Fabian Schar’s equaliser for Newcastle United against Watford.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2019/09/12/var-has-made-errors-newcastles-equaliser-against-watford-should/

As for your correcting the grammar of the journalist, that's a telltale sign you have no argument against it. And the ignoring of the error in our match against Arsenal, yet still concluding it's all human error not technology tells it's own story.

[PhaseOfPlay]

How long does it take to qualify as a referee? I ask this as I cannot see why they couldn't have started a training programme as soon as they knew VAR was coming, where they taught the laws and you became a qualified referee at the end. There would be thousands (at least) of people who could learn the laws and do the job, but don't want to run around fields getting abused and attacked as part of their training.

Qualify to what level? Each level has a higher standard. You can qualify to be a grassroots young kids ref in a few months (Grade 9/8).

You spend a season at each level for the most part (at least for grades 7-4), before moving up, if you're a good ref. Here is the pyramid in England:

    Level 1 - National List (English Football League and English Premier League)
    Level 2a - Panel Select (National League Premier)
    Level 2b - Panel (National League North and South)
    Level 3 - Contributory (Contributory Leagues)
    Level 4 - Supply (Supply Leagues)
    Level 5 - Senior County (County Leagues)
    Level 6 - County (County leagues)
    Level 7 - Junior (Amateur leagues)
    Level 8 - Youth (Junior Referee below age of 16)
    Level 9 - Trainee

So to get to the depth of knowledge required to understand the LOTG at Premier League/UEFA level, would take a few years. It's just like the coaching badges - from the bottom of the pyramid to the top (A/Pro Licence), the topics and information don't change, it's just the depth of information and the expectation of how much you're required to demonstrate a mastery of, that does.

[rob1966]

Sorry but you have no credibility if that's your view. Go back and watch Carragher and Neville speaking to the refs and the hawkeye technicians before our game against Norwich. They introduce the system and show it in action. I'm not making a claim, it's simple fact. Do you really think premier league refs are also professional editors

You can read it from the horses mouth if you still somehow deny reality https://www.hawkeyeinnovations.com/products/smart/smart-replay
You're wrong about the BT/Andy Gray thing too. On TV they showed us the angles the ref saw for the penalty. Then ten minutes later BT said during the interval they had just found a new angle.

For your proof-less assumption that the Newcastle one was the refs fault, here's Riley quoted:
"Riley also highlighted an error of judgment in not sending off Leicester City’s Youri Tielemans for a studs up foul on Callum Wilson, as well as a “process” error that saw them miss Isaac Hayden’s handball in the build-up to Fabian Schar’s equaliser for Newcastle United against Watford.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2019/09/12/var-has-made-errors-newcastles-equaliser-against-watford-should/

As for your correcting the grammar of the journalist, that's a telltale sign you have no argument against it. And the ignoring of the error in our match against Arsenal, yet still concluding it's all human error not technology tells it's own story.

I give up with you, you are obviously one of those people who twists things to suit their own agenda. Last thing I will say to you is read below

Hawk-Eye’s Synchronised Multi-Angle Replay Technology (SMART) is an exciting new video replay and distribution technology that puts control of live video content into the hands of those who need it the most.

SMART Replay provides TV match officials with every angle of an incident, allowing complete control of all broadcast feeds and enabling decisions to be made quickly and accurately either on or off-site.

[rob1966]

Qualify to what level? Each level has a higher standard. You can qualify to be a grassroots young kids ref in a few months (Grade 9/8).

You spend a season at each level for the most part (at least for grades 7-4), before moving up, if you're a good ref. Here is the pyramid in England:

    Level 1 - National List (English Football League and English Premier League)
    Level 2a - Panel Select (National League Premier)
    Level 2b - Panel (National League North and South)
    Level 3 - Contributory (Contributory Leagues)
    Level 4 - Supply (Supply Leagues)
    Level 5 - Senior County (County Leagues)
    Level 6 - County (County leagues)
    Level 7 - Junior (Amateur leagues)
    Level 8 - Youth (Junior Referee below age of 16)
    Level 9 - Trainee

So to get to the depth of knowledge required to understand the LOTG at Premier League/UEFA level, would take a few years. It's just like the coaching badges - from the bottom of the pyramid to the top (A/Pro Licence), the topics and information don't change, it's just the depth of information and the expectation of how much you're required to demonstrate a mastery of, that does.

In your opinion, is it possible to study full time for say 3 to 4 years, reviewing games etc, without actually stepping on the pitch and achieve the knowledge required to be a Premier League standard referee? I'm trying to get an idea of the feasibilty of using non referees to do the VAR.

[classycarra]

I give up with you, you are obviously one of those people who twists things to suit their own agenda. Last thing I will say to you is read below

Hawk-Eye’s Synchronised Multi-Angle Replay Technology (SMART) is an exciting new video replay and distribution technology that puts control of live video content into the hands of those who need it the most.

SMART Replay provides TV match officials with every angle of an incident, allowing complete control of all broadcast feeds and enabling decisions to be made quickly and accurately either on or off-site.

So you do agree with me after all that? They failed to provide the VAR, during the review of every goal they perform, with the angle that made the Newcastle handball extremely obvious.

For the record, I haven't twisted a thing. You asked me for support to my claims, I provided it, you were unable to refute the claims. Fair enough, let's drop it now. Given the above quote it sounds like there's maybe been some misunderstanding

[PhaseOfPlay]

In your opinion, is it possible to study full time for say 3 to 4 years, reviewing games etc, without actually stepping on the pitch and achieve the knowledge required to be a Premier League standard referee? I'm trying to get an idea of the feasibilty of using non referees to do the VAR.

It's definitely possible to do that and know the Laws of the Game inside out, for sure. But understanding what a referee is thinking, whilst communicating an issue to be looked at, can only be done with experience on the field.

So you'd definitely get knowledgeable people, but there would be no understanding of what the centre ref is thinking on some decisions.

[rob1966]

It's definitely possible to do that and know the Laws of the Game inside out, for sure. But understanding what a referee is thinking, whilst communicating an issue to be looked at, can only be done with experience on the field.

So you'd definitely get knowledgeable people, but there would be no understanding of what the centre ref is thinking on some decisions.

Cheers.

The FA do need to address the whole issue, what we are seeing now is an utter joke. The whole aim of VAR should be to make things easier for the referees, without interfering with the game more than is necessary. We are all used to seeing players arguing with the officials for a minute or so, if VAR cannot give a definitive answer in a minute, then it shouldn't be used for that decision.

[Brian Blessed]

The first Watford goal shouldn’t have stood as the goal scorer had a foot in the box when the keeper released the ball. But it was up to the on field refs to see it. VAR couldn’t review because it was a restart. But VAR is supposed to review every goal.

I honestly have no idea wtf is going on.

[PhaseOfPlay]

The first Watford goal shouldn’t have stood as the goal scorer had a foot in the box when the keeper released the ball. But it was up to the on field refs to see it. VAR couldn’t review because it was a restart. But VAR is supposed to review every goal.

I honestly have no idea wtf is going on.

I'm not sure he did. Just watched it again and he was on the line right until the ball was kicked.

[Brian Blessed]

I’m just going by what the commentator said, after talking to the VAR people.

[PhaseOfPlay]

I’m just going by what the commentator said, after talking to the VAR people.

I do hope commentators aren't having access to the VAR people in-game!

[Brian Blessed]

I’m sure someone fed him the info from the .

[LovelyCushionedHeader]

Another faultless day for the referees. Well done Mike.

[4pool]

I do hope commentators aren't having access to the VAR people in-game!

They are supposed to be told what VAR is checking for. But not the actual conversation between officials.

[Anthony]

I'm not sure he did. Just watched it again and he was on the line right until the ball was kicked.

Isn't on the line in the box? Seem to remember this from a Penalty discussion before.

[PhaseOfPlay]

They are supposed to be told what VAR is checking for. But not the actual conversation between officials.

There must be an easier way to broadcast that information. Some sort of radiophonic way of transmitting that data over a tv broadcast for everyone to hear, in a passive manner, without having to directly communicate with the VAR refs.

There must be some way.

Nope, I got nothing.

[PhaseOfPlay]

Isn't on the line in the box? Seem to remember this from a Penalty discussion before.

Possibly. But there's also this:

If, when a goal kick is taken, any opponents are inside the penalty area because they did not have time to leave, the referee allows play to continue

But looking at a still of AFTER the ball is kicked, it doesn't look like he was in the box at all at the kick (I can't find an angle for the moment before the kick):

[4pool]

To bad VAR wasn't around when Mike Riley was ref..in case you forgot.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=77&v=mM747L9Wf8M

100% correct with all his decisions. VAR would have justified them.   

[rob1966]

Possibly. But there's also this:

But looking at a still of AFTER the ball is kicked, it doesn't look like he was in the box at all at the kick (I can't find an angle for the moment before the kick):

This is just before the keeper kicks it - in the box. How the blind bastards missed it I'll never know. Can I be a VAR ref please?

[classycarra]

This is just before the keeper kicks it - in the box. How the blind bastards missed it I'll never know. Can I be a VAR ref please?

It's not like Hawkeye to mess up with straight lines.


(source)