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

[The G in Gerrard]

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11661/12996417/ref-watch-manchester-city-penalty-warranted-but-newcastle-fortunate-over-spot-kick-vs-wolves-says-former-premier-league-official-dermot-gallagher

[Zlen]

“Another day, another ref and it could have been a penalty."

Sums them up.
They are perfectly fine being totally inconsistent. Best way to hide bias and who know what else.

[WhereAngelsPlay]

“Another day, another ref and it could have been a penalty."

Sums them up.
They are perfectly fine being totally inconsistent. Best way to hide bias and who know what else.

Hiding in plain sight.

[Barneylfc∗]

It's no coincidence that both the sportswashed clubs got awarded 2 of the softest penalties you'll see all season.

Compare those to this, which was deemed perfectly OK and a throw in to Nottingham Forest. 
https://twitter.com/Nick___Collins/status/1718698108056457663?t=sIAgrkkINqItzBgnGnyghw&s=19

[Alan_X]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79a1of6Eo-M

It's clear from this he knows we got away with one and Konate should've walked.

There's a big difference between could have and should have.

[Barneylfc∗]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/67265837

Live audio of VAR decisions would be 'chaotic' - Ifab

There are no plans to broadcast live video assistant referee communication because it would be too "chaotic" to listen to and potentially create "an unsafe environment for referees".

Last month, Luis Diaz wrongly had a goal disallowed for offside as Liverpool lost 2-1 to Tottenham, and the VAR audio for that decision was subsequently released.

The International Football Association Board (Ifab) believes fans should be informed of decisions, but not hear them being made live.

"I categorically say no, they shouldn't," Ifab secretary and chief executive Lukas Brud told BBC Radio 5 Live Breakfast's Rick Edwards.

"I was allowed to observe and see communication between match officials during a review and it is quite a chaotic situation, not in a negative sense but there's many people talking at the same time and I think it would be counterproductive for anyone to listen to all those voices talking to each other.

"Then you have the VAR and the assistant VAR, the replay operators, the referee and maybe even the assistant referees and fourth official, so all of a sudden it becomes quite a chaotic experience.

"We have given the green light to test the announcement of decisions to bring a little more transparency to decision making, but we are not prepared at this point to open up communication live to the audience."

The audio recordings of discussions between the match officials around Diaz's disallowed goal were made public by referees' body PGMOL, who said the error was a result of a "lapse of concentration and loss of focus".

PGMOL said it recognised standards "fell short of expectations" in the incident and released a number of "key learnings", which it said would "mitigate against the risk of a future error".

Can football follow systems used in other sports?

Fifa has trialled having the outcomes of decisions made by VAR communicated to television viewers and those in the stadium by match referees in some of their competitions, including the Women's World Cup in the summer.

There have also been calls for football to follow other sports such as rugby and cricket in how they communicate on field decisions to fans, but Brud feels direct comparisons are unrealistic.

"They are different sports with different set ups," he added. "We cannot compare by simply saying it is the same. In football, processes are slightly different.

"Football is different because everyone is putting a magnifying glass on every decision and every single word would then be analysed in the media and it would create a very unsafe environment for referees.

"They need to feel safe when they are focused on decision-making."

A window of time to reverse decisions?

One issue that arose from the release of the VAR audio from the offside error in the Liverpool-Tottenham match was the inability to stop play and reverse the incorrect decision.

IFAB rules on VAR state play cannot be brought back once it has been started after a decision has been made "except for a case of mistaken identity or for a potential sending-off offence relating to violent conduct, spitting, biting or extremely offensive, insulting and/or abusive action(s)."

However, Brud also ruled out the potential for a window of time in which decisions made by human error could be reversed.

"We always have to remember these things don't happen very often," he said.

"We should not immediately start questioning the entire set up because in one of thousands of matches this situation has occurred.

"Certainly we are going to improve if need be certain areas of VAR. Whether we need to solve an issue where humans made an error, let's see."

The speed of VAR decision-making has also been an issue since its introduction.

During Burnley's 2-1 loss to Bournemouth at the weekend, VAR took more than five minutes to rule out a late goal for the Clarets for offside.

Asked about the possibility of semi-automated or automated offsides being brought in to assist referees, Burd added: "There is always development in the technology being used and I am sure at some point we will see something between semi-automatic and automatic calls because technology is getting better.

"But you will always have the passive offside position. Match officials still have to judge if a player who was in an offside position was having an impact in the game.

"I am sure the decision-making will be quicker, but there will always be a human intervention when it comes to offside."

Sin-bins and cutting down referee abuse

Brud also said Ifab is looking into measures that could be implemented to reduce the amount of abuse referees receive, particularly at grassroots level.

Sin-bins - a player receiving a temporary dismissal from the pitch - is something that is being looked at.

"We are currently evaluation what kind of measures there are," Brud said.

"At grassroots level and in a number of leagues in England, referees are wearing body cameras now as a form of deterrent to misbehaviours - and results so far have been very positive.

"We are looking into different ways, but we also want to help referees officiate matches in a fair way and also make sure players and coaching staff also behave appropriately.

"Football is not an emotional wastebasket, it's sport, it's supposed to be fun. We need to cut out some deeply-rooted behaviour."

[tubby]

I get the argument for not broadcasting the audio live, but there is zero argument for not releasing the audio for each VAR incident in every game once the round of fixtures is done.

[Elzar]

The chaotic nature of the conversation is probably part of the problem?

You don't need to hear everyone in the VAR set up at all times. The main VAR just needs to be heard communicating what is being seen to the ref, and if the ref then has to review, they explain what they are then seeing and what decision will be given. For offsides, the main VAR would just go with "We have got a decision, that is offside/onside".

Chaotic nature of the conversation comes from "Hiya mate, yep check all good, we've done this well, proper good. Matty is happy, Jonesy is smiling as we nailed this one mate"

[Barneylfc∗]

I get the argument for not broadcasting the audio live, but there is zero argument for not releasing the audio for each VAR incident in every game once the round of fixtures is done.

I don't.
What is someone at home going to do, throw a cup at their TV and hit the ref on the head with it?
It's absolute bollocks.

[Zlen]

It's all just bullshit at this stage.
We were all better off without VAR.
Nothing has improved.

[tubby]

I don't.
What is someone at home going to do, throw a cup at their TV and hit the ref on the head with it?
It's absolute bollocks.

It's more pressure on the officials though.

[Tommy_W]

Yeah, that's nonsense that it would be too chaotic. All the public need to hear is the direct communication between the main VAR operator and the referee explaining why they've come to the conclusion that they have.

[CraigDS]

Absolutely no reason they can't copy the way rugby do it, the only reason they won't is because it will show up of inept (and I get the feeling arrogant) most refs are.

[Charlie Adams fried egg]

There's a big difference between could have and should have.

Especially taking into account some of the reds (and bookings) we've had this season.
Surprised by the amount of reds that assumed Klopp meant he should have been sent off. Actually I'm not that surprised.

[stoa]

Love the argument for the no "window of time to reverse decisions". It doesn't happen often says the guy. Yeah, he's completely right. Happened only two weeks in a row (that we know of). What a load of horseshit...

[Chakan]

I get the argument for not broadcasting the audio live, but there is zero argument for not releasing the audio for each VAR incident in every game once the round of fixtures is done.

There's absolutely no reason whatsoever they can't do it live. None.

They won't because it will show how utterly inept they are. That's the reason.

[Rush 82]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/67265837

Bunch of Weasels 

[Rush 82]

These need to be forcibly brought into the modern world.

Rip that band-aid off and force them to professionalise in word and deed.

[DangerScouse]

Shithouses.

[stewil007]

Bunch of Weasels 

Its only 'chaotic' because they make it so.

Simplify the process, like the cricket, go through each step explaining what is happening and broadcast that between the main VAR and the ref - if every bugger else in the VAR van is running round like headless chcikens, we dont need to hear that.

[tubby]

There's absolutely no reason whatsoever they can't do it live. None.

They won't because it will show how utterly inept they are. That's the reason.

You don't think having their decision making process broadcast live wouldn't add even more pressure to the officials?  I'd be fine with them releasing the audio after the games, doesn't make any difference if it's mid-game or afterwards, it won't change anything that happened.

[Ghost Town]

Absolutely no reason they can't copy the way rugby do it, the only reason they won't is because it will show up of inept (and I get the feeling arrogant) most refs are.

Exactly. Part of the point of having live audio would be to implement a professional and focussed way of communicating, instead of the 'chaotic' chattering and scrabbling about like infants after eating too many brightly coloured sweets, that we have now.

In particular devising clear language so that both on-field and off-field officials can double check what the situation is, what the other is asking/reporting and whether the information relayed has been clearly understood before proceeding.

Knowing that audio would be heard should up-the-game and make the communication more careful and useful. Referees should be all in favour of it as it should show them at their best and demonstrate their control, dilligence and mastery of the situation.

No surprise these cowardly, amateur, lie-around-in-their-pants incompetents don't want it.

[ScottScott]

Rugby and cricket do it absolutely fine so this excuse is bullshit

Follow the rugby method. It's fucking simple. Why football has to make it so complicated is beyond me. IFAB, a load of fellas who never played the game at any level, making the rules of the game. Refs who have never played the game, enforcing those rules on the pitch

[Chakan]

You don't think having their decision making process broadcast live wouldn't add even more pressure to the officials?  I'd be fine with them releasing the audio after the games, doesn't make any difference if it's mid-game or afterwards, it won't change anything that happened.

Who gives a shit what kind of pressure they are under? If they are doing their job correctly then they shouldn't worry about it.

If you have a simple process in place to check something then the audio will follow the exact same format every single time. It's like reading a script.

Var: "Ref we have a check for offsides on that goal."

Ref: "Ok go ahead"

Var: "Lines are being drawn. Waiting. Waiting. The lines are on the big screen now. As you can see he is ahead of the last defender. Offside is given. Do you agree?"

Ref: "Yes I can see that, goal disallowed and freekick given for offside"

What's so hard about that?

Apply that logic to any VAR situation.

If as the article says it's chaotic and these 50 people talking at the same time, then there's your issue right there.

[tubby]

Who gives a shit what kind of pressure they are under? If they are doing their job correctly then they shouldn't worry about it.

In any job, the more pressure you're under, the more likely you are to make a mistake.  What's the difference between broadcasting it live vs releasing it after the game?

[Ghost Town]

Var: "Ref we have a check for offsides on that goal."

Var: "Lines are being drawn.

 there's your issue right there.

Yer not wrong!

[Chakan]

In any job, the more pressure you're under, the more likely you are to make a mistake.  What's the difference between broadcasting it live vs releasing it after the game?

Because if they make a mistake during the game they can correct it right then and there. Not a week later and offer an apology. I thought that was obvious.

[tubby]

Because if they make a mistake during the game they can correct it right then and there. Not a week later and offer an apology. I thought that was obvious.

They wouldn't though.  Who would tell them?  They'd just broadcast their decision making live and then the game would carry on.

[Chakan]

They wouldn't though.  Who would tell them?  They'd just broadcast their decision making live and then the game would carry on.

Well the managers would know right away so i'm pretty sure they would tell them. Anyway we'll agree to disagree on this one.

Besides it'll never happen in the English game, the less accountability the refs have the more they prefer it.

[Ghost Town]

In any job, the more pressure you're under, the more likely you are to make a mistake.  What's the difference between broadcasting it live vs releasing it after the game?

If they are not able to cope with 'the pressure' of articulating their actions clearly without falling to pieces; actions and words which are well within the remit of their supposed expertise, then perhaps replace them with able individuals who are. As happens in other sports, where they don't seem to disintegrate in the way you're suggesting.

[DelTrotter]

I think they actually need some pressure, as it is they aren't really under much, yeah they'll get a bit of shit from fans on social media for a day and a manager might moan but that's gonna happen anyway. Some pressure to make the correct decision would be a good thing, as it is they can make the worst decision in the sports history and get a holiday for a bit then come back like nothing happened, there is no real pressure, their job is ridiculously secure and they answer to no one.

[tubby]

I think they actually need some pressure, as it is they aren't really under much, yeah they'll get a bit of shit from fans on social media for a day and a manager might moan but that's gonna happen anyway. Some pressure to make the correct decision would be a good thing, as it is they can make the worst decision in the sports history and get a holiday for a bit then come back like nothing happened, there is no real pressure, their job is ridiculously secure and they answer to no one.

Agree on that last bit.  There's zero accountability and they only answer to one of their own.  But to say they're not operating under huge pressure I think misses just how horrible a job it is.  22 players all trying to con you non-stop.

[Rush 82]

If they are not able to cope with 'the pressure' of articulating their actions clearly without falling to pieces; actions and words which are well within the remit of their supposed expertise, then perhaps replace them with able individuals who are. As happens in other sports, where they don't seem to disintegrate in the way you're suggesting.

This. If they can't cope with the 'pressure' might one suggest that the job is not suited to them.

[Rush 82]

Agree on that last bit.  There's zero accountability and they only answer to one of their own.  But to say they're not operating under huge pressure I think misses just how horrible a job it is.  22 players all trying to con you non-stop.

On the field, yes.

Miles away in the VAR room? No - I can think of a lot more pressured work environments especially if you're paying attention to your job and not lollygagging 'cos you've just come off a jolly to the Middle East. There's no one shouting at you or spraying you with spittle.

You're sitting there watching high def TV on multiple monitors in air conditioned comfort with every gizmo at your fingertips to rewind and play things in slowmo.

[thaddeus]

On the field, yes.

Miles away in the VAR room? No - I can think of a lot more pressured work environments especially if you're paying attention to your job and not lollygagging 'cos you've just come off a jolly to the Middle East. There's no one shouting at you or spraying you with spittle.

You're sitting there watching high def TV on multiple monitors in air conditioned comfort with every gizmo at your fingertips to rewind and play things in slowmo.

There's still the pressure of trying to balance what you know is the correct decision with the wishes of the evil overlords using VAR to get the results they want 

Having been a ref in kids games many times and frequently getting a load of abuse - I consoled myself with the BBC approach that if everyone hates you then you must be doing a good job - I admire anyone that does it week after week.  You need to have a certain character to do that and unfortunately it's characteristics that are not going to make you very popular.

[PaulF]

Is there any reason a rival organisation to PGMOL can't be set up and bid to referee games for a season? No reason they can't include some of the refs from PGMOL if they so wanted, or foreign refs.  I'm sure the clown committee of the UK, Cbeebies or the flat earth society could put something together quickly.

[Barneylfc∗]

You don't think having their decision making process broadcast live wouldn't add even more pressure to the officials?  I'd be fine with them releasing the audio after the games, doesn't make any difference if it's mid-game or afterwards, it won't change anything that happened.

Rugby officials are fine with their decision making being broadcast and the extra pressure that brings.

[stoa]

Is there any reason a rival organisation to PGMOL can't be set up and bid to referee games for a season? No reason they can't include some of the refs from PGMOL if they so wanted, or foreign refs.  I'm sure the clown committee of the UK, Cbeebies or the flat earth society could put something together quickly.

PGMOL is an organisation created and funded by the PL, the EFL and the FA to referee their games. Unless they all realise themselves what a shitshow they have created, setting up a "rival organisation" will do fuck all.

[tubby]

Rugby officials are fine with their decision making being broadcast and the extra pressure that brings.

Sure, but they don't have anywhere near the level of media attention or global viewing.  They also have sensible rules about talking to officials, something football can't quite get its head round.

[LovelyCushionedHeader]

If it's chaotic then they aren't doing their job properly.