A&H

TOT v LIV

Status
Not open for further replies.
The nearside AR gets too focussed on foul detection. It's been recognised that both players are holding, so pass the play over to the referee. Hooper simply must do better to acknowledge this verbally and get there physically. Once the AR continues to monitor Law 12, he entirely neglects his main duty, Law 11. This is a contributor to the monumental F*** up in even calling the attacker offside in the first place.
 
A&H International
It's interesting point about play has restarted, so they can't go back and change a decision and yet we see it so often at throws where the ball is thrown in, gets played a few times, ref blows his whistle and points for a substitution to take place and then play restarts with the retaken throw.

In other news, BBC reporting Jones' red card appeal has been rejected.
 
RefGod said:
The nearside AR gets too focussed on foul detection. It's been recognised that both players are holding, so pass the play over to the referee. Hooper simply must do better to acknowledge this verbally and get there physically. Once the AR continues to monitor Law 12, he entirely neglects his main duty, Law 11. This is a contributor to the monumental F*** up in even calling the attacker offside in the first place.
Click to expand...
The comms from the AR is pretty standard in regards to the holding/pulling. I was never a big fan of needing to give info like that, but some refs prefer the info
 
I honestly don’t understand how the process we see on screen isn’t replicated on the screen at Stockley. So it should be, Ref - goal disallowed for offside, please check. Then that comes up on the screen at Stockley.
 
Runner-Ref said:
The comms from the AR is pretty standard in regards to the holding/pulling. I was never a big fan of needing to give info like that, but some refs prefer the info
Click to expand...
The comms may be standard but the fascination with Law 12 and neglect of Law 11 certainly isn't. It's standard practice to pass that area of the field over to the referee entirely. The AR errs due to not being in position with the second rearmost. Hooper's starting position from the throw simply isn't good enough and once the AR advises him the first time, he must do better to take the play from him or at least relieve him of his assumed Law 12 duty.
 
Runner-Ref said:
It would need to clearer than that. On the comms, it’s very easy to mix up onside & offside. The basic terminology should be along the lines of ‘check complete, result is goal goal goal’
Click to expand...
Omg no ffs. That doesn't solve anything

It needs to be along the lines of

Check complete, on field onside decision stands and goal can be awarded

Or

Check complete, on field onside decision is incorrect, disallow the goal
 
Matthew said:
I think what stands out the most is the total failure of communication. I don’t know what the solution is, but the majority of the VAR failures have come about because of poor communication. That suggests a lack of training at the very least.
Click to expand...
Apparently they have been getting help from rugby with VAR, but that sound like it has been completely ignored, as we don’t want to learn from other sports as we are experts in what we are doing, and we don’t need other people meddling in our process. At least this will draw a line under this chapter of VAR, and hopefully the next chapter will be operated in a more professional grown up, transparent way.
I will start watching the rugby World Cup, as all my rugby mates say they are light years ahead of football with regards to operating this technology
 
When can the infield officials hear the VAR?
Presume it's not always on, or an infield official could have twigged and said free kick taken from wrong place etc.

Seem to remember Mike Jones giving a dubious foul throw well after a goal was scored; the attacker side hadn't given the ball back following an injury.
 
The whole VAR setup with regards to communication has been naff from the start. Every communication of an on-field decision and check outcome has to be unambiguous.

David F said:
Does MO think they’re talking to him when they say ‘Oli’? The below suggests he can hear the discussion…
Click to expand...
No, think it is just coincidental from the on-field audio feed and they can't hear VAR.
 
bester said:
When can the infield officials hear the VAR?
Presume it's not always on, or an infield official could have twigged and said free kick taken from wrong place etc.

Seem to remember Mike Jones giving a dubious foul throw well after a goal was scored; the attacker side hadn't given the ball back following an injury.
Click to expand...
The replay operator shouts "delay delay" almost immediately - so it's clear no one can hear him!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top