The Ref Stop

Rangers v Aberdeen VAR intervention

I'm OK with red. I'd also be OK with Yellow
No need for VAR to interfere. Very rare that monitor serves any purpose, but if the Ref wants to stick with his original decision, then fair play to him
 
The Ref Stop
Paul_10 said:
But if you don't think it's a red card and your suggesting the referee looking at the screen should recognise from replays that is not SFP then surely recommending for a review is the right thing to do?

The referee decided to stick by his decision which he has every right to do so but it doesn't mean he's right.
Click to expand...
I don't think it is a red, but equally I don't think it is the kind of howler of a decision that VAR should be getting involved with, its a bad decision but not a 100% incorrect one. But once they recommenced a review the horse is already through the stable door and running amok amongst the fields, so the referee might as well take advantage of VAR over involvement to correct his original error.
 
RustyRef said:
I don't think it is a red, but equally I don't think it is the kind of howler of a decision that VAR should be getting involved with, its a bad decision but not a 100% incorrect one. But once they recommenced a review the horse is already through the stable door and running amok amongst the fields, so the referee might as well take advantage of VAR over involvement to correct his original error.
Click to expand...
But that isn’t the protocol. The R is only supposed to change it if it was C&O error.
 
socal lurker said:
But that isn’t the protocol. The R is only supposed to change it if it was C&O error.
Click to expand...
As usual, the game around the World is not applying the LOTG the way they're written
As @cwyeary quite rightly points out, we've moved on from C&O (at least most Countries have). We repeatedly see the tail wagging the dog in football. It's one of the fundamental reasons why we can't achieve consistency, especially from one country to another
 
Big Cat said:
As usual, the game around the World is not applying the LOTG the way they're written
As @cwyeary quite rightly points out, we've moved on from C&O (at least most Countries have). We repeatedly see the tail wagging the dog in football. It's one of the fundamental reasons why we can't achieve consistency, especially from one country to another
Click to expand...
I don’t think we’ve “moved on” from C&O so much as ended up with some strange thoughts on what it means, particularly in the context of HB offenses. But I don’t think there is anywhere that has suggested the VAR and R should be using different standards. As @JamesL has said the reason there shouldn’t be a disagreement is that they are supposed to be using the same standard and if that standard is adequately clear, trained professionals should get the same result. (And my gloss is that there are going to be edge cases in any standard where skilled professionals can slip on either side of the line.)
 
Paul_10 said:
I think a referee only rejected a review once in the PL and that was Darren England for a penalty decision which the VAR reccomended for him to overturn.
Click to expand...
I remember Michael Salisbury doing it once but I don’t thing Webb has started his TV show thing at that point.
 
socal lurker said:
But that isn’t the protocol. The R is only supposed to change it if it was C&O error.
Click to expand...
I know, but it is the optics. He's been sent to the screen by a same level referee to look a decision that he thinks he got obviously wrong. The referee had one look at it and I totally understand why he went red, but it clearly wasn't a red card. So we have the bizarre situation that the referee makes a decision, VAR incorrectly gets involved and recommends a review, and the referee watches it and realises he has seen it completely differently to what actually happened. So he can either religiously stick to the same protocol that the AR didn't, or take that opportunity to get himself out of a mess.

There's no wonder supporters can't work out what is going on.
 
This was a built in problem from day one. And it’s going to be a problem as long as we use VAR for subjective decisions. There is never going to be a fully agreed upon line for the subjective decisions that are the core of VAR. VAR is pretty effective for OSP and whether the ball touched an arm. After that it is inherently looking at shades of grey.
 
es1 said:
All for a ref sticking with their decision having been given the opportunity to change it.

Rangers player is at high speed, true he's not high but he does catch him top of the foot, it's a yellow at the absolute minimum. Is that enough to call it a clear and obvious error? not for me
Click to expand...
I’m not in this case as to me it’s debatable if I’m even seeing a caution credit VAR for trying to help him as I can see at full speed how he can get it wrong luckily wasn’t long left as it’s a game altering decision
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top