A&H

France V Australia

I didn't see the game but the radio commentary was of the view that original decision was good. Regardless, sounds like a 60/40 decision which will now be all the more controversial because of VAR. Sick of hearing about VAR tbh :dummy:
 
The Referee Store
arbitre said:
Should Umtiti not have been given a yellow for the handball which gave the Aussies a penalty?
Click to expand...

I think it's a clear yellow. The only thing I can think of is the AR wasn't entirely sure who handled it since it appears he was the one that made the call.
 
Good use of VAR.

My first instinct was it was a penalty anyway, was good that he revisited it and gave it. I don't agree with Dion Dublin (that it was a good tackle) or Mark Lawrenson (that contact was minimal) and don't think their comments help. It was a foul.

Nice spot on the handball, I didn't see that at all.

It was a horrible game though, lots of small fouls that broke up the flow. Some of the players walked a fine line at the end of the day.

If VAR is used like this everywhere, I can get behind supporting it.
 
RobOda said:
If VAR is used like this everywhere, I can get behind supporting it.
Click to expand...

There's still the resource issue. At the World Cup you can use four FIFA referees and it makes the process really efficient.

Take the PK to France. While VAR and AVAR3 are checking if it was a penalty, AVAR2 is checking if there was a possible offside in the buildup and AVAR1 is continuing to watch live play. Within 20 seconds they can recommend a review and within another 20 seconds the PK is given.

If this were to occur in a league, first the VAR would have to decide if it was a penalty. And then he'd need to check an offside decision. At this point the referee is holding up play with his finger in his ear for 30 seconds and the fans are starting to boo. Because you can't use four high level refs as VARs in a league match.

The Premier League would probably use it's SG1 ref that's normally the 4th official as a VAR. That means an SG2 ref now takes over as 4th official in the Premier League match. That means 10 fewer Football League matches with an SG2 center. That means less experience for SG2 refs. It's a big problem.

I think VAR at the World Cup will be about as perfect as it can get but it still doesn't answer the question of how to handle VAR with limited referee resources.
 
one said:
No because a penalty was given.
(Similar concept to some DOGSOs becoming yellow if a penalty is given)
Click to expand...

But that still has the "attempt to play the ball" qualifier on it which a deliberate handball is not an attempt to play the ball.
 
It really i
cwyeary said:
But that still has the "attempt to play the ball" qualifier on it which a deliberate handball is not an attempt to play the ball.
Click to expand...
It really depends what you would give the yellow card for. The only reason for me would be SPA and that would be nulified/ balanced by the pen.
 
Here's our UB cautions

• handles the ball to interfere with or stop a promising attack
• commits a foul which interferes with or stops a promising attack except
where the referee awards a penalty kick for an offence which was an attempt
to play the ball

I think it's SPA for handling but if you disagree I can understand.
 
On the France pen, there is a lot of talk about if the defender made contact with the ball first. For me that only becomes relevant if the attacker then 'trips himself' over the defender's leg. In this instance the attacker was tripped from behind by the defender. Just because you get the ball doesn't mean you can then trip an opponent.

I have sanctioned pleanty slide tackles from behind that get the ball first but then upend the opponent.
 
So, I've seen the penalty decision now. I think it probably was a foul and therefore a penalty, but i don't think it was a clear or obvious error on the referee's part. I haven't been able to bring myself to read the VAR bumf, but doesn't this incident contradict the 'minimal interference' pledge?
 
It was the first time it's been used in 5 matches. I'd say it's done pretty well at "minimum interference".
 
Big Cat said:
That's because nothing has happened! VAR couldn't resist the very first opportunity to interfere with a decision which was neither clear or obvious. That's maximal interference
Click to expand...

I seem to remember them not interfering in the Spain match when a whole lot of people wanted them to.
 
cwyeary said:
I seem to remember them not interfering in the Spain match when a whole lot of people wanted them to.
Click to expand...
Safe to say I wasn't in 'the lot of people' group. Subjective penalty decisions are often devisive here on the forum, so VAR must leave these incidents alone and focus on those Incidents which are clearly and obviously missed by the officials. Otherwise, controversial decisions will unduly delay the game, whilst exacerbating the annoyance for those who don't agree with the outcome
 
Big Cat said:
So, I've seen the penalty decision now. I think it probably was a foul and therefore a penalty, but i don't think it was a clear or obvious error on the referee's part. I haven't been able to bring myself to read the VAR bumf, but doesn't this incident contradict the 'minimal interference' pledge?
Click to expand...

Don't agree. The referee played on but the attacker was fouled, that is a clear and obvious error.
 
RustyRef said:
Don't agree. The referee played on but the attacker was fouled, that is a clear and obvious error.
Click to expand...
But you can say that about everthing that VAR changes even if the foul is not an obvious one.

The clear and obvious has to be about the foul itself which for me it was.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top