The Ref Stop

Its just ruining football

Donate to RefChat

Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated

The Ref Stop
Is there a better angle for the Watford no-penalty? Doesn't look like VAR got it wrong from that angle?

I thought the LIV-MUN one was a foul at the time, but I can understand why VAR isn't giving it.

Don't see the controversy over the Brighton penalty, or the foul against Arsenal, nor the Liverpool vs City 'handball'.

Also the Virgil header is more of a referee error than a VAR one IMO.
 
RobOda said:
Is there a better angle for the Watford no-penalty? Doesn't look like VAR got it wrong from that angle?

I thought the LIV-MUN one was a foul at the time, but I can understand why VAR isn't giving it.

Don't see the controversy over the Brighton penalty, or the foul against Arsenal, nor the Liverpool vs City 'handball'.

Also the Virgil header is more of a referee error than a VAR one IMO.
Click to expand...

the biggest give away that the watford penalty is a pen (and it absolutely is) is vertonghan gesturing to the keeper to take the goal kick quickly to bypass the VAR review and get the ball back into play
 
es1 said:
the biggest give away that the watford penalty is a pen (and it absolutely is) is vertonghan gesturing to the keeper to take the goal kick quickly to bypass the VAR review and get the ball back into play
Click to expand...

Part of me wants to agree with you, but the perception of the random nature of VAR makes me think that you can't infer that. Wanting there not to be a VAR review doesn't necessarily mean the player thinks it was a foul but the player doesn't want to risk that VAR will think there was a foul. It's a smart play, whatever likelihood the player thinks it was a foul.
 
Tbh VAR is here to stay. In April the Premiership clubs will meet to see what they are going to do going forward but I can't see it being scrapped. Rugby's TMO had a problematic introduction and it's a real shame football hadn't learnt some things and refined it better before launch.

One thing that HAS to be changed is the in-stadium experience. It ain't great :confused:
 
socal lurker said:
Part of me wants to agree with you, but the perception of the random nature of VAR makes me think that you can't infer that. Wanting there not to be a VAR review doesn't necessarily mean the player thinks it was a foul but the player doesn't want to risk that VAR will think there was a foul. It's a smart play, whatever likelihood the player thinks it was a foul.
Click to expand...

You're right, of course, but it's still a stonewaller nonetheless!
 
afronaut81 said:
Tbh VAR is here to stay. In April the Premiership clubs will meet to see what they are going to do going forward but I can't see it being scrapped. Rugby's TMO had a problematic introduction and it's a real shame football hadn't learnt some things and refined it better before launch.

One thing that HAS to be changed is the in-stadium experience. It ain't great :confused:
Click to expand...

It's 100% here to stay, and I fully expect the pitch side monitor will be used more next season.

There's a clamour for consistency in refereeing decisions, and I've always said you won't get that for all decisions as different referees view things differently, have different tolerance levels, allow less or more physical contact, etc. You can only really expect each referee to be fully consistent with their own decisions, and that falls apart if someone else is making those decisions for them. Take the Sterling challenge for that at the weekend, I suspect Mike Dean, who isn't afraid of making big decisions, would have changed to red had he watched it on the screen, but he wasn't given the chance.
 
afronaut81 said:
Tbh VAR is here to stay. In April the Premiership clubs will meet to see what they are going to do going forward but I can't see it being scrapped. Rugby's TMO had a problematic introduction and it's a real shame football hadn't learnt some things and refined it better before launch.

One thing that HAS to be changed is the in-stadium experience. It ain't great :confused:
Click to expand...
Can you explain feeling that for all our Championship members please!! ;)
 
Bar the Watford challenge, none of these are controversial at all. They are correct
 
One fairly minor point - but it irks me slightly every time I see it, is the way they announce a non-overturn on the stadium screens, especially for penalties not given when there's a potential foul. The screen says, for example: "No penalty. No foul."

That's inaccurate - and again, contrary to what the VAR protocol says. To paraphrase slightly, the VAR is not deciding, "Was it a foul?" but "Was it a clear and obvious error to give/not give the foul?"

As I say, it's a somewhat minor point but it does shift the considerations and the conversations about VAR outcomes. You quite often hear the pundits saying something like, "That was (or wasn't) a foul - I can't believe the VAR didn't see that." Which is to misconstrue what the VAR is actually deciding on.

I understand it might be a little tricky to find a neat, concise form of wording to put up on the screen but the way they just baldly state "No foul," when that is not what the VAR is saying, is just causing and/or perpetuating misconceptions about the whole process.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top