A&H

Merseyside derby

Status
Not open for further replies.
Van Dijk now probably out for the season and Pickford seemingly unlikely to be retrospectively punished at all. I've always hated the "well, the referee saw it, so *shrug*" rule, but it seems even more nonsensical than usual here, given how clear it is that the VAR just basically forgot to look at the possibility of a red card.
 
The Referee Store
i dont see how this is different from every other marginal call that could / should be a red but doesnt get given fro one reason or another.

the one that springs to my mind immediately is callum mcmannaman for wigan v newcastle maybe 8 or 9 years ago.
 
i dont see how this is different from every other marginal call that could / should be a red but doesnt get given fro one reason or another.

the one that springs to my mind immediately is callum mcmannaman for wigan v newcastle maybe 8 or 9 years ago.
There was no VAR 8 or 9 years ago, so there's a significant difference to start with?
 
There was no VAR 8 or 9 years ago, so there's a significant difference to start with?

yeah but in that instance no retrospective action was taken because the AR was looking at the foul and took no action

here you have, at the very least, the AR having a clear unobstructed view of the incident, not sure on the refs angle. VAR had the opportunity to review it, obviously not sure how in depth that check ever went.

i recognise that there can be retrospective punishment for offences that have been seen now but it seems harsh when at least 1 of the officials had the opportunity to take action immediately and for whatever reason, didnt.
 
yeah but in that instance no retrospective action was taken because the AR was looking at the foul and took no action

here you have, at the very least, the AR having a clear unobstructed view of the incident, not sure on the refs angle. VAR had the opportunity to review it, obviously not sure how in depth that check ever went.

i recognise that there can be retrospective punishment for offences that have been seen now but it seems harsh when at least 1 of the officials had the opportunity to take action immediately and for whatever reason, didnt.
But that's where I think the distinction comes in. In your example 8 or 9 years ago, if the official tells us that he had a clear view, we have to just accept that he believes that to be the case, however unlikely we think that is. Might be a poor, almost inexplicable decision, but there are still limits to what one man getting one view while running can do.

Now, we have VAR and therefore, we have an official who believes he took the time to look at all available angles to make the correct decision - and a football community that is united to an almost unprecedented degree in saying that he was wrong. So the question is still out there - did he genuinely take a long, detailed look at the foul and make a terrible decision (in which case, are there consequences?), or did he make a mistake and fail to fully consider the possibility of a red card, and then we are being fed a lie to try and cover it?

All I'm saying is I think this still has legs - the presence of an obvious mistake by the VAR adds intrigue and complexity to the post-match dissection in this case.
 
But that's where I think the distinction comes in. In your example 8 or 9 years ago, if the official tells us that he had a clear view, we have to just accept that he believes that to be the case, however unlikely we think that is. Might be a poor, almost inexplicable decision, but there are still limits to what one man getting one view while running can do.

Now, we have VAR and therefore, we have an official who believes he took the time to look at all available angles to make the correct decision - and a football community that is united to an almost unprecedented degree in saying that he was wrong. So the question is still out there - did he genuinely take a long, detailed look at the foul and make a terrible decision (in which case, are there consequences?), or did he make a mistake and fail to fully consider the possibility of a red card, and then we are being fed a lie to try and cover it?

All I'm saying is I think this still has legs - the presence of an obvious mistake by the VAR adds intrigue and complexity to the post-match dissection in this case.

i see where you're coming from but i feel uneasy that, given the VAR had ample time to review it and at least one official has seen it clearly, it could be further reviewed after the game.

in any case, the FA have said they're not reviewing it.

it does make me wonder under which circumstances they would ever use retrospective punishment where an incident is seen mind
 
i see where you're coming from but i feel uneasy that, given the VAR had ample time to review it and at least one official has seen it clearly, it could be further reviewed after the game.

in any case, the FA have said they're not reviewing it.

it does make me wonder under which circumstances they would ever use retrospective punishment where an incident is seen mind
Well, exactly. If not this, the only reason you even need to keep the option of retrospective punishment in the competition rules would be for a complete technology failure.
 
i dont see how this is different from every other marginal call that could / should be a red but doesnt get given fro one reason or another.

the one that springs to my mind immediately is callum mcmannaman for wigan v newcastle maybe 8 or 9 years ago.
'Marginal'????!!!!!!
 
i dont see how this is different from every other marginal call that could / should be a red but doesnt get given fro one reason or another.

the one that springs to my mind immediately is callum mcmannaman for wigan v newcastle maybe 8 or 9 years ago.
It was 2013, Mark Halsey's last season. I think the general view at the time was that the protocols should be changed to correct such a clear injustice. Presumably the thinking at the time was wanting to uphold the 'referee's opinion is final' idea but that's out of the window now with VAR. It was clearly a red card offence and if the VAR had done their job correctly that would have been the punishment.

I'm not surprised no retrospective action was taken though because we've seen it in the past such as the Lo Celso incident in the Chelsea V Spurs game I referred to last season (with the same officials!) It would seem sensible to me to review the protocols to fall in line more with what the intention is behind VAR, namely to correct clear injustices.
 
There realistically won't be retrospective action any more with VAR in play, as it is nigh on impossible to say that none of the officials had seen the incident.
 
yeah but in that instance no retrospective action was taken because the AR was looking at the foul and took no action

here you have, at the very least, the AR having a clear unobstructed view of the incident, not sure on the refs angle. VAR had the opportunity to review it, obviously not sure how in depth that check ever went.

i recognise that there can be retrospective punishment for offences that have been seen now but it seems harsh when at least 1 of the officials had the opportunity to take action immediately and for whatever reason, didnt.
The AR didn't have a view on it as he was busy flagging a marginal offside when they have been told to wait and see. That's the thing that's still mind boggling to me, would have been a sent off Pickford if Oliver'd been allowed to give the PK, see the assistant with his flag up and then check with VAR
 
The AR didn't have a view on it as he was busy flagging a marginal offside when they have been told to wait and see. That's the thing that's still mind boggling to me, would have been a sent off Pickford if Oliver'd been allowed to give the PK, see the assistant with his flag up and then check with VAR

Not sure I buy that, he's got a clear unobstructed view, I'm sure he's concentrating on the fact he's about to raise his flag but he'll still be following play. If nothing else just to make sure he raises it at the right time
 
i dont see how this is different from every other marginal call that could / should be a red but doesnt get given fro one reason or another.

the one that springs to my mind immediately is callum mcmannaman for wigan v newcastle maybe 8 or 9 years ago.
Very impressed by your knowledge/memory of that. I thought I was the only one scarred!
Honestly, I think I'm over it, but only after many years of therapy

 
Last edited:
Very impressed by your knowledge/memory of that
It was the only other example mentioned in the article from post #42 😉😀

For me retrospective should review any clear and obvious error from the entire officials team. Some things they can't change but some things they can. VAR is not supposed to re-referee the game either but it does change some decisions even though the referee has seen it. Why can't a retrospective review?

For example, a clear error in law in some cases means a replay.
 
It was the only other example mentioned in the article from post #42 😉😀

For me retrospective should review any clear and obvious error from the entire officials team. Some things they can't change but some things they can. VAR is not supposed to re-referee the game either but it does change some decisions even though the referee has seen it. Why can't a retrospective review?

For example, a clear error in law in some cases means a replay.
Exactly. And while I don't see this ever being replayed (partly because I think Liverpool might prefer to just take a point over having to add another game to their schedule!), I still think the ambiguity around what actually happened here means we haven't yet ruled out a misapplication of law in this case.

If the reason VAR failed to recommend an OFR is because he thought the offside meant the red card was no longer an option - but felt that otherwise a red card would have been recommended - then I think you are getting very close to the kind of error you're referring to. What can be done about it and if anyone's even going to chase it up are different questions mind...
 
Exactly. And while I don't see this ever being replayed (partly because I think Liverpool might prefer to just take a point over having to add another game to their schedule!), I still think the ambiguity around what actually happened here means we haven't yet ruled out a misapplication of law in this case.

If the reason VAR failed to recommend an OFR is because he thought the offside meant the red card was no longer an option - but felt that otherwise a red card would have been recommended - then I think you are getting very close to the kind of error you're referring to. What can be done about it and if anyone's even going to chase it up are different questions mind...

I think the PGMOL will be quite happy that we've got 2 rounds of CL fixtures back to back with PL games in between. Alot of high profile football happening over the next 8 days and they'll hope that the VVD issue will fade into the background
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top