A&H

Nor v Man City - VAR?

Without going through all of it, I am fairly certain what you were saying (or implicating) was that EPL 'will not have' OFR, not that they will have it but not use it. Two different things.

Nope I said that PGMOL would not use OFR, whether it was there or not.
 
The Referee Store
I’m reminded of a ref who told me of being assessed and criticized for not wearing two watches. For her next assessment, she borrowed a second watch. When the lender started to explain how it worked, she told him not to bother as she was wearing it, not using it. Do w know those touchline monitors are actually connected to anything?:angel:
Sounds about right :) . I'd go even further, is there any conclusive proof that VAR's ever checks for C&O-E's by referees? Or does EPL uses just a no-frills version of the system to check for offside decisions only?

I am guessing the latter and they are just pretending the rest to imply they are complying with the entire VAR protocol. Conspiracy, conspiracy!!!
 
Whether the monitors are there or not is irrelevant. (I haven't seen one at the London Stadium), the point is the same as was intended originally. I said that PGMOL wouldn't be using monitors and got slated for it yet what is the situation? PGMOL aren't using monitors, the VAR's decision is final, which means that you have 2 different referee's with 2 different tolerance levels making judgement calls on the same incident with the VAR official having the final say. Currently the VAR official has 2 choices, agree with the referee, or undermine his authority.

Any subjective calls should be referred back to the referee to make the final decision by looking on a monitor. Factual decisions should be made by VAR and hopefully the speed will improve through usage.
 
Whether the monitors are there or not is irrelevant. (I haven't seen one at the London Stadium), the point is the same as was intended originally. I said that PGMOL wouldn't be using monitors and got slated for it yet what is the situation? PGMOL aren't using monitors, the VAR's decision is final, which means that you have 2 different referee's with 2 different tolerance levels making judgement calls on the same incident with the VAR official having the final say. Currently the VAR official has 2 choices, agree with the referee, or undermine his authority.

Any subjective calls should be referred back to the referee to make the final decision by looking on a monitor. Factual decisions should be made by VAR and hopefully the speed will improve through usage.
I think slated is too stronger of a word. What you were 'disagreed' with was not that you said "PGMOL wouldn't be using monitors", it was with you saying "there aren't going to be monitors" (see above quote). Two different things. We can agree to disagree on this. Its not a big issue really.

But if you 'meant' to say "PGMOL will have monitors but wouldn't be using them" then it looks like you were right. Any chance you can pass on next week's lotto number?
 
Any chance you can pass on next week's lotto number?

LMAO I wish.

I only knew about the monitors not being used because I heard an interview that Mike Riley gave back last summer where he said that PGMO would be using VAR differently and specifically mentioned the lack of monitor use. At that point I had no idea whether they would be physically present or not, just that there would be no monitors used by PGMOL.
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
Whether the monitors are there or not is irrelevant. (I haven't seen one at the London Stadium), the point is the same as was intended originally. I said that PGMOL wouldn't be using monitors and got slated for it yet what is the situation? PGMOL aren't using monitors, the VAR's decision is final, which means that you have 2 different referee's with 2 different tolerance levels making judgement calls on the same incident with the VAR official having the final say. Currently the VAR official has 2 choices, agree with the referee, or undermine his authority.

Any subjective calls should be referred back to the referee to make the final decision by looking on a monitor. Factual decisions should be made by VAR and hopefully the speed will improve through usage.

The fatal floor in your argument is that you have absolutely no idea whether VAR is over ruling the onfield referee, because you don't know what is being said between the two.

You are simply making it up, like a lot of people do here regarding VAR.

If VAR was overruling the onfield referee (which there is no evidence of) then they would be incorrect in law, the final decision is always left to the onfield referee, and therefore IF VAR was making the final decision then there would be alot of teams making complaints with grounds to have matches replayed.
 
Currently VAR isn't overruling the referee because the only other option is to undermine the referee. The way the PGMOL are using VAR they have to just support the onfield referee's decision if it is subjective, even if there is a clear and obvious error. As soon as VAR overturns an onfield referee's subjective decision we have the situation I have stated above, where VAR has the final say.

For a subjective decision to be overturned then the onfield referee HAS to make that decision after reviewing it on a monitor.
 
Currently VAR isn't overruling the referee because the only other option is to undermine the referee. The way the PGMOL are using VAR they have to just support the onfield referee's decision if it is subjective, even if there is a clear and obvious error. As soon as VAR overturns an onfield referee's subjective decision we have the situation I have stated above, where VAR has the final say.

For a subjective decision to be overturned then the onfield referee HAS to make that decision after reviewing it on a monitor.
I agree completely with your post
I'd still rather have the PGMOL's ignorance of subjective OFR's, than the ROTW's ignorance of C&O
I think we might be heading towards the VAR refereeing the game, although IFAB will resist this. The OFR process is possibly the worst aspect of VAR, so something has to give. The genie is out of the bottle because IFAB would never backtrack and lose face
 
Currently VAR isn't overruling the referee because the only other option is to undermine the referee. The way the PGMOL are using VAR they have to just support the onfield referee's decision if it is subjective, even if there is a clear and obvious error. As soon as VAR overturns an onfield referee's subjective decision we have the situation I have stated above, where VAR has the final say.

For a subjective decision to be overturned then the onfield referee HAS to make that decision after reviewing it on a monitor.

You are forgetting one very important part, the on field referee has the final say. The VAR can tell them what they have seen, but the VAR cannot make the decision for the referee.

Its exactly the same as with normal assistants, they can flag for a foul, or an offside, but the referee doesn't have to go with them. And when I referee does go with them I don't see people screaming about the assistant over ruling the on field referee.
 
You are forgetting one very important part, the on field referee has the final say. The VAR can tell them what they have seen, but the VAR cannot make the decision for the referee.

Its exactly the same as with normal assistants, they can flag for a foul, or an offside, but the referee doesn't have to go with them. And when I referee does go with them I don't see people screaming about the assistant over ruling the on field referee.

The assistants are not overruling the referee they give what they see and the referee then chooses whether to go with them, or not. With VAR it would be different. Referee waves play on but VAR then says "You missed a foul there". What choice does the onfield referee have currently?

1) Let the VAR make a subjective decision, that overrules the one he made, or
2) tell VAR thanks, but I have made my decision.

Using the monitor allows VAR to say "I think you MAY have made an error there" so referee then reviews it and makes the final decision. There should be only one person making subjective calls.

The way that PGMOL are using VAR the Law needs changing - every time the phrase 'In the opinion of the referee' appears it needs to be changed to 'In the opinion of the referee, unless VAR disagrees'
 
The assistants are not overruling the referee they give what they see and the referee then chooses whether to go with them, or not. With VAR it would be different. Referee waves play on but VAR then says "You missed a foul there". What choice does the onfield referee have currently?

1) Let the VAR make a subjective decision, that overrules the one he made, or
2) tell VAR thanks, but I have made my decision.

Using the monitor allows VAR to say "I think you MAY have made an error there" so referee then reviews it and makes the final decision. There should be only one person making subjective calls.

The way that PGMOL are using VAR the Law needs changing - every time the phrase 'In the opinion of the referee' appears it needs to be changed to 'In the opinion of the referee, unless VAR disagrees'


Again you are making assumptions that you have no way of backing up.

It's is exactly the same as with a normal AR, with the exception that if I flag for an offside the referee can't go and check it on a monitor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nij
We should remember that the PGMO referees are allowed to go and check the monitors if they deem it necessary - they just aren't really encouraged to do it too much.

The referee is not forced to take the input from the AR but it seems generally they are willing to do so and essentially VARs aren't intervening unless it really is an abundantly clear decision (and even then not always!)
 
It appears that some of these VAR decisions are clear and obvious when viewing multiple tv screens and angles. Yet the referee either isn't asked to or wants to look at a different angle to see a different story. Is this a re-refereeing the game issue?

I feel the type of use of language here isn't helpful at all. If something is deemed a clear and obvious error, then that may seen as a slight on the referee because it is seen as an error. It may in fact just be an offence that couldn't have possibly been seen by the referee at the time.

It has feeling of the PGMOL wanting to say that their refs are always right or never err. It needs to change.
 
Again you are making assumptions that you have no way of backing up.

It's is exactly the same as with a normal AR, with the exception that if I flag for an offside the referee can't go and check it on a monitor.
The referee makes a decision AFTER the AR has given him the info. However the referee makes his decision BEFORE VAR queries it and then has to ignore VAR or change his decison, completely different.
 
We should remember that the PGMO referees are allowed to go and check the monitors if they deem it necessary - they just aren't really encouraged to do it too much.

The referee is not forced to take the input from the AR but it seems generally they are willing to do so and essentially VARs aren't intervening unless it really is an abundantly clear decision (and even then not always!)
Have you actually seen a monitor at an EPL game? I haven't
 
The referee makes a decision AFTER the AR has given him the info. However the referee makes his decision BEFORE VAR queries it and then has to ignore VAR or change his decison, completely different.
Not really, the referee can still choose to ignore the AR
 
Back
Top