A&H

World Cup Second refereeing briefing streamed live.

The Referee Store
This highlights how much influence the VAR has in talking to the ref.

You can the VAR is explaining what is on screen while the ref is watching it. The idea that the ref is able to make his/her own decision is laughable.

Going back to the bad handball decisions...
 
Admitting they broke protocol in the Germany game...
I don't mind that but it gets up my nose a bit when I read about how great the protocol is!
 
So far every VAR example has been review after the opinion of the VAR has been different to the one of the referee, not if the referee has been clearly and obviously wrong which is what the protocol says.
 
Collina ace again... explaining they changed the guidance to officials to deal with holding after Kane and it worked
 
Best at the end. Collina explains that players communicate with signs sometimes when they don't speak the referee's language... in explaining why no cards for making the box sign. Very clear. Good stuff.
 
Was he saying at the start that a referee/referees were replying "I don't know" when players asked why penalties were/weren't given after a review?
 
santa sangria said:
Best at the end. Collina explains that players communicate with signs sometimes when they don't speak the referee's language... in explaining why no cards for making the box sign. Very clear. Good stuff.
Click to expand...

Cop out. Players shouldn’t be allowed to ask at all.
 
Overall a good briefing. Many reasonable and sensible responses and some good clarifications. As expected, VAR dominated the discussions. Despite enjoying many of the responses I wasn't happy with a few things.

A very interesting interpretation of deliberate handball by Collina too.

Its now clear to me that VAR has easily improved the decision making overall. While it has not corrected all the wrongs, it has corrected many wrongs (some of those being subjective).

While they were happy to discuss the specific incident where VAR had positive impact, when asked about incidents which is widely known as negative (Switzerland pen or Kane pen...) they danced around a proper response. A simple admission of that they got it wrong would have given them more credibility.

From the VAR figures Collina gave:
  • 335 incidents checked
  • 17 reviews,
  • 14 decisions changed
  • Referee accuracy without VAR 95%
  • Referee accuracy with VAR 99.3%
Firstly, I find the figure 99.3% very peculiar. 333 (out of 335) accurate decisions would give 99.40% accuracy, 332 would give 99.1%. You can't have a decision 2/3rd correct. So 99.3% seem somewhat arbitrary.

According to their stats, at worst, there were only 3 VAR missed incidents or mistakes (0.07%). This is clearly wrong for me because i can think of at least 4 of or 5 of the top of my head.

Lastly, listening to the briefing and the examples of the VAR reviews, it seams that "clear and obvious error" is much less important than getting the KMI correct, even if through wrong process. I really don't have an issues with this.
 
JH said:
Was he saying at the start that a referee/referees were replying "I don't know" when players asked why penalties were/weren't given after a review?
Click to expand...
He was saying there are reports which say that but he doesn't believe it to be true. It doesn't make sense for a referee to say he doesn't know why a penalty is given.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JH
If Gazzetta Dello Sport is correct, Marciniak and Brych refused to accept the recommendation of the VAR to have an on field review in SWE : GER and SRB : SUI and that they've been sent home. I guess we won't know if it's true to not, but Brych being one game and done would be shocking.
 
cwyeary said:
If Gazzetta Dello Sport is correct, Marciniak and Brych refused to accept the recommendation of the VAR to have an on field review in SWE : GER and SRB : SUI and that they've been sent home. I guess we won't know if it's true to not, but Brych being one game and done would be shocking.
Click to expand...
What were the situations, can you recall?
 
JH said:
What were the situations, can you recall?
Click to expand...

SWE : GER was the potential DOGSO foul on Sweden with the push/trip and SRB : SUI was when the Serbian was bear hugged by two defenders. The Italian paper is reporting (e.g. NOT confirmed) that the VARs recommended an OFR but the referee refused. FIFA judged those to be clear errors that should have been fixed. It also says the Kane hold against Tunisia should have been a PK, but they used that incident as an example of holding that should be called during the rest of the tournament.
 
The “VAR Official” twitter account (subsequently suspended) said Brych had ignored the request for an onfied review.
 
cwyeary said:
SWE : GER was the potential DOGSO foul on Sweden with the push/trip and SRB : SUI was when the Serbian was bear hugged by two defenders. The Italian paper is reporting (e.g. NOT confirmed) that the VARs recommended an OFR but the referee refused. FIFA judged those to be clear errors that should have been fixed. It also says the Kane hold against Tunisia should have been a PK, but they used that incident as an example of holding that should be called during the rest of the tournament.
Click to expand...
I'd be VERY surprised if they sent Brych home after one game and I'm not sure how exactly the paper would know what was said by the referee and VAR, but it doesn't look good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top