A&H

WBA vs Southampton

R

RustyRef

Administrator
Staff member
Thoughts on the disallowed goal? For me that is the worst VAR offside error made to date, Diagne is very clearly onside. Yet because of the position of Bartley's body they say that they can't draw a line and therefore have to stick with the AR's original offside decision, even though it was obviously wrong to the naked eye.

It really is a complete shambles now. I don't blame the officials as they seem to be as confused as everyone else, but there needs to be a much more visible management profile with these increasingly controversial decisions being explained after games. Not just from a nameless and faceless Tweet, but rather someone in a position of authority standing in front of a camera.
 
The Referee Store
It's every game. At best, it's every other game. What if that was the last day of the season and relegation depended upon the outcome? What then?
Litigation?
 
I actually think the assistant only raised the flag because of "instructions" of close calls to effectively check "just in case". But I suspect that he thinks he was onside but protocol told him to raise it (because of the "just in case").
I understand VAR won't check if assistant doesn't flag.

I also thought, from a recent match where something similar occurred, that they (PGMOL) said something like they have multiple cameras so that they can draw the lines specifically, even if WE don't see those extra cameras. So where are the cameras for this game.
 
It's a 'funny old game'. Way too funny for 'remote refereeing'. I know I'm really vociferous on the subject. I do try to see a future for VAR. But there's an absolute chasm between where it is now and where it needs to be. Why would anyone have faith in 'them' bridging the chasm?
ladbroke8745 said:
I actually think the assistant only raised the flag because of "instructions" of close calls to effectively check "just in case". But I suspect that he thinks he was onside but protocol told him to raise it (because of the "just in case").
Click to expand...
Probably right there
 
ladbroke8745 said:
I actually think the assistant only raised the flag because of "instructions" of close calls to effectively check "just in case". But I suspect that he thinks he was onside but protocol told him to raise it (because of the "just in case").
I understand VAR won't check if assistant doesn't flag.

I also thought, from a recent match where something similar occurred, that they (PGMOL) said something like they have multiple cameras so that they can draw the lines specifically, even if WE don't see those extra cameras. So where are the cameras for this game.
Click to expand...
All goals are checked. Or at least that is my understanding.
 
ladbroke8745 said:
I actually think the assistant only raised the flag because of "instructions" of close calls to effectively check "just in case". But I suspect that he thinks he was onside but protocol told him to raise it (because of the "just in case").
I understand VAR won't check if assistant doesn't flag.

I also thought, from a recent match where something similar occurred, that they (PGMOL) said something like they have multiple cameras so that they can draw the lines specifically, even if WE don't see those extra cameras. So where are the cameras for this game.
Click to expand...

Every goal is checked whether the AR flags or not. If an AR flags and it wasn't offside they get an incorrect KMI even though VAR rescues them, and vice versa. In fairness to the AR it was a really difficult call because of the defender's trailing leg and the additional presence of Bartley, he would have seen a lot of WBA kit and not a lot of Southampton.

It is unfathomable as to how VAR came to offside though. If the whole system fails if a player is in the way of a camera view then the whole system isn't fit for purpose, and certainly not fit enough to make decisions down to millimetres as they have been doing.
 
ladbroke8745 said:
I actually think the assistant only raised the flag because of "instructions" of close calls to effectively check "just in case". But I suspect that he thinks he was onside but protocol told him to raise it (because of the "just in case").
I understand VAR won't check if assistant doesn't flag.
Click to expand...
Completely incorrect.

The myths out there on instructions are legion. ARs are instructed to identify OS exactly as they would without VAR.

But they are supposed to delay the flag if there is an immediate scoring opportunity until the goal is scored or the opportunity ends, at which point they raise the flag. Only the timing of the flag is supposed to change.

Every goal is reviewed for an offense in the build up, which means reviewing for OS, as well as for other fouls in the build up.

I understand the AR's error here, as he is looking through the defender at two attackers who are close to one another. All I can think of for VAR is that someone had the ill advised but well-intentioned idea of telling VARs that if they can't draw a line, the call stands. So technical instruction overrides common sense.
 
The VAR lacked a bit of common sense here. PGMOL needs to hire cleverer referees who can think on their feet (or seat) and react to these unusual situations.
 
I think this is possibly the most baffling decision I've seen to date.

It's very clear to the naked eye that Diagne is onside, yet the refs have seemingly become so reliant on the tech that they won't (or can't) overrule the on field AR.
 
Orange boots is clearly in an offside position. Yelloiw boots.....maaaaaybe?

Is there any possibility that the offside was upheld because orange boots was considered to have been interfering with the keeper?
 
GraemeS said:
Orange boots is clearly in an offside position. Yelloiw boots.....maaaaaybe?

Is there any possibility that the offside was upheld because orange boots was considered to have been interfering with the keeper?
Click to expand...

not imo, based on similar decisions that have or have not been made this year
 
GraemeS said:
Orange boots is clearly in an offside position. Yelloiw boots.....maaaaaybe?

Is there any possibility that the offside was upheld because orange boots was considered to have been interfering with the keeper?
Click to expand...
I think that's the only reasonable explanation - but I don't think that tallies with the tweet following.
 
TV Pundits et al: It works in rugby and cricket. VAR must be more like them!!

VAR: Don’t have enough evidence to overturn. On field call stands. (Or umpires call)

TV Pundits et al: NOOOO!!! Not like that!!!!

Point is it proves to me that irrespective of the outcome it will never be accepted, always criticised and always posited as wrong.

Unlike rugby and cricket where it’s accepted.
 
I think football does make life more difficult for itself as well. In the examples you state, everyone involved knows that the TMO/3rd umpire has failed to find definitive evidence and has just stuck with the onfield decision, because you hear the conversation and understand how they got to that point.

Football's inexplicable decision to hide that process means we have no idea if that's what happened in this case, or if the VAR think he has seen definite evidence - and if the latter is the case, we have no way of deciding if that decision is correct or not. VAR was always going to be an uphill battle to acceptance - things like this only make it harder and it would have been so easy to avoid if they'd just taken a look at literally any other sport that has already done this.
 
Tealeaf said:
TV Pundits et al: It works in rugby and cricket. VAR must be more like them!!

VAR: Don’t have enough evidence to overturn. On field call stands. (Or umpires call)

TV Pundits et al: NOOOO!!! Not like that!!!!

Point is it proves to me that irrespective of the outcome it will never be accepted, always criticised and always posited as wrong.

Unlike rugby and cricket where it’s accepted.
Click to expand...
I'd argue that this angle should have been enough evidence to overturn the offside decision, and that a match official in rugby for example would have the common sense to see that.

1.png

However, irrespective of what you think about the decision, are you seriously telling me that in this day and age they can't have enough camera angles to be able to clear this up? In that Sky Sports video we see two replays from this side of the pitch, and one from behind the goal (where the GK is blocking the defender) - were there really no cameras on the other side of the stadium which would have been able to see without Bartley blocking it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: es1
Alex Rush-Fear said:
I'd argue that this angle should have been enough evidence to overturn the offside decision, and that a match official in rugby for example would have the common sense to see that.

View attachment 4905

However, irrespective of what you think about the decision, are you seriously telling me that in this day and age they can't have enough camera angles to be able to clear this up? In that Sky Sports video we see two replays from this side of the pitch, and one from behind the goal (where the GK is blocking the defender) - were there really no cameras on the other side of the stadium which would have been able to see without Bartley blocking it?
Click to expand...
See, whilst it'll looks okay he could possibly have a stray arm pit hair from that angle.
 
RustyRef said:
Every goal is checked whether the AR flags or not. If an AR flags and it wasn't offside they get an incorrect KMI even though VAR rescues them, and vice versa. In fairness to the AR it was a really difficult call because of the defender's trailing leg and the additional presence of Bartley, he would have seen a lot of WBA kit and not a lot of Southampton.

It is unfathomable as to how VAR came to offside though. If the whole system fails if a player is in the way of a camera view then the whole system isn't fit for purpose, and certainly not fit enough to make decisions down to millimetres as they have been doing.
Click to expand...
Agree 100%, but isn't the wider point, which I and others have made numerous times, that ANY system, even GLT (Once!) can fail.

Therefore, chasing the dream, of never having a wrong decision, is futile.

Of course the obvious argument is, are the 'wrong' decisions acceptable in pursuit of more right ones.

I think we can all agree that with GLT that is clearly the case, but the debate with VAR shows that it is very much in the balance.

As I've said many times I think the disadvantages outweigh the advantages by a long way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top