While i understand they cannot make themselves liable for lawsuits etc., if this is true... i’m a bit out of words.
Surely if he said this he won’t ref the PL ever again? In the normal competetive business world, and with the amount of money involved, the PL would face a hefty lawsuit.
When presented with all the available facts at the time. How did you make the wrong decision. Like, explain it, and i might accept. But the decision to open VAR without making ref’s have mic’s, post match interviews or otherwise making them susceptible to the consequence of their decisions is beyond me.
It’s not going to happen. The more likely outcome is that a similar handball occurs and a penalty is given
Ifthat happens it will be a pen for SHU, so they can maintain narrative.Bonus: they miss it.
What I want to understand is what is it that the referee has seen that convinces him that it isn't a penalty. This is why refs need to come out and be questioned at the end of games. It's all guesswork until they start doing this. If they know that they're going to be questioned after games, maybe they'll make better decisions during the match.
Exactly. TV2 norway got a comment from the VAR bus saying CHO’s hand was not moving towards the ball, hence no pen. Which obviously is both wrong, AND wrong use of the rules. If he had said Greenwoods hand affected the handball, i could have accepted the deciscion(even though wrong). According to Atwell you can obviously position yourself like a GK, as long as your hand doesn’t move towards the ball. Also, looking from last change of direction kn the ball, he moved his hand towards the ball for everything but the last 2/100s of a second...
Might be wrong but is that not what they do in their referee reports after the game which get submitted to the league and FA? Basically explaining every decision they’ve made and why.
Again, I might be talking pure sour grapes here but I’m sure that’s what they do after every game they officiate?
That has do be filed what, 24(?)/48(?) hrs after the game? Whoch is when the normal controversy has all died down, other games have taken the spotlight.
What we need is to know why they make the decision they do, when they make it. I’m all for putting mic’s on refs and/or having them themselves give the reason behind their call in VAR situations, like in american football. Without further comparison to that game, that should be possible. In cases like today, where that is obviously not enough. Why are they shielded from post match interviews? The restrictions should be on the interviewer, asking non-loaded questions. I can accept understandable mistakes, if you can tell me how you made them.
Or just have them mic'd up! If we heard their conversation with the VAR we'd know exactly what's going on and why they're making the call. When you hear rugby refs talking to the TMO it's completely clear to everyone what's going on, whereas in football it's deliberately left for us to guess.
Exactly. For me, easier to accept even imo wrong decisions if you say why. Like, greenwood affected CHO’s arm enough that i thought it wasn’t a pen. OK, fair enough. I disagree, but at least i know why you didn’t give it.