Refs & VAR 2020/2021 Discussion

[noodlehair]

I think the Bruno one was always going to be overturned after the VIlla one earlier. Both were wrong imo but it would have looked beyond ridiculous if one got overturned and then the same day an almost identical incident didn't. Those are the ones I sympahise with the refs a bit on because I think in either instance if no penalty is given in the first place there's no major controversy, but similarly if it's not overturned there's no major controversy either. Lose-lose scenario...particularly with the second one as not oeverturning it would then contradict the first one.

The hand ball I'm not sure what the complaint is. He's literally flung his arm over his head and blocked the ball with it. It's not like the ball has flown into his hand while it's by his side. He's turned his back on the shot and flung his arm into the air. Effectively made a movement purposely to block the ball which he then has done, with his hand. Even before the apparent rule change that's a penalty....and then the keeper's literally long jumped off his line to save it, and then did the same again with the re-take so even if he saved it again it wouldn't have mattered.

 

[nemanja15]

It's not a clear and obvious foul. It was a game where players pressed each-other and the ref had let a few things slide all game. Rashford and Fred himself had similar incidents all game where they where on their heels without getting the ball, but ref let play go on as it was not enough in it. That's exactly what happened before the goal. Fred didn't win the ball cleanly, he just pressed the other player who chose to make a little bit of a gamble of going to ground in a risky situation facing his own goal and ref did what he had been doing all game. If they're looking at small situations right before goals like this, overruling all these types of decisions for every goal, they also have to consider similar incidents throughout the game that might have led to a goal if it weren't for the wrong call..no?

I hear you, even as an ardent United fan, but still disagree. The point about letting other niggles go is fairly moot... this is a match-changing incident (ref-speak) that requires closer examination. The facts are these: Fred is challenging from behind, can never gain possession without making contact, does make clear contact, and the ball breaks to United, who within two passes have won a penalty. Yes, clear and obvious is subjective to a point, of course it is. But when you see the facts laid out (and video evidence) I still do not understand how the officials let it slide.

 

[Gio]

Is there a single non United fan that thinks that wasn’t a pen?

I know it’s difficult when looking at your own team, and not being biased. But everything I’ve seen shows that’s a pen. We’ve got lucky tonight.

I think you got lucky but both decisions looked correct to me. Martial's was a clear dive, the WBA shout is a marginal one but he gets enough of the ball there, and with the current handball rule United's penalty looked right as well. Pre-VAR the ref probably doesn't deliver a double whammy of harsh decisions on WBA, but the current system is ruthless.

 

[ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg]

I think you got lucky but both decisions looked correct to me. Martial's was a clear dive, the WBA shout is a marginal one but he gets enough of the ball there, and with the current handball rule United's penalty looked right as well. Pre-VAR the ref probably doesn't deliver a double whammy of harsh decisions on WBA, but the current system is ruthless.

i don’t think anyone is debating the United pen or the retake. Both were very clear. Whether the rules are correct, is a different matter. I actually think the keeper off the like rule is right, and I assume that’s always been the rule, but until now hasn’t realistically been enforceable. Clearly gives the pen taker an advantage as the keeper can’t close down the angles by coming out, but that’s no bad thing.

I don’t like the handball rule though, but given the rules, it’s a pen.

 

[Annihilate Now!]

I think at this point it's pretty clear they need to do away with this "clear and obvious" bollocks... Just be what it is, if the refs think something is review worthy then it'll be reviewed. Plain and simple.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

I'm not denying that the use of it is making the PL worse. But that's on the PL, not on the system. VAR is an improvement for the game if used correctly, so your Trump comparison makes no sense because that's no good to begin with no matter how you apply it.

Technology in sports works and you only have to look at other sports to see that. It's how the Premier League has decided to use VAR that's fecking it all up and making people sick of it. You just have to look at the handball rules now, which are in place to "avoid any controversy" but it's causing a hundred times more controversy than it used to because it's executed poorly.

“VAR Works”..... aside from all the ways it doesn’t work.

It’s a horror show. It’s made the game worse. I watch a decent amount of Bundesliga as my brother in law lives there, and it’s still a backwards step there too.

It’s inclusion has shifted post-match discussions from heated debates around refereeing errors, to polarised discussions about where an arm starts, frame rates, width of goal lines, what ‘getting the ball’ constitutes, how far ‘off the line’ is off the line, can a hand be offside.

It’s all shit. If the world had watched this going down in the MLS for two years, nobody would be beating a drum to start it up here. We’d be taking the p1ss out of the yanks turning Soccer into the NFL.

Instead, there’s this Brexitesque divide. You’re Leave or Remain. That’s it. No room for a Remainer that wants reworked immigration protocols. No room for a Leaver that wants freedom of movement to continue. Two options.

Pro VAR and you must apparently support it staying, even the ugly parts. Any criticism and you’re ‘Anti-VAR’. It’s pathetic. Two camps. Polarised.

It kind of mostly works better for Goal Line decisions than a linesman. That’s probably it. That’s the one nailed on success. Even that I think should be done without the cartoon imagery, shadows and lines.

Everything else was as contentious, or less contentious before. (Note : I am Not saying ‘Better before’).

It’s been a total shambles and emotions have trumped intelligence.

 

[limerickcitykid]

“VAR Works”..... aside from all the ways it doesn’t work.

It’s a horror show. It’s made the game worse. I watch a decent amount of Bundesliga as my brother in law lives there, and it’s still a backwards step there too.

It’s inclusion has shifted post-match discussions from heated debates around refereeing errors, to polarised discussions about where an arm starts, frame rates, width of goal lines, what ‘getting the ball’ constitutes, how far ‘off the line’ is off the line, can a hand be offside.

It’s all shit. If the world had watched this going down in the MLS for two years, nobody would be beating a drum to start it up here. We’d be taking the p1ss out of the yanks turning Soccer into the NFL.

Instead, there’s this Brexitesque divide. You’re Leave or Remain. That’s it. No room for a Remainer that wants reworked immigration protocols. No room for a Leaver that wants freedom of movement to continue. Two options.

Pro VAR and you must apparently support it staying, even the ugly parts. Any criticism and you’re ‘Anti-VAR’. It’s pathetic. Two camps. Polarised.

It kind of mostly works better for Goal Line decisions than a linesman. That’s probably it. That’s the one nailed on success. Even that I think should be done without the cartoon imagery, shadows and lines.

Everything else was as contentious, or less contentious before. (Note : I am Not saying ‘Better before’).

It’s been a total shambles and emotions have trumped intelligence.

VAR wasn’t first thought of by Americans, it wasn’t created by Americans, and it wasn’t first implemented in the USA or MLS.

But who cares, I don’t like something so it’s America’s fault.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

VAR wasn’t first thought of by Americans, it wasn’t created by Americans, and it wasn’t first implemented in the USA or MLS.

But who cares, I don’t like something so it’s America’s fault.

At no point did I say it was their fault. I’m saying if we had witnessed it implemented like this, elsewhere, we would not want to adopt it.

UEFA kind of moves forward as a rule-set so I used MLS as an example. It’s more familiar to me, and more visible than South American leagues. Ditto for SE Asian leagues. Same again for Australasian competition.

 

[limerickcitykid]

At no point did I say it was their fault. I’m saying if we had witnessed it implemented like this, elsewhere, we would not want to adopt it.

UEFA kind of moves forward as a rule-set so I used MLS as an example. It’s more familiar to me, and more visible than South American leagues. Ditto for SE Asian leagues. Same again for Australasian competition.

You claimed you could take the piss out of the yanks for turning football into the NFL. They didn’t create VAR so how can you take the piss out of them? It’s just complete stupidity to even shoehorn America in for no reason.

You claim the world could witness MLS using it for 2 years. MLS didn’t use VAR first so how on Earth could the world witness something that didn’t happen? Once again just plain stupidity.

We did witness it used elsewhere and it was decided to implement it. So again completely wrong.

Your second paragraph is just gibberish.

You’ve even had a moan about “cartoon imagery” of goal line tech, which isn’t VAR, and claim it is only kind of mostly better than a linesman. Perfectly summing up the complete stupidity within the post.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

You claimed you could take the piss out of the yanks for turning football into the NFL. They didn’t create VAR so how can you take the piss out of them? It’s just complete stupidity to even shoehorn America in for no reason.

You claim the world could witness MLS using it for 2 years. MLS didn’t use VAR first so how on Earth could the world witness something that didn’t happen? Once again just plain stupidity.

We did witness it used elsewhere and it was decided to implement it. So again completely wrong.

Your second paragraph is just gibberish.

You’ve even had a moan about “cartoon imagery” of goal line tech, which isn’t VAR, and claim it is only kind of mostly better than a linesman. Perfectly summing up the complete stupidity within the post.

Dude. You missed the qualifier at the start of the sentence. It literally sets up the hypothetical. It’s a single word and only two letters so I can see how you may have missed it as the red mist descended. It’s below, bolded

“If the world had watched this going down in the MLS for two years, nobody would be beating a drum to start it up here”

You do you. If you’re offended, I can edit the post to reference the J-League. Just let me know.

To your final; you seem To be complaining about me endorsing the one area of VAR I support. Which is a real hot take. If you need it as a statement of fact : I endorse VAR for goal line decisions.

 

[Anustart89]

I can't believe people are claiming that overturning their penalty was a ridiculous call. Can somebody look at the replay and say what makes his left leg swing back with full force if not the player himself trying to con the referee? There's no reason for the left leg to go like that from contact to the right leg. Bizarre how people can't understand the basic functions of body movement.

There's no basis for suggesting that the contact from Bruno was what made the player lose his balance, he did it to himself in an attempt to buy a penalty off a tiny piece of contact.

 

[red woppit]

I can't believe people are claiming that overturning their penalty was a ridiculous call. Can somebody look at the replay and say what makes his left leg swing back with full force if not the player himself trying to con the referee? There's no reason for the left leg to go like that from contact to the right leg. Bizarre how people can't understand the basic functions of body movement.

There's no basis for suggesting that the contact from Bruno was what made the player lose his balance, he did it to himself in an attempt to buy a penalty off a tiny piece of contact.

Well done.
Someone who thinks the same as me.
When Bruno goes for the ball, he tries to drag it backwards, so how can the West Brom players leg shoot out at the angle it did, when Bruno's foot/leg was traveling in a different direction.
What annoys me more than anything else is the fact that Association Football is a physical game, where contact with an opponent will always happen, so why should two shins/legs/feet coming into contact be deemed a foul, especially when one player has contacted the ball first. It seems to me that players are falling over at the slightest touch, it happens all over the pitch now, and referees are falling for it more and more.
Going back to the Bruno penalty incident, it was difficult to see if Bruno actually made contact with the other players leg at all, from any angle, not surprised that it was overruled. Very disappointed with Rio and Pete Walton for saying it was a penalty, and "not a clear and obvious error', which it was.

 

[Annihilate Now!]

Big Dermot thinks it wasn't a penalty (though refs do like to agree with other refs where possible)

https://www.skysports.com/football/...lagher-bruno-fernandes-incident-not-a-penalty


VERDICT: "I don't think it was a penalty. Fernandes gets the ball. There is contact, there's no doubt, but l don't think there's contact that would put Conor Gallagher down like that."

"As regards clear and obvious, if the referee on VAR doesn't think it is a penalty, it's clear and obvious to him, then that's the difficulty in defining it as clear and obvious. I think it's very difficult to say to a guy 'yes, give a penalty' when you are convinced it's not."

Asked to categorically state that Fernandes touched the ball first in his tackle, Gallagher replied: "That doesn't matter.

 

[MikeeMike]

I can't believe people are claiming that overturning their penalty was a ridiculous call. Can somebody look at the replay and say what makes his left leg swing back with full force if not the player himself trying to con the referee? There's no reason for the left leg to go like that from contact to the right leg. Bizarre how people can't understand the basic functions of body movement.

There's no basis for suggesting that the contact from Bruno was what made the player lose his balance, he did it to himself in an attempt to buy a penalty off a tiny piece of contact.

Agree 100% and I suspect that is why it wasnt given. He swung left leg away as if fully tripped.

Also annoying is the undermining of VAR, by players, managers and media alike. Johnstone moaning about being off the line. That has been the rule since forever. Then Ian Wright bemoaning the “got the ball first” rule with petty comments about only just and small clips.

If we want VAR then it should be accepted as is. What is clear is obvious referee mistakes are fewer. Unfortunately microscopic analysis is now spoiling the game for me. Can you actually celebrate a goal (at home :/) anymore without an eye on ref putting finger to ear for VAR check.

 

[Anustart89]

Agree 100% and I suspect that is why it wasnt given. He swung left leg away as if fully tripped.

Exactly, and some people have said that it's not a "clear and obvious" error so shouldn't be overturned. But - if the ref's seen Bruno kick towards the player, sees the left leg go and gives a penalty on the basis that Bruno tripped him by making his left leg go and then sees that replay, then obviously he got the sequence of events wrong and that makes it a clear and obvious error anyway.

Do they even use the clear and obvious when the ref himself only has to change his mind? Or was clear and obvious just when VAR went in last season and overruled without pitchside monitor review?

 

[arnie_ni]

Exactly, and some people have said that it's not a "clear and obvious" error so shouldn't be overturned. But - if the ref's seen Bruno kick towards the player, sees the left leg go and gives a penalty on the basis that Bruno tripped him by making his left leg go and then sees that replay, then obviously he got the sequence of events wrong and that makes it a clear and obvious error anyway.

Do they even use the clear and obvious when the ref himself only has to change his mind? Or was clear and obvious just when VAR went in last season and overruled without pitchside monitor review?

They are saying it wasn't clear and obvious enough for the var ref to even tell the ref to go and look at it.

I'm not sure how that's determined

 

[Annihilate Now!]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Dale Johnson's thread for the weekend... suggesting that if VAR are looking at the WBA penalty (which he says isn't clear and obvious), it should also surely be looking at the Martial shirt tug which would have given us a first half penalty.

 

[90 + 5min]

Lot of talk here and in media about Fernandes. But everybody seems to be just fine with not mentioning obvious pulling on Martial in first half that could easy been penalty had Martial gone down.

 

[Mb194dc]

Tonight was poor and he was on VAR for the ridiculous Pickford-van Dijk assault and invisible Mane offside in the Merseyside derby too but he was also on VAR for this:

He felt that wasn't a red card...

It's no wonder the standard of officiating in the Premier League is at an all time low when bums like this guy are getting big jobs.

Just reading the Dale thread for this week.... Pretty clear what VAR in the premier league has been all about from day one... accept it or don't watch I guess because it clearly isn't going to change. Riley is sitting pretty. Can say other leagues have got similarly bad with it recently.

Best solution (from fans point of view anyway...) would be to have the big European leagues all pool their resources and setup referees and VAR structure totally independent of the leagues themselves. Then you might actually get objective decisions and a fair deal for all clubs. I was naive enough to think that is what would happen with VAR but actually I think the situation is even worse, or at lease more obvious problems than before it existed.

 

[Bobski]

So how do we make VAR workable long term? For all the comments that it is just England where problems are occurring I have read and heard a lot to suggest otherwise and it hasn't exactly been perfect in European competition. I don't believe it can be fully removed now, as much as many would like, so do the laws have to be rethought in a post VAR game?

Just on offside I would like to limit the VAR official to a still of the moment of the pass, no magnification, no lines, just a still frame, the linesman view we could call it, and tell them to judge from that, if you can't tell it is offside from that, it is not offside.

 

[sullydnl]

So how do we make VAR workable long term? For all the comments that it is just England where problems are occurring I have read and heard a lot to suggest otherwise and it hasn't exactly been perfect in European competition. I don't believe it can be fully removed now, as much as many would like, so do the laws have to be rethought in a post VAR game?

Just on offside I would like to limit the VAR official to a still of the moment of the pass, no magnification, no lines, just a still frame, the linesman view we could call it, and tell them to judge from that, if you can't tell it is offside from that, it is not offside.

Things are better in other leagues but that's mostly because the PL botched its implementation of VAR particularly badly rather than because it's done exceptionally well anywhere else.

In reality it's never going to be perfect and there will always be people who outright dislike it. It should at least improve though as technology improves, laws adjust to the new reality and best practice is discovered. There will be several years of trial and error before VAR plateaus at however good/bad it will (largely) be in the long run.

In fact when the PL were implementing VAR the secretary of IFAB said that based on what they'd heard from other sports it would be a decade before they fully understood how it should work. And based on what we've seen so far that sort of timescale certainly doesn't seem overly pessimistic. It really is a huge change to the game.

Of all the areas it needs to improve though, offsides are 100% the ones that concern me least as that's the area that will be most impacted by the improvements in technology we're already seeing. Fundamentally it comes down to "is point X further ahead than point Y at moment Z". That's a measurable thing, it's just about increasing the accuracy of that measurement as time goes on.

Whereas subjective calls are the real head melt.

 

[McGrathsipan]

fecking ruining the game.
I hate it.

 

[MikeeMike]

Lot of talk here and in media about Fernandes. But everybody seems to be just fine with not mentioning obvious pulling on Martial in first half that could easy been penalty had Martial gone down.

I thought Martial did “go down” with slightest shirt tug. For me was a dive and actually would like a retrospective system to punish this. Same with WBA player hurling his left leg. Same with players leaping in the air if they get the slightest clip. Always strange how if advantage played and attacking they recover in seconds.

 

[arthurka]

Coote is a cnut as well as a shite anything. Thank God they took him off our game as VAR operator and put him in the Utd game instead. He would definitely be ruling a couple of our legitimate goals as offside or handball. As well as awarding non existent penalties to Leicester. I can sleep easy tonight.

The fact he keeps Ole at Utd even longer is an added bonus (1-0 against a totally smashable WBA, excellent).

Thanks for this I thought I was the only one with this take on things at Utd. I have a feeling VAR is being used to keep Ole hanging on.

 

[tomaldinho1]

Big Dermot thinks it wasn't a penalty (though refs do like to agree with other refs where possible)

https://www.skysports.com/football/...lagher-bruno-fernandes-incident-not-a-penalty


VERDICT: "I don't think it was a penalty. Fernandes gets the ball. There is contact, there's no doubt, but l don't think there's contact that would put Conor Gallagher down like that."

"As regards clear and obvious, if the referee on VAR doesn't think it is a penalty, it's clear and obvious to him, then that's the difficulty in defining it as clear and obvious. I think it's very difficult to say to a guy 'yes, give a penalty' when you are convinced it's not."

Asked to categorically state that Fernandes touched the ball first in his tackle, Gallagher replied: "That doesn't matter.

Regardless of what you think about the penalty - this kind of comment is what makes me question the standard of refereeing in this country. I get Gallagher is no longer a current ref but he's effectively become their spokesman for Sky.

In this scenario it shouldn't matter if a player has engineered contact because that happens 90% of the time and you don't see refs going to the VAR monitor to overrule those penalties. Even when someone has bought a foul, it's still a foul so in this instance it is crucial to know whether Fernandes made contact with the ball or the player first.

Personally I think it's a good tackle, although I am biased, and he gets a small nick on the ball before the shin on shin contact that Gallagher reacts to.

 

[MikeeMike]

They are saying it wasn't clear and obvious enough for the var ref to even tell the ref to go and look at it.

I'm not sure how that's determined

What is clear and obvious is that even after we have all seen the replays many times and from all angles, opinion is divided as to the correct decision. This, to me , implies that VAR is failing in super tight decisions. Not sure what the answer is but only goal line tech seems to be acceptable at the moment.

 

[cyberman]

Always thought the doesnt matter if they touch the ball argument really applied to bad tackles?
If thats a pen then players will need to 100 percent win the ball and never touch an attacker in the progress ever again

 

[Someone]

I was a big var supporter but I don't think it's working at all. A lot of decisions are controversial and we keep blaming the refs, but I wonder if football is the kind of sport where the laws of the game are as clear as some think. Also it sucks that I can't be happy about any goal scored until it's reviewed. Perhaps we could find a fast tech for offsides like goal line technology, but all in all it has been dreadful.

 

[sullydnl]

Always thought the doesnt matter if they touch the ball argument really applied to bad tackles?
If thats a pen then players will need to 100 percent win the ball and never touch an attacker in the progress ever again

Kinda.

It essentially comes down to whether the tackle is careless, reckless or uses excessive force. If the referee judges that to be the case then it doesn't matter whether they played the ball or not, it's still a foul. In fact I'm not sure the laws even mention playing the ball at all.

However, the ball being played obviously makes it less likely for the ref to deem the tackle careless. Or to look at it from the opposite direction, a tackle where the ball isn't played and the only contact is with the opposition player is obviously more likely to be deemed careless.

If you're not awarding a penalty against Fernandes then the logic is that he didn't use excessive force (which he didn't) and that it wasn't a sufficiently careless challenge. Playing the ball first is obviously *a* factor when weighing up the latter part and likely made the difference here.

 

[VivaRonaldo85]

VAR is used seamlessly in rugby and cricket but is a car crash in football (PL in particular) right now. I wonder if those other sports had such issues in how it’s supposed to be consistently used by the officials?

All VAR has done in football is change the pattern of debates and/or arguments about incidents in or after matches that we all used to get pre VAR anyway. Apart from goal line technology which is so black or white, I don’t like it and preferred football before it came in.

 

[Withnail]

I can't believe people are claiming that overturning their penalty was a ridiculous call. Can somebody look at the replay and say what makes his left leg swing back with full force if not the player himself trying to con the referee? There's no reason for the left leg to go like that from contact to the right leg. Bizarre how people can't understand the basic functions of body movement.

There's no basis for suggesting that the contact from Bruno was what made the player lose his balance, he did it to himself in an attempt to buy a penalty off a tiny piece of contact.

Well done.
Someone who thinks the same as me.
When Bruno goes for the ball, he tries to drag it backwards, so how can the West Brom players leg shoot out at the angle it did, when Bruno's foot/leg was traveling in a different direction.
What annoys me more than anything else is the fact that Association Football is a physical game, where contact with an opponent will always happen, so why should two shins/legs/feet coming into contact be deemed a foul, especially when one player has contacted the ball first. It seems to me that players are falling over at the slightest touch, it happens all over the pitch now, and referees are falling for it more and more.
Going back to the Bruno penalty incident, it was difficult to see if Bruno actually made contact with the other players leg at all, from any angle, not surprised that it was overruled. Very disappointed with Rio and Pete Walton for saying it was a penalty, and "not a clear and obvious error', which it was.

Agree 100% and I suspect that is why it wasnt given. He swung left leg away as if fully tripped.

Also annoying is the undermining of VAR, by players, managers and media alike. Johnstone moaning about being off the line. That has been the rule since forever. Then Ian Wright bemoaning the “got the ball first” rule with petty comments about only just and small clips.

If we want VAR then it should be accepted as is. What is clear is obvious referee mistakes are fewer. Unfortunately microscopic analysis is now spoiling the game for me. Can you actually celebrate a goal (at home :/) anymore without an eye on ref putting finger to ear for VAR check.

It was a good decision. The contact was minimal as all of the above point out and that Gallagher was at it all game.

There were three or four occasions were he initiated contact and flung himself to the ground. He really could have been carded for it. There was one on half way which I couldn't believe the ref fell for. He slowed down, waited for Fred I think it was to get close enough and then threw his legs back into him.

 

[ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg]

VAR is used seamlessly in rugby and cricket but is a car crash in football (PL in particular) right now. I wonder if those other sports had such issues in how it’s supposed to be consistently used by the officials?

All VAR has done in football is change the pattern of debates and/or arguments about incidents in or after matches that we all used to get pre VAR anyway. Apart from goal line technology which is so black or white, I don’t like it and preferred football before it came in.

in cricket, it’s a lot more black and white. The absolute thinnest nick of the bat, that even the batsman cannot detect is out. No ifs, no buts. The LBW law is also very clear, when it comes to decisions that can or can’t be overturned.

what is also great about cricket, is that the umpire runs through the process every time, and we can hear it at home. It’s also far quicker (but that comes in time). There is also a lot more transparency in rugby (I very rarely watch a game), but I believe you can hear what the ref is saying to the players etc.

the challenge football has is that many of the decisions are subjective. Take the Bruno pen incident. I think it’s a definite pen, some people agree with me, some don’t. You don’t get that ambiguity in cricket, rugby or tennis, or if you do, the not the norm, and not every game, like in football at the moment.

the standard of VAR referees has to be questioned. We should be able to see the exact replays they are looking at, and hear what they are saying to the infield refs. That’s going to need some serious retraining, but will help from a supporters perspective. At the moment, it’s a farce. You can accept the on field ref getting it wrong (with or without VAR), but with all the tech available, we still see questionable decisions.

they should either make better decisions, or scale back the use of VAR so it’s used much more infrequently.

 

[roseguy64]

Bit weird that none of the talk from the commentators or pundits is about whether or not Bruno touched the ball. They just focused on whether there was contact between legs, which there clearly was.

The refs need to be mic’d up. I’m convinced if people were able to hear why it was over turned it would be easier to accept. All the focus would have shifted from “was there contact” to “did Bruno touch the ball first”. It would have cut 90% of the debate that’s being had.

I'm sure this has been said already but on the feed I was watching on they played audio of the ref's side of the convo with the VAR. All he wanted to know was if the ball got touched first. He clearly thought the ball wasn't touched and it was all man which is why he gave the pen initially. He realised that the ball got taken first and didn't then feel the contact was enough.

 

[roseguy64]

VAR is used seamlessly in rugby and cricket but is a car crash in football (PL in particular) right now. I wonder if those other sports had such issues in how it’s supposed to be consistently used by the officials?

All VAR has done in football is change the pattern of debates and/or arguments about incidents in or after matches that we all used to get pre VAR anyway. Apart from goal line technology which is so black or white, I don’t like it and preferred football before it came in.

I don't remember everything but video technology in cricket has made lots of changes since it was first introduced. I stopped watching for a few years until this year and saw the differences.

Nothing major like this is perfect right off.

 

[Longshanks]

It was a good decision. The contact was minimal as all of the above point out and that Gallagher was at it all game.

There were three or four occasions were he initiated contact and flung himself to the ground. He really could have been carded for it. There was one on half way which I couldn't believe the ref fell for. He slowed down, waited for Fred I think it was to get close enough and then threw his legs back into him.

I agree with this, the problem is the law surrounding fouls is very much up for interpretation, officially it states a foul is to be called if ' a player is impeded with contact'. Nice and clear when football is a contact sport and surely any contact could impede.

For me the IFAB and the FA need to clarify this as clearly there is alot of debate surrounding decisions that involve minimal contact, just how much contact is allowed before its classed as enough to impede? Currently players just throw themselves to the ground with any contact in the penalty area.

The other element of this that needs clarifying is the winning the ball argument, in my eyes if a defending player makes contact with the ball taking it away from the attacking player than as long as he takes the ball before making contact with the attacker and it's not classed as reckless or dangerous than it's not a foul, but again there is no clarification of this in the laws.

What hope have the referees got if the laws themselves surrounding what is a fair tackle and what is a foul are as clear as mud?

 

[Mshafeek]

I think we should just get along with it. I really hope that they don't scrap it from fan pressure. Application of rules in a football game includes a lot of subjectivity and is sure to invite controversy no matter what. With time, improvements and refinements are guaranteed - both from experience and technological advancement. I don't know why people calling for scrapping it are forgetting the huge irritating mess that is refereeing being left solely on the discretion of a single person. Why they seem to be fine with the huge blots refereeing mistakes have left on the history of football. Even with all these issues, statistically VAR is sure to improve objectivity , and more so when it is narrowed down to the game changing decisions.

 

[Dan_F]

I'm sure this has been said already but on the feed I was watching on they played audio of the ref's side of the convo with the VAR. All he wanted to know was if the ball got touched first. He clearly thought the ball wasn't touched and it was all man which is why he gave the pen initially. He realised that the ball got taken first and didn't then feel the contact was enough.

Thanks. Football seems to enjoy doing things so illogically. Look at rugby and how much clearer it is being able to hear the ref. I’m not saying we need to have it all the time, but just when play is stopped it would be great.

 

[VivaRonaldo85]

in cricket, it’s a lot more black and white. The absolute thinnest nick of the bat, that even the batsman cannot detect is out. No ifs, no buts. The LBW law is also very clear, when it comes to decisions that can or can’t be overturned.

what is also great about cricket, is that the umpire runs through the process every time, and we can hear it at home. It’s also far quicker (but that comes in time). There is also a lot more transparency in rugby (I very rarely watch a game), but I believe you can hear what the ref is saying to the players etc.

the challenge football has is that many of the decisions are subjective. Take the Bruno pen incident. I think it’s a definite pen, some people agree with me, some don’t. You don’t get that ambiguity in cricket, rugby or tennis, or if you do, the not the norm, and not every game, like in football at the moment.

the standard of VAR referees has to be questioned. We should be able to see the exact replays they are looking at, and hear what they are saying to the infield refs. That’s going to need some serious retraining, but will help from a supporters perspective. At the moment, it’s a farce. You can accept the on field ref getting it wrong (with or without VAR), but with all the tech available, we still see questionable decisions.

they should either make better decisions, or scale back the use of VAR so it’s used much more infrequently.

Interesting points. What would make it more palatable for me is:

1. Let the fans hear the dialogue between the on pitch referee and the VAR, much like they do in rugby and cricket. It appears the TV commentators hear this conversation in football but no one else does.
2. Use it more objectively than subjectively, i.e. place less importance on its involvement in every incident and make it available to determine factual incidents.
3. Clarify what clear and obvious means and stick to it; i.e. someone being a finger nail offside is not a clear and obvious error, it's just human error. If someone is 2 yards off side let's say, and the linesman has inexplicably missed it (very rare that happens these days), then fair enough, that's a clear and obvious error that needs correcting.
4. Allow the on pitch referee to be in control of VAR (like you feel they are in rugby) rather than the VAR be in control of the on pitch referee. By that, I mean let the on pitch referee make the decisions, only have VAR call them if it they have missed a clear and obvious breach of the rules and allow the on pitch referee to call VAR if he thinks he has seen something but wishes for clarity from another pair of eyes on a monitor.
5. Design its implementation as a tool to support on pitch referees, not turn the on pitch referee into VAR puppets who are refereeing the game from Stockley Park by getting the referee to do as they say on the pitch (that's how it feels now).

 

[Withnail]

I'm sure this has been said already but on the feed I was watching on they played audio of the ref's side of the convo with the VAR. All he wanted to know was if the ball got touched first. He clearly thought the ball wasn't touched and it was all man which is why he gave the pen initially. He realised that the ball got taken first and didn't then feel the contact was enough.

Did they actually have an audio feed of the ref or could you hear it because the camera was close to the ref and there are no crowds?

I think it's a bit odd he was so fixated on whether Bruno touched the ball, given the contact was minimal and the delay you could see on the replay between the contact and the player throwing his legs out.

I'm not sure how anyone could look at that footage and conclude Bruno's action actually caused the player to lose his footing. It may be too hard to do but surely this could the reasoning used: Was there sufficient contact to cause the player to go down? A trip or a barge is one thing but when one player in that position, who isn't running, gets a tap on the shin pad of his non-standing leg it's not going to have much of an effect at all.

 

[roseguy64]

Did they actually have an audio feed of the ref or could you hear it because the camera was close to the ref and there are no crowds?

I think it's a bit odd he was so fixated on whether Bruno touched the ball, given the contact was minimal and the delay you could see on the replay between the contact and the player throwing his legs out.

I'm not sure how anyone could look at that footage and conclude Bruno's action actually caused the player to lose his footing. It may be too hard to do but surely this could the reasoning used: Was there sufficient contact to cause the player to go down? A trip or a barge is one thing but when one player in that position, who isn't running, gets a tap on the shin pad of his non-standing leg it's not going to have much of an effect at all.

The latter. No crowd so the audio of his side was clear.