NotChatGPT
Brownfinger
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2023
- Messages
- 1,327
ThatI agree, but VAR must have looked at it from several angles, more than the ref could, and upheld it, so your agrument is a tad invalid, and so is Gallaghers
Is
Not
How
VAR
Works
ThatI agree, but VAR must have looked at it from several angles, more than the ref could, and upheld it, so your agrument is a tad invalid, and so is Gallaghers
I know that, and you know that, but some here seem to think that VAR upholding the decision is not part of the discussion.That's not how VAR works.
ReallyThat
Is
Not
How
VAR
Works
Really
So enlighten me, how does VAR work ?
I know that, and you know that, but some here seem to think that VAR upholding the decision is not part of the discussion.
It's simple either 4 officials got it wrong, or 4 got it right
Really
So enlighten me, how does VAR work ?
I agree, but VAR must have looked at it from several angles, more than the ref could, and upheld it, so your agrument is a tad invalid, and so is Gallaghers
I mean you know it has to be a monumental cock up for Dermot to disagree with a refs decision!!
I said it yesterday that i don't think Kavanagh has much of a view of the situation.
DERMOT SAYS: I don't think the referee can see it. He can't see the challenge happen. It's a glancing blow down the leg. He has an optical illusion, a more palatable decision would have been a yellow card.
Yeah I don't really blame Kavanagh too much - at first glance you can maybe see why he thought it was a red. It's a 100% VAR failing (which harks back to a complete flaw in the way VAR is operated).
Personally I think a red card decision should always be discussed at the monitor. It's a huge, game-changing, alteration (generally much greater then a penalty award in my opinion - depending on the time of award obviously) - so the refs gathering around for a minute or 2 to discuss it doesn't seem too crazy to me.
As I saw it they didn't send him to the screen so they didn't think there was a error in the decisionBut it's not.
A subjective decision has been made on the pitch by Kavanagh, in order to send him to the screen it has to be a clear and obvious error. It being a subjective decision, and it's a general rule of thumb that subjective decisions should stand, means that the referees are very rarely sent to the monitor for situations like this. If he'd given him a yellow card VAR wouldn't have recommended checking it on the monitor for potential serious foul play. schrodinger foul play.A
Genuinely think that would solve so many issues.TV stream on his iPhone on his wrist
According to the Premier League, all cards have to be reviewed by VAR, as do all possible cards.But there has clearly been a dramatic change this season with pressure being put on VAR to not get involved and re-referee incidents. In fact, I don't think I have seen VAR change a single decision so far this season that wasn't related to offside. I am sure it has happened... and maybe someone can point to an incident, but it's very rare this season that VAR overturns anything penalty or red card related. That's definitely not because the decisions are so good.
Genuinely think that would solve so many issues.
Let the referee look at the wrist-screen while the players are trying to argue with the ref, and if the decision is really close he can jog over to the screen.
The game was probably stopped for over two minutes after the tackle, and it would take the ref about 20 seconds to check that replay on his wrist and see that he got it wrong.
Take yesterdays game, other than the Bruno incident you probably only have the handball on Romero to check, which would also only need one replay to see that the call was correct. Just start the replay right away and the ref gets a quick look. I'm no fan of VAR, but if we can't get rid of it they need to do everything they can to make it better, and I don't see how a phone sized screen on the wrist don't improve on what we have today, no matter how looney it sounds.
As I saw it they didn't send him to the screen so they didn't think there was a error in the decision
This is pure specualtion.
VAR have overturned reds before, 3 to date.
The EPL state that VAR review every yellow card or non carded offence for a possible red, or yellow
VAR also reviews every red card awarded
https://www.premierleague.com/var/red-card-decisions-explained
Having the ref run to the monitor before giving a red would also stop the players from arguing that it needs to be checked.This is why I think all red cards should just be reviewed at the monitor - there is always massive delay after a red card.
It's not my faut that you don't understand that ALL cards, Red and yellow are reviewed by VARIt's not my fault that your understanding of VAR is this limited. The nature of the clear and obvious threshold means that subjective decisions are statistically almost never challenged by telling the referee to review the situation on the monitor.
This is probably the best case scenario, it allows the officials time to catch a breath and think, plus they can review it away from players and the TV camera'sThis is why I think all red cards should just be reviewed at the monitor - there is always massive delay after a red card.
Just do it like rugby does with TMOs. It’s always ref decision but they use the technology well.This is why I think all red cards should just be reviewed at the monitor - there is always massive delay after a red card.
It's not my faut that you don't understand that ALL cards, Red and yellow are reviewed by VAR
From the EPL site
"If the evidence readily available to the VAR from the broadcast footage shows that the referee's on-field call is clearly and obviously wrong, the VAR can recommend the on-field referee goes to the pitchside monitor (RRA) to review.
The final decision will remain with the on-field referee."
Is that subjective enough, or will you be petitioning the RA, FA, and EPL ?
It's not my faut that you don't understand that ALL cards, Red and yellow are reviewed by VAR
From the EPL site
"If the evidence readily available to the VAR from the broadcast footage shows that the referee's on-field call is clearly and obviously wrong, the VAR can recommend the on-field referee goes to the pitchside monitor (RRA) to review.
The final decision will remain with the on-field referee."
Is that subjective enough, or will you be petitioning the RA, FA, and EPL ?
So you’re positive VAR reviews ALL yellow cards? Sure?It's not my faut that you don't understand that ALL cards, Red and yellow are reviewed by VAR
From the EPL site
"If the evidence readily available to the VAR from the broadcast footage shows that the referee's on-field call is clearly and obviously wrong, the VAR can recommend the on-field referee goes to the pitchside monitor (RRA) to review.
The final decision will remain with the on-field referee."
Is that subjective enough, or will you be petitioning the RA, FA, and EPL ?
So you’re positive VAR reviews ALL yellow cards? Sure?
(and AGAIN with the smart arse condescending posts?)
I know that - the threshold is stupid. As above, do it like rugby… I love Union, I don’t care if a ref makes a decision and reverses it (which PGMOL seem to want to avoid as scared of how they’ll look). Ref can caveat his decision AND TMO can query.It
Doesn't
Matter
"All red cards awarded in the Premier League are automatically checked by the VAR.
The VAR also checks for possible red-card incidents for which the on-field referee has awarded a yellow card or no card at all."
It's just a generic statement that VAR aren't prohibited from getting involved no matter what the referee decides.*
*The VAR is NOT permitted within the VAR protocol to intervene for an incident where a second yellow card leads to a red card, unless the VAR believes the second yellow card should be upgraded to a direct red.
The issue here is still the threshold of clear and obvious and how it effects situations like this, where VAR won't get involved no matter what the outcome is and everyone is happy because it's a subjective decision
This is why I think all red cards should just be reviewed at the monitor - there is always massive delay after a red card.
Wouldn’t change anything. The way the screen review works isn’t fit for purpose. I have a rant about this here.
In my mind it would be an open discussion between the ref and VAR at that point - not some daft "show me the evidence to back up my decision" nonsense... just a ""let's see all the angles/what happened" discussion.
Even Dale thinks its not a red.
Also says we've a good chance of getting it overturned - which is what i've been saying.
Reviewing at the pitch side monitor is dumb and wastes time for no benefit whatsoever. There should not even be a pitch side monitor.
The (equally qualified) ref in the VAR studio should simply tell the on pitch ref what the right decision is.
In my mind it would be an open discussion between the ref and VAR at that point - not some daft "show me the evidence to back up my decision" nonsense... just a ""let's see all the angles/what happened" discussion.
As per my rant, though, the discussion they need to have takes several minutes to look through all the angles. So is only acceptable in a sport like rugby which is full of long stoppages or where teams have a limited number of challenges.
Another, quicker option, is that the decision is made by the video reviewer without both officials seeing the same footage. This footage needs to be seen by the fans though. Or the wait would be excruciating (this happens in field hockey)
.
Best image I've seen, his foot is halfway up Madisons leg, so hardly a trip like a tap on the ankle, plus he's stretching for the ball.He’s spot on.
This image is the clearest I’ve seen. So obvious it’s just a trip, with Madisson never in any danger.
The idea that we have to put up with VAR and it can’t correct an error which video review can so easily clear up is absolutely infuriating.
Even Dale thinks its not a red.
Also says we've a good chance of getting it overturned - which is what i've been saying.
Best image I've seen, his foot is halfway up Madisons leg, so hardly a trip like a tap on the ankle, plus he's stretching for the ball.
I take it back, from that angle and that image it's a yellow at most.
The question has to be asked, if the VAR crew saw this, why didn't they rescind the red on the pitch?
The question has to be asked, if the VAR crew saw this, why didn't they rescind the red on the pitch?
I agree, but VAR must have looked at it from several angles, more than the ref could, and upheld it, so your agrument is a tad invalid, and so is Gallaghers