VAR/Refereeing at the Euros

[BusbyMalone]

VAR seems to be getting a lot of praise in this tournament and it does seem to be working more smoothly and less intrusively than it does in the Premier League. From what I've heard, they have a specialist VAR team for offsides and another for red card incidents/penalties, etc. Not sure if that is contributing to how much better it has been, but it could be an avenue to go down for the leagues.

We’ve seen a few examples of the type of handball incidents that would typically lead to a penalty in the Premier League but have been waved away here. I know that has more to do with the rules as opposed to VAR, but they kind of meld into one.

Also, shout out to the refs. I think they’ve generally been excellent, with one or two exceptions. They seem to allow the game to flow a lot more which I think has contributed to some good games. There also appears to be a general intolerance to some of the more bullshit actions you get from certain players (diving, etc) which is nice to see

Anyway, what do people on here think of the officiating and VAR implementation at these Euros?

 

[The Firestarter]

Largely agree, especially about the refs letting the game flow / allowing some harder challenges to stand. What also helps is that teams in general appear to not make too many fouls, and in general shithousery seems less.

 

[BusbyMalone]

Largely agree, especially about the refs letting the game flow / allowing some harder challenges to stand. What also helps is that teams in general appear to not make too many fouls, and in general shithousery seems less.

Yeah, I think that goes hand in hand with the referees not accepting it. Players only do it when they know the ref will blow every time.

 

[BusbyMalone]

Seems like I cursed this. Don't think that was a pen

 

[Anustart89]

The Euro implementation is way too restrictive in overturning calls IMO. Some obvious bullshit calls not being changed in this tournament.

 

[El Zoido]

The Euro implementation is way too restrictive in overturning calls IMO. Some obvious bullshit calls not being changed in this tournament.

Have you noticed though, there’s a lot more fan outrage and anger when VAR changes a decision, than a ref simply making a bad call. Hell, it feels like people get angrier at VAR correctly chalking off an offside goal, than than do a poor on-field decision that isn’t even looked at by VAR.

 

[MU655]

The refereeing was dreadful today. Why wasn't VAR used for the red? Did they just take into their own hands to decide they won't use it? When did they get this power?

Also, the idea that the foul on Morrison was in another phase of play was ridiculous. It directly contributed to the attack that the goal was scored from.

Clearly, VAR is just as bad out of the Premier League.

 

[TheReligion]

The refereeing was dreadful today. Why wasn't VAR used for the red? Did they just take into their own hands to decide they won't use it? When did they get this power?

Also, the idea that the foul on Morrison was in another phase of play was ridiculous. It directly contributed to the attack that the goal was scored from.

Clearly, VAR is just as bad out of the Premier League.

Shouldn't have been a red at all I agree.

I think Nico Williams made it another phase of play. Could have cleared that easily.

 

[saivet]

Have you noticed though, there’s a lot more fan outrage and anger when VAR changes a decision, than a ref simply making a bad call. Hell, it feels like people get angrier at VAR correctly chalking off an offside goal, than than do a poor on-field decision that isn’t even looked at by VAR.

It's weird, though I think that's partly due to the bad decisions not having that big of an impact on the game. For me, the two awful decisions have been the France penalty vs Portugal and the red card for Wales today.

I think if that Wales red card is at 1-0 or 0-0 and Wales go on to lose there would be a much bigger uproar from fans. Equally if that penalty for France gets given in the knock outs, there would be outrage. Then again the outrage would probably be directed to VAR being pointless in not overturning those decisions.

 

[Anustart89]

Shouldn't have been a red at all I agree.

I think Nico Williams made it another phase of play. Could have cleared that easily.

Neco Williams can’t mishit the ball in his own box if they’re taking an attacking free kick instead of defending a counter where ball is won from a foul, after which the ball never travels backwards.

The very fact that they were doing a VAR check that took that long seems to suggest that they were looking at the foul itself rather than whether Williams made it a new situation, because that would’ve been resolved before the replays had finished.

What’s so bloody wrong with telling the ref “hey, you might want to check this on the monitor” and have him run out there long before the Danes had stopped celebrating? I mean, the VAR is looking at the footage even before the ball goes into the net so when the ball hits the net he can send the ref out there. It was obvious from everyone’s reaction that there was a decision to be made with regards to the foul. Let the ref have another look immediately if it’s contentious rather than having a fifth party decide whether it was correct, wrong, slightly wrong, plain wrong, clearly wrong or clearly and obviously wrong, of which only the latter would prompt the referee to run to the monitor. It would’ve taken the ref ten seconds to decide whether he would stand by his original decision or not and the game would’ve restarted faster with a decision that everyone could be happy had been properly reviewed.

 

[TheReligion]

Neco Williams can’t mishit the ball in his own box if they’re taking an attacking free kick instead of defending a counter where ball is won from a foul, after which the ball never travels backwards.

The very fact that they were doing a VAR check that took that long seems to suggest that they were looking at the foul itself rather than whether Williams made it a new situation, because that would’ve been resolved before the replays had finished.

What’s so bloody wrong with telling the ref “hey, you might want to check this on the monitor” and have him run out there long before the Danes had stopped celebrating? It was obvious from everyone’s reaction that there was a decision to be made. Let the ref have another look immediately if it’s contentious rather than having a fifth party decide whether it was correct, wrong, slightly wrong, plain wrong, clearly wrong or clearly and obviously wrong, of which only the latter would prompt the referee to run to the monitor.

They were looking if the ball went out of play.

You can't have the phase of play argument when Williams made such a balls up in my opinion.

 

[Anustart89]

They were looking if the ball went out of play.

You can't have the phase of play argument when Williams made such a balls up in my opinion.

Really, that’s what they were checking?

Seems weird that would be relevant then if it’s a new phase of play when Williams mishits it. So the ball should never have ended up in Wales’s box for Williams to mishit but it’s different if it’s because the ball was out of play from a foul or a throw-in.

For me, it doesn’t matter if the goal comes from a defender messing it up really since the attack is a direct result of a counter from a foul.

I mean, yeah. If he controls the ball, runs with it for three seconds and then passes it into his own net, then that’s another thing, but there should have been no cross to mess up to begin with because Wales should have been taking a free kick and that’s what seems logical to me. Would there be a difference between Williams messing up a clearance and the goalkeeper making a mistake in saving the shot? And how egregious would the mistake have to be? Using my argument (ie the shot should never have been there to be taken) there wouldn’t be a need for any such distinctions, which would be more logical. Maybe

 

[TheReligion]

Really, that’s what they were checking?

Seems weird that would be relevant then if it’s a new phase of play when Williams mishits it. So the ball should never have ended up in Wales’s box for Williams to mishit but it’s different if it’s because the ball was out of play from a foul or a throw-in.

For me, it doesn’t matter if the goal comes from a defender messing it up really since the attack is a direct result of a counter from a foul.

I mean, yeah. If he controls the ball, runs with it for three seconds and then passes it into his own net, then that’s another thing, but there should have been no cross to mess up to begin with because Wales should have been taking a free kick.

Yeah they were looking if it went out (which it might have done actually looking again)

 

[Okocha119]

The refereeing was dreadful today. Why wasn't VAR used for the red? Did they just take into their own hands to decide they won't use it? When did they get this power?

People on this forum don't seem to understand what VAR is supposed to be. It's there to assist the ref by making up for the fact that he has access to incomplete information. This is most obvious in the case of off-side, but can also hold for penalties where the ref may not have a clear view of the incident or see the right angle. It is NOT supposed to replace or overrule the ref. The one making the decision on what is a foul, penalty or a red card is still the ref on the field. Therefore if the ref sees an incident clearly and makes a judgment based on complete information, then it's not up to VAR to question said judgment.

In the case of tonight's red card: The ref saw the incident, judged it to be violent conduct and therefore gave a red card. I personally don't agree with this decision, but it's up to the ref to make it. If you want a system where ten people sit around a table and make decisions democratically, then fine, but it's not the system we have right now.

 

[Baneofthegame]

People on this forum don't seem to understand what VAR is supposed to be. It's there to assist the ref by making up for the fact that he has access to incomplete information. This is most obvious in the case of off-side, but can also hold for penalties where the ref may not have a clear view of the incident or see the right angle. It is NOT supposed to replace or overrule the ref. The one making the decision on what is a foul, penalty or a red card is still the ref on the field. Therefore if the ref sees an incident clearly and makes a judgment based on complete information, then it's not up to VAR to question said judgment.

In the case of tonight's red card: The ref saw the incident, judged it to be violent conduct and therefore gave a red card. I personally don't agree with this decision, but it's up to the ref to make it. If you want a system where ten people sit around a table and make decisions democratically, then fine, but it's not the system we have right now.

Except there are many times where it does overrule the ref and sometimes incorrectly.

 

[MU655]

People on this forum don't seem to understand what VAR is supposed to be. It's there to assist the ref by making up for the fact that he has access to incomplete information. This is most obvious in the case of off-side, but can also hold for penalties where the ref may not have a clear view of the incident or see the right angle. It is NOT supposed to replace or overrule the ref. The one making the decision on what is a foul, penalty or a red card is still the ref on the field. Therefore if the ref sees an incident clearly and makes a judgment based on complete information, then it's not up to VAR to question said judgment.

In the case of tonight's red card: The ref saw the incident, judged it to be violent conduct and therefore gave a red card. I personally don't agree with this decision, but it's up to the ref to make it. If you want a system where ten people sit around a table and make decisions democratically, then fine, but it's not the system we have right now.

The whole point of VAR is to get the correct decisions. It is stupid not to use it for that. You might as well not have it at all in that case.

What you are saying is actually the major issue with VAR in football. They only want a bit of it, but it doesn't work that way.

You either use it on the whole game or you don't use it at all. Doing anything short of that completely undermines it's existence.

 

[TheReligion]

People on this forum don't seem to understand what VAR is supposed to be. It's there to assist the ref by making up for the fact that he has access to incomplete information. This is most obvious in the case of off-side, but can also hold for penalties where the ref may not have a clear view of the incident or see the right angle. It is NOT supposed to replace or overrule the ref. The one making the decision on what is a foul, penalty or a red card is still the ref on the field. Therefore if the ref sees an incident clearly and makes a judgment based on complete information, then it's not up to VAR to question said judgment.

In the case of tonight's red card: The ref saw the incident, judged it to be violent conduct and therefore gave a red card. I personally don't agree with this decision, but it's up to the ref to make it. If you want a system where ten people sit around a table and make decisions democratically, then fine, but it's not the system we have right now.

Why does VAR interfere with the referees interpretation of handball then?

 

[hellhunter]

Why does VAR interfere with the referees interpretation of handball then?

Been dying to make that point about referees judgement. VAR interfers with judgement calls all the time, and rightfully so.

Feel like the poster mixed up VAR with retrospectively rescinded red cards after games.

 

[Okocha119]

The whole point of VAR is to get the correct decisions. It is stupid not to use it for that. You might as well not have it at all in that case.

What you are saying is actually the major issue with VAR in football. They only want a bit of it, but it doesn't work that way.

You either use it on the whole game or you don't use it at all. Doing anything short of that completely undermines it's existence.

There are hardly any 100% correct decisions in football though. This only really applies in the case of offside. The rules just aren't specific enough, that's why you have the referee in the first place. He is the one who decides how the rules should be applied. You will never get a 100% agreement on what is a penalty, a red card or a handball.

VAR is not there to find the one and only correct decision, because it doesn't exist. It's supposed to prevent incorrect ones, meaning decisions that stand in conflict with the rules.

 

[Poltophagy]

On the last goal in Denmark - Wales they spent like 3 minutes debating whether the player was offside or not, then the commentator screen gets the message it has been disallowed, but they call the goal anyway. This fishyness is what we traded good refs for. They're just windowdressing now for whatever goes on in that VAR room.

 

[MU655]

There are hardly any 100% correct decisions in football though. This only really applies in the case of offside. The rules just aren't specific enough, that's why you have the referee in the first place. He is the one who decides how the rules should be applied. You will never get a 100% agreement on what is a penalty, a red card or a handball.

VAR is not there to find the one and only correct decision, because it doesn't exist. It's supposed to prevent incorrect ones, meaning decisions that stand in conflict with the rules.

I think that completely goes against its point.

There is even definitive decisions that aren't corrected. For example, why doesn't it check whether the corner is given to the right team? That can be a direct assist for a goal, yet it isn't checked because it is a different phase of play. A change of decision can be made in a few seconds. The ball isn't even in play.

The foul on Moore should have been checked by VAR regardless of Denmark scoring. It should constantly be working in the background. But it doesn't look at it. It is denying a goalscoring opportunity of a free kick.

The only things it checks is offside, handballs, penalties, and reds. That is all it does in football. But a lot of goals are scored outside of those areas, and the earlier decision that led to the goal is never checked.

The VAR team doesn't do anything for long periods of time. I'm guessing their just shoving down biscuits and chatting most of the time. Give them some work.

 

[PSV]

Made a huge, important interference today. There's no way the ref is making a sound judgement on that handball without the off-field screen.

 

[KirkDuyt]

Made a huge, important interference today. There's no way the ref is making a sound judgement on that handball without the off-field screen.

Agreed. Shit as it was, it was the right decision.

 

[Jev]

I've been an ardent opponent but it's worked very well this tournament, although I'd still rather be without it.

The only silly ones I can recall are the pedantic offside for Lukaku vs Finland and the Braithwaite goal, which was allowed vs Wales. Both were so miniscule that the on-field call should have stood.

I hate it when VAR overturns a decision that not a soul would have complained about afterwards (such as the Lukaku goal), or when they check for a penalty or incident that not a single player or fan thought to complain about (like when they checked for a ghost penalty for Chech Republic today). This tournament has come close to finding a level which might actually make football tolerable with VAR. They've generally been good at not being too pedantic (such as the non-existant foul for Wales before Denmark's goal).

 

[FootyGirl88]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Anustart89]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Of course he wears a tacky Versace t-shirt.