VAR (PL introduction 2019)

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

so the ref waves away a pen, he then has to stop the game and check with the VAR just in case? We'll never finish a game.

The Dutch trial a season or so back averaged 11 seconds for each referral. Don't know the average number of referrals per game but I would think we would finish a game some minutes after the usual time, but with the knowledge that the outcomes were more correctly decided. i think to get the latter, the former is a small price to pay.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

Agreed, which is why I am against it unless this criteria is standard..! It becomes a pointless tool if the ref refuses to use it based on his observations..!

And it makes football the only world sport that fudges the issue of a fair slice of human error to the extent it is currently obvious, being driven from the game.

As an example, just how would the decision by Corporal Jones a season or two ago when he booked Sergio for diving, a decision roundly condemned as the worst of that weekend, be treated under the FArce/PL regs for the application of VAR? Would we get the pen, would the VAR agree with the ref, or would the ref not refer his dreadful first thoughts to the VAR?

 

[PannickAtTheDisco]

The Dutch trial a season or so back averaged 11 seconds for each referral. Don't know the average number of referrals per game but I would think we would finish a game some minutes after the usual time, but with the knowledge that the outcomes were more correctly decided. i think to get the latter, the former is a small price to pay.

So if anyone goes down in the box, we should just stop and go straight to VAR? Would get farcical. I think giving the captain's referrals would be easier, and say to the team appealing if you want to go to VAR then kick the ball out straight away. The problem with penalty referrals is always going to be "is the contact sufficient". I think the only way round that is for the referee to make a call, immediately signal for VAR and then state on an audible mic why he has or hasn't given it.

If the referee says "I didn't give the penalty because I thought he won the ball first", and the VAR proves he didn't, then you could overturn it. If it's a case of "sufficient contact", then the referee will have to watch it again (only at full speed, slow-mo distorts it) and make a judgement call.

We'd basically have to say the ball is dead once a player goes to ground in the box unless we give referees licence to wave it away and let the VAR pull the game back. Would kill the game imo.

 

[BerkshireBlue]

Aye. Daft BBC pundits don't understand how VAR works. Only "clear and conclusive" incidents can be overturned. Willian's was unclear - I, like many others, thought Willian made the most of it. Initiated contact which wasn't even contact it was so minimal and not enough to go over for a penalty. Referee was spot on.

Plus he was already going down when he got the nick off the other player. No way was it clear cut

 

[I'm With Stupid]

So if anyone goes down in the box, we should just stop and go straight to VAR? Would get farcical. I think giving the captain's referrals would be easier, and say to the team appealing if you want to go to VAR then kick the ball out straight away. The problem with penalty referrals is always going to be "is the contact sufficient". I think the only way round that is for the referee to make a call, immediately signal for VAR and then state on an audible mic why he has or hasn't given it.

If the referee says "I didn't give the penalty because I thought he won the ball first", and the VAR proves he didn't, then you could overturn it. If it's a case of "sufficient contact", then the referee will have to watch it again (only at full speed, slow-mo distorts it) and make a judgement call.

We'd basically have to say the ball is dead once a player goes to ground in the box unless we give referees licence to wave it away and let the VAR pull the game back. Would kill the game imo.

I assume that the logic behind all video technology with regards to diving is to try and eliminate it from the game. So with that in mind, it's not fair to look at current rates of diving to judge whether it would be workable or not. Presumably if players know that a VAR will be used, they're far less likely to dive in the box. And you also can't really judge it on one competition, because players are used to and have trained to go down when they feel contact in the box. If they knew that it would be scrutinized every time, they might change that. But if they can dive in every game, with the exception of one obscure cup replay, they will continue to have that habit.

 

[Machiavelli]

Plus he was already going down when he got the nick off the other player. No way was it clear cut

Exactly, Willian’s legs both came together as he jumped to instigate the contact. You could see all night how many players Chelsea have who frequently dive.
Pedro’s dive looked very much like a dive because Gunn pulled out leaving no leg for Pedro to initiate contact with, the defender who made contact with Willian left his leg stretched out so Willian had the opportunity to make it look worse than it was. Dives look less like dives if there’s a leg to initiate contact with. Arsehole commentators saying the old “there was contact” bollocks. Morata’s dive was due to being slightly pulled whilst jostling for a loose ball, in this situation I’m not sure why both legs would go from under a player just because of hands/arms on a player’s shoulder/torso? Another blatant dive.

 

[aguero93:20]

So if anyone goes down in the box, we should just stop and go straight to VAR? Would get farcical.

It would indeed. You really need to read about the way this is being applied, I'm sick of posting it tbh.

Play doesn't stop (remember this bit).

VAR reviews the incident while play continues (remember this bit).

If there's a clear and obvious mistake in the eyes of the VAR they inform the match referee (this is important, remember it too).

If the incident would result in play being stopped the referee stops play instantly (this one is really important, commit it to memory).

The game returns to the point of the clear and obvious incorrect decision and the correct decision is awarded (you know the story by now).

 

[Machiavelli]

It would indeed. You really need to read about the way this is being applied, I'm sick of posting it tbh.

Play doesn't stop (remember this bit).

VAR reviews the incident while play continues (remember this bit).

If there's a clear and obvious mistake in the eyes of the VAR they inform the match referee (this is important, remember it too).

If the incident would result in play being stopped the referee stops play instantly (this one is really important, commit it to memory).

The game returns to the point of the clear and obvious incorrect decision and the correct decision is awarded (you know the story by now).

You’ve said this a few times before haven’t you? ;)

 

[PannickAtTheDisco]

It would indeed. You really need to read about the way this is being applied, I'm sick of posting it tbh.

Play doesn't stop (remember this bit).

VAR reviews the incident while play continues (remember this bit).

If there's a clear and obvious mistake in the eyes of the VAR they inform the match referee (this is important, remember it too).

If the incident would result in play being stopped the referee stops play instantly (this one is really important, commit it to memory).

The game returns to the point of the clear and obvious incorrect decision and the correct decision is awarded (you know the story by now).

fuck off, ok, if you've bothered to read the discussion, I was clearly "questioning" the logic of Dave Ewing's post which said the referee should be forced to consult with VAR in the case of a pen, because the trouble is caused by the ref waving play on and the game having to be pulled back to deal with the incident. The logical step to that is that whenever a player goes over in the box, we'd have to stop play and refer to the VAR, which would be farcical.

So don't fucking patronise me because you didn't read the thread properly. And Blueinsa and FI, just go for it lads, I know you're waiting.

 

[aguero93:20]

fuck off, ok, if you've bothered to read the discussion, I was clearly "questioning" the logic of Dave Ewing's post which said the referee should be forced to consult with VAR in the case of a pen, because the trouble is caused by the ref waving play on and the game having to be pulled back to deal with the incident. The logical step to that is that whenever a player goes over in the box, we'd have to stop play and refer to the VAR, which would be farcical.

So don't fucking patronise me because you didn't read the thread properly. And Blueinsa and FI, just go for it lads, I know you're waiting.

The VAR reviews every possible penalty incident completely independently of the referee and if the referee has made a clear and obvious mistake informs him at the first available opportunity (may as well remember this one too).