The only conclusion I can draw from this recent discussion is that VAR has made the decision and in the absence of a recommendation to look at it on the screen the ref has chosen to accept the VAR conclusion without seeing what actually happened.
This is a new one on me. I can only assume the VAR protocol allows for this?
Hahahahaha. Now can only conclude that you are being disingenuous. Your post that I replied to does not mention a red card at all.I have , officials got it wrong - should have been a red, at the very least a yellow and a free kick.
Hang on mate.The referee’s ‘decision’ was that there no offence. VAR can only recommend he goes to the screen if they think he’s missed a penalty or a sending off. You might not like it but that is the protocol. The referee can’t just choose to have another look at it.
No use arguing with him pal, he's just Mr Contrary and a borderline WUM.Hang on mate.
How can the referee reach a decision that there was no offence when he didn't see the handball outside the box which may have denied Haaland a clear goal scoring opportunity ( if he had seen it he would have at least awarded a free kick)?
On your second sentence why can't VAR can recommend he goes to the screen if he's missed the offence that may have denied the goal scoring chance?
What do you think ?Has blue hammer given a normal view of the incident or still trying to wind everyone up about it?
Hang on mate.
How can the referee reach a decision that there was no offence when he didn't see the handball outside the box which may have denied Haaland a clear goal scoring opportunity ( if he had seen it he would have at least awarded a free kick)?
On your second sentence why can't VAR can recommend he goes to the screen if he's missed the offence that may have denied the goal scoring chance?
In this situation im sorry but there just isnt a - 'at the very least a yellow card and a free kick' - because that implies and offers the excuse that it possibly wasnt a goalscoring chance when it clearly and evidently was. There was only one correct decision, not one and an at the very least. One and one decision only, clear and undeniable and they all purposely decoded to against it. I get that everyone wants the underdogs to win, the spectacle to be seen and the 115 cheating bastards to lose one and be made a laughing stock. But to blatantly and so obviously ignore the rules is plain and simply nothing else short of utter corruptness!I have , officials got it wrong - should have been a red, at the very least a yellow and a free kick.
Then why did VAR stop play to look at it?I’m not defending the referee. But by not giving anything, his decision is that no offence has taken place. Whether he’s seen it or not.
The second point is it isn’t in the VAR remit to advise referees to ‘have another look’ Maybe it should be. Maybe in the future it will be. But the cold hard fact is, at the moment it isn’t something he is permitted to do.
It is within VARs remit to inform the referee if there is a possible red card incident.I’m not defending the referee. But by not giving anything, his decision is that no offence has taken place. Whether he’s seen it or not.
The second point is it isn’t in the VAR remit to advise referees to ‘have another look’ Maybe it should be. Maybe in the future it will be. But the cold hard fact is, at the moment it isn’t something he is permitted to do.
Won’t matter they’d just edit it or redo it to cover the fact it was a huge fuck up ..I hope the club finally decides enough ia enough and demands the audio and an explanation
It is within VARs remit to inform the referee if there is a possible red card incident.
OK.Exactly. But rightly, or in this case wrongly, he didn’t think that.
I was just pointing out to the guy who said the referee should have instigated having a look at the screen, that he’s unable to do that.
Len, I agree with everything you said however I think that a lot of people are missing 1 important thing.OK.
So your second paragraph is important if correct.
What you are saying appears to be that under the VAR rules the referee can only go to the monitor IF the VAR team recommend that he does so. If they don't he can't.
That would fit with what happened in this situation I.e. they (the VAR team) reviewed the incident which was not seen by the ref, decided there was no prevention of a clear goal scoring opportunity and informed the ref of their decision which he then had to accept without recourse to the monitor.
Am I reading you correctly and are you sure that this is the VAR protocol?
I can understand that Attwell didn't see the incident clearly, as he was so far behind play. But the linesman should have seen it and told his referee what happened. After all, these are the best linesmen and referees in the country this season.OK.
So your second paragraph is important if correct.
What you are saying appears to be that under the VAR rules the referee can only go to the monitor IF the VAR team recommend that he does so. If they don't he can't.
That would fit with what happened in this situation I.e. they (the VAR team) reviewed the incident which was not seen by the ref, decided there was no prevention of a clear goal scoring opportunity and informed the ref of their decision which he then had to accept without recourse to the monitor.
Am I reading you correctly and are you sure that this is the VAR protocol?
Well to be honest I don't know.Len, I agree with everything you said however I think that a lot of people are missing 1 important thing.
VAR was brought in to assist with CLEAR AND OBVIOUS ERRORS and that incident yesterday was a clear and obvious error so the var team should have told the ref to go to the monitor. They fucked up big time.
I know why they didn't give it, because they are too reliant on VAR. The game is 100% refereed differently because of VAR, not inspite of VAR.A bit harsh. He couldn't make that call from where he was, imho. By all means criticise him for not being up with the play, which is his most important job, but that is a different matter. I can see why the onfield officials didn't give anything.
It will all become much clearer tomorrow when Dermot Gallagher gives his 'expert opinion' to Sly's red audience.
"Never a sending off as Haaland was actually going to turn around and play a back pass to Ortega" will probably be his assessment of it