Var debate 2019/20

[Brendan110_0]

They have to show the review on screen. It is the ONLY way that fans will buy in. (Even then I am anti-VAR)...And they won't do this because that will mean transparency and that will not fit the agenda.

They did show it - it was handball. I wait with baited breath to see if one of Manure/Dippers get the same treatment or not.

 

[madloaf]

Was the handball not shown on the screen? if not why not,that's why it's there and showed last weeks decisions,hmm

I'm not sure if it was - but all reviews need to be shown and talked through as per cricket reviews. I want to hear the conversation of the review of Rodri being strangled to the ground in the first half and have that explained to the paying public why that is not a penalty. If they say "we believe he fell down without assistance" then we can at least understand the reasoning. If they say "we are specifically looking for ways to fuck City over this season" then at least we have it writing.

 

[blueinsa]

They did show it - it was handball. I wait with baited breath to see if one of Manure/Dippers get the same treatment or not.

Off whose hand because ive watched it several times and it is not clear?

 

[maurizio]

Its early days so they make the rules up after deciding what is worse for our club to help those that play in red. That's the trouble, there's still scope for inconsistency and like many of us believe it's an opportunity for officials that wish we weren't the force we've become to alter the result of the match. It'll balance itself by the end of the season, yeah right, didn't with the referees decisions last year and won't be with the VAR decisions this year.

 

[urban genie]

I thought the ref didn't review? There's no screen to watch it on.

From the premier league VAR instructions

"The on-field referee will then decide whether to accept and act on the VAR official's view of the incident. This may involve the use of the pitch-side monitor, although the Premier League says this will be used sparingly, for incidents either not seen by the on-field ref or for those outside of their expected range".

So a ref can check if they want but the prem doesn't want the game slowed down.

Thay decision today was shown on the big screen and wasn't clear, Oliver should have reviewed it to be certain, the **** didn't bother.

 

[Chi-town blues]

If laws are suppose to apply evenly then how Raz touching was yellow and foul but wwe on Laporte inside the box is not pk ?
Fuck var

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Hmm.
BBC 2 weeks ago:
"VAR automatically checks all key incidents during a game, but the video officials' role will be informed by their on-field colleague, who describes to them what they have seen and why they have reached their conclusion.
It is only if the replays show a different version of events to that described by the on-field referee that the VAR team will step in. The on-field referee will then decide whether to accept and act on the VAR official's view of the incident. This may involve the use of the pitch-side monitor, although the Premier League says this will be used sparingly, for incidents either not seen by the on-field ref or for those outside of their expected range."

Telegraph:
How does this work in practice?

• The VAR speaks to the on-field referee through an earpiece, or vica versa, and the referee will put his hand up to pause play and inform the players a decision is being reviewed.
• VAR reviews the video footage of the incident and advises whether or not action should be taken. If there has been an error, the referee will draw a rectangle with his arms to replicate a TV a screen to change his original decision.
• In the case of more subjective incidents, the VAR will instruct the referee to watch a replay on a pitchside screen. This is known as an on-pitch review.

Firstly, referees have been told to avoid on-pitch reviews at the pitch-side screen whenever possible. These types of review are known to cause the longest delays. Instead, on-pitch referees have been told to trust the advice they are given by VAR.
There has also been a pledge from former referee Neil Swarbrick, the man leading VAR's implementation in the Premier League, to stick to a'higher threshold' for reviewing decisions and only intervene in the case of 'clear and obvious' errors (does not apply to offsides, remember).

goal.com
Premier League referees have been encouraged to limit the time they use the video review area at the side of the pitch, which has been identified as a notable source of delay in VAR calls.
Instead of reviewing every call flagged by the VAR assistants, it is hoped that match officials will trust the advice given to them by their colleagues. However, the referee can still take time to review if necessary.
Relating to that, the Premier League has taken steps to keep the supporters and those watching the game on TV informed about the process and rationale of decisions.

All of those suggest that the on-field ref can just ignore the advice, or incidents are not considered clear and obvious errors by VAR team.

 

[B\connellblue]

No Need for debate. It's an abomination. Get rid of it or risk the death knell of football.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

How many games into the season are they going to be using the excuse that they are ironing out teething problems with VAR?

 

[Deleted member 77198]

It was chaos outside the ground. Police escorted both sets of fans all the way back to Town with skirmishes all the way from the ground to Piccadilly.

VAR will see violence return!