Ref Watch

[Vic]

Well the red card for Willian was correct. His hands nowhere near his midriff. However, why the ref needed VAR to help him on that decision beggars belief. This is why Fulham blew up. Their penalty incident in the 1st half not even reviewed by VAR. They can also claim that when Silva was sent off got encroaching the VAR area that de gea was also in the area. As for Mitrovic, again the correct decision but hard to take given the Portugese cheat did the same thing a few weeks ago and not even spoke to.

The result is the Fulham meltdown

De Gea was in the video review area?

 

[Stephen230]

Just why couldn't the useless fucks who operate var make the call on Willian's handball. It was as clear as fuck and absolutely no need to let the ref make the decision. Something very dodgy about it all

Because that isn’t the way it works. Can you imagine if they broke set down protocol and gave United a penalty because it was an obvious one?

 

[SebastianBlue]

Because that isn’t the way it works. Can you imagine if they broke set down protocol and gave United a penalty because it was an obvious one?

The ref never went to the screen for the Sanchez handball or Mitoma potential penalty incident in the Brighton-Grimsby match. He stopped play, put his hand to his ear, beckoned to all of the players he was listening to VAR, and then indicated play on.

It is essentially the same thing. VAR made determinations as to whether Sanchez handled the ball outside of the area (he did but they ignored it) and whether the Mitoma incident qualifies as a penalty. It made the decision for the ref.

And more referees are doing this. They are not making decisions on the pitch and simply waiting for VAR to review and decide.

 

[Stephen230]

The ref never went to the screen for the Sanchez handball or Mitoma potential penalty incident in the Brighton-Grimsby match. He stopped play, put his hand to his ear, beckoned to all of the players he was listening to VAR, and then indicated play on.

It is essentially the same thing. VAR made determinations as to whether Sanchez handled the ball outside of the area (he did but they ignored it) and whether the Mitoma incident qualifies as a penalty. It made the decision for the ref.

And more referees are doing this. They are not making decisions on the pitch and simply waiting for VAR to review and decide.

The last paragraph is your opinion. It may or may not be a valid one. But I’m talking about official procedure. In which the referee always makes the original decision. There is no official provision for him making a no decision and asking the VAR to make that call. It’s why we had the seemingly ridiculous situation at the Tottenham, Chelsea game where the VAR firstly identified the player who the referee wanted to send off. Then waited until he’d shown him the red card before telling him to review his decision and recede the red.

Are you saying you’d have been quite happy if the VAR had told the referee to forget about protocol in this situation and just send off Willian and give the penalty without bothering checking the monitor and he’d agreed and done that? Because that’s what the guy who I was replying to was calling for.

 

[SebastianBlue]

The last paragraph is your opinion. It may or may not be a valid one. But I’m talking about official procedure. In which the referee always makes the original decision. There is no official provision for him making a no decision and asking the VAR to make that call. It’s why we had the seemingly ridiculous situation at the Tottenham, Chelsea game where the VAR firstly identified the player who the referee wanted to send off. Then waited until he’d shown him the red card before telling him to review his decision and recede the red.

Are you saying you’d have been quite happy if the VAR had told the referee to forget about protocol in this situation and just send off Willian and give the penalty without bothering checking the monitor and he’d agreed and done that? Because that’s what the guy who I was replying to was calling for.

I am saying that referees are regularly not making decisions and are waiting for VAR. It’s not an opinion, it is happening. It happened many times today. It has happened many, many times this season (and not just in the PL). I was offering conclusive evidence that they are not following the protocol you are referencing.

You tend to respond with arguments leaning on what should be happening whilst many of us are discussing what is actually happening (with mounting evidence). We all know what should be happening. That is why your posts seem naive (at best).

VAR has fundamentally changed on-field officiating, regardless of where you stand on the “is VAR used for the manipulation of match outcomes” debate.

 

[Stephen230]

I am saying that referees are regularly not making decisions and are waiting for VAR. It’s not an opinion, it is happening. It happened many times today. It has happened many, many times this season (and not just in the PL). I was offering conclusive evidence that they are not following the protocol you are referencing.

You tend to respond with arguments leaning on what should be happening whilst many of us are discussing what is actually happening (with mounting evidence). We all know what should be happening. That is why your posts seem naive (at best).

VAR has fundamentally changed on-field officiating, regardless of where you stand on the “is VAR used for the manipulation of match outcomes” debate.

It is an opinion. Your two examples of conclusive evidence in the Brighton game involve incidents where the referee didn’t blow the whistle because in his opinion an offence hadn’t been committed. His decision was to play on. He may have been right or wrong. I didn’t even see the penalty incident so can’t comment. But it’s irrelevant whether he was right or wrong anyway. By not giving it, he’s made his decision.

 

[Dirty Harry]

Well the red card for Willian was correct. His hands nowhere near his midriff. However, why the ref needed VAR to help him on that decision beggars belief. This is why Fulham blew up. Their penalty incident in the 1st half not even reviewed by VAR. They can also claim that when Silva was sent off got encroaching the VAR area that de gea was also in the area. As for Mitrovic, again the correct decision but hard to take given the Portugese cheat did the same thing a few weeks ago and not even spoke to.

The result is the Fulham meltdown

Plus Antony should have been off within minutes of coming on for violent conduct, unless lashing out and kicking a player is no longer violent conduct ?

 

[SebastianBlue]

It is an opinion. Your two examples of conclusive evidence in the Brighton game involve incidents where the referee didn’t blow the whistle because in his opinion an offence hadn’t been committed. His decision was to play on. He may have been right or wrong. I didn’t even see the penalty incident so can’t comment. But it’s irrelevant whether he was right or wrong anyway. By not giving it, he’s made his decision.

No, he made no on-field decision and waited for VAR to review, hence why he immediately stopped play and indicated VAR were reviewing when players approached him.

And the rate at which referees are choosing not making decisions on the pitch but rather immediately indicating VAR is instead reviewing is increasing. They are leaning on VAR to make the decisions, not just check if their decisions were correct. And in a way this make sense, as it is easier to let someone sitting in front of many screens with many different angles of an incident make the decision. But it also allows the opportunity for quite a lot of confusion, inconsistent application of the rules, wildly varying outcomes for similar (or identical) situations (which VAR was meant to prevent), and risk of manipulation.

It is not opinion, it is very obviously happening. Commentators are talking about it. Pundits are talking about it. Managers are talking about it. Players are talking about it. And, yes, fans are talking about it.

The debate has gotten so pervasive, in fact, that commentators and pundits alike regularly say “see, this is an example of VAR working correctly” when VAR actually does something right. They literally feel the need to point out when it worked well, because they are constantly seeing head scratching situations involving VAR. Commentators are even making jokes—after analysing an incident and sharing what they think VAR will rule as VAR is reviewing an incident—“but who knows with VAR [laughing]” or “but watch VAR rule the exact opposite [laughing]” or “anything can happen with VAR, though [laughing]”.

Seemingly only you don’t see it happening, choosing to live an alternate reality where rules and laws are absolute and are not reliant on being actually followed and enforced by humans.

You can say “no decision is a decision” as much as you like to try to obfuscate the obvious shift in officiating, but you’ll just be taken less and less seriously each time you do.

 

[Stephen230]

No, he made no on-field decision and waited for VAR to review, hence why he immediately stopped play and indicated VAR were reviewing when players approached him.

And the rate at which referees are choosing not making decisions on the pitch but rather immediately indicating VAR is instead reviewing is increasing. They are leaning on VAR to make the decisions, not just check if their decisions were correct. And in a way this make sense, as it is easier to let someone sitting in front of many screens with many different angles of an incident make the decision. But it also allows the opportunity for quite a lot of confusion, inconsistent application of the rules, wildly varying outcomes for similar (or identical) situations (which VAR was meant to prevent), and risk of manipulation.

It is not opinion, it is very obviously happening. Commentators are talking about it. Pundits are talking about it. Managers are talking about it. Players are talking about it. And, yes, fans are talking about it.

The debate has gotten so pervasive, in fact, that commentators and pundits alike regularly say “see, this is an example of VAR working correctly” when VAR actually does something right. They literally feel the need to point out when it worked well, because they are constantly seeing head scratching situations involving VAR. Commentators are even making jokes—after analysing an incident and sharing what they think VAR will rule as VAR is reviewing an incident—“but who knows with VAR [laughing]” or “but watch VAR rule the exact opposite [laughing]” or “anything can happen with VAR, though [laughing]”.

Seemingly only you don’t see it happening, choosing to live an alternate reality where rules and laws are absolute and are not reliant on being actually followed and enforced by humans.

You can say “no decision is a decision” as much as you like to try to obfuscate the obvious shift in officiating, but you’ll just be taken less and less seriously each time you do.

All I can say is I have never noticed an incident where a referee has stopped play without making a decision to get the VARs opinion. It certainly didn’t happen in the handball incident that you used as an example. Play continued until it was out of play in the other half. I’ll keep an eye out. Out of interest, how does play restart in these instances, when the VAR rules there’s been no offence?

 

[MillionMilesAway]

All I can say is I have never noticed an incident where a referee has stopped play without making a decision to get the VARs opinion. It certainly didn’t happen in the handball incident that you used as an example. Play continued until it was out of play in the other half. I’ll keep an eye out. Out of interest, how does play restart in these instances, when the VAR rules there’s been no offence

If play stops for VAR when the ball is out of play, it starts as it normally would.

I don't think that refs are not making decisions - that would be specifically counter to the regs.

I think instead that there is a tendency to make a 'safe' decision, knowing that VAR should pick up some of those incidents. I think in some cases, they make a decision and may ask VAR to e.g. confirm something being inside the area, although VAR should check anyway regardless.
I don't think it's the way it should be used, but it's my impression. It's possible the ref is just explaining to VAR what he saw and why he played on, as that allows VAR to look for an error in what the ref thinks he saw (as opposed to a judgement on something the ref says he saw clearly).

This can look like they're not making decisions, but I don't recall seeing a ref stop play with the ball in play unless VAR is directing him to a screen review, or a definite line call (e.g. penalty area in/out).