I don't think it'll change until the last of the pre-VAR officials has retired.Why are they so insecure?
Nobody cares if the on-field ref makes a mistake if VAR clears it up. That’s what it’s there for.
Nobody thinks any less (or shouldn’t) of referees and linesmen if they make a live-call mistake because they see things once from one angle at one speed in the heat of the moment. Sometimes they have to be trying to take in two things at once, having to flit their eyes/head from something happening twenty yards away from the other thing (especially linesmen with offsides where they need to look at the defensive line and the exact moment the ball is kicked).
It blindingly obvious pitch officials are going to make mistakes. That’s why sports created video technology and video referees.
For a video ref to correct a pitch official mistake is taking the game forward. It’s what everyone wants. The pitch officials are no better or worse at their job if they make mistakes or have VAR back them up.
They need to get real these fuckers!
Why are they so insecure?
Nobody cares if the on-field ref makes a mistake if VAR clears it up. That’s what it’s there for.
Nobody thinks any less (or shouldn’t) of referees and linesmen if they make a live-call mistake because they see things once from one angle at one speed in the heat of the moment. Sometimes they have to be trying to take in two things at once, having to flit their eyes/head from something happening twenty yards away from the other thing (especially linesmen with offsides where they need to look at the defensive line and the exact moment the ball is kicked).
It blindingly obvious pitch officials are going to make mistakes. That’s why sports created video technology and video referees.
For a video ref to correct a pitch official mistake is taking the game forward. It’s what everyone wants. The pitch officials are no better or worse at their job if they make mistakes or have VAR back them up.
They need to get real these fuckers!
Surely you mean Erling!?Can you see what's gonna happen?
Eddie sent off for farting after a check and Bernardo murdered by Sean Bean and the decision given the other way.
Wow... I didn't think even you would try to dress up Dean's admission to be anything other than what it is: an example of corruption in officiating ("jobs for the boys" or "lads protecting their mates" is corruption, even if it is not as egregious as bribery, extortion, or illicit manipulation).I don’t think Dean is saying he didn’t want to show his mate up as having made a mistake.
He’s saying he’d had a difficult game and thought instigating a review would bring him even more hassle. Which it probably would.
It doesn’t make it ok. Far from it. And was almost certainly one of the major reasons why Webb effectively sacked him from being a VAR.
I’ve never really bought this idea that they won’t show up a mate’s mistake. Because ignoring a blatant mistake and not instigating a review is highlighting the mistake even more. It’s doing him no favours.
If the VAR had told the referee to re-consider at Old Trafford the other week for example. He would have checked the monitor, given the penalty and everyone would be saying, great, that’s exactly what VAR is for.
It’s getting a mate out of jail, not throwing him under the bus.
Wow... I didn't think even you would try to dress up Dean's admission to be anything other than what it is: an example of corruption in officiating ("jobs for the boys" or "lads protecting their mates" is corruption, even if it is not as egregious as bribery, extortion, or illicit manipulation).
But I stand corrected, unfortunately.
And only the exceptionally naive would believe this is the only time this happened since VAR has been brought in. It's likely not even the first time Dean had done it.
To use a term from my professional background, this also an example of regulatory capture, as those ostensibly tasked with overseeing the on-field officials are those that were once on-field officials themselves, working (and it seems drinking) with those they are effectively regulating, which influences their decisions. In this case, he chose not to fairly apply the laws of the game (and VAR rules) to protect his friend, which lead to one team being unfairly disadvantaged and penalised. Given there where potential financial consequences of Dean's corrupt decision--losing 2 points could have impacted qualification for europe, which could have lead to lower direct and indirect revenue, ability to recruit and retain talent, and even previsions of playing staff contracts to be triggered--there is a very real argument that Chelsea could bring suit against Dean and PGMOL for at least gross negligence and unlawful direct harm to business.
No matter how much you or others try to downplay this admission, it is truly scandalous, and any reasonable observer would rightly question how often this occurs in matches (and why PGMOL and the PL have not taken stronger steps to prevent it). And please don't reference the fact that he was stood down and then resigned. That was likely to take the heat off the organisation and this was very likely one of many instances of him choosing to make decisions based on personal allegiances rather than fairly applying the laws of the match (over the course of a very long career).
Looking the other way until the behaviour becomes too egregious to explain away is not properly addressing the problem.
Once more, I think Dean knew exactly what he was doing by admitting it so publicly. What his aim is exactly, who knows, but it is not something you flippantly say on a podcast, especially not in the current climate. If I had to make a guess, it would be as a shot across the bow of Webb and a few other members of the PGMOL brass that may have been considering using Dean as one of the scapegoats of any more sordid information that may come out in the future. A clear "This was just a personal appetizer; I have many more morsels for the main course, so you better think long and hard before crossing me" message.