Ref Watch

[SebastianBlue]

PIGMOB are a shambles and not fit for purpose

 

[Stephen230]

You’ve had a mare here. Everything you’ve written is the complete opposite of the reality

So you think he did Taylor a favour by not correcting an obvious error?

Or the VAR who didn’t intervene in the United, Wolves game did his mate the referee a favour by not intervening? , Even though it ended up with him getting stood down because of it.

 

[Stiff Little Wingers]

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’s 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!

It's a good point. If VAR was used the way it was intended why would anyone care about the ref? In cricket, no one cares about the umpire now but pre DRS there were allegations of bias - in fact Holding and Gatting almost caused diplomatic incidents.
If VAR is properly applied and corrects a clear and obvious error then everyone just moves on and if it backs up the ref then all well and good.
But Dean has just admitted the corruption we already know. His vorruption might jof have been for personal gain (match fixing) or even to benefit the red clubs - it doesn't,matter, he made a decision for non football reasons and that's corrupt

 

[Dodge]

Calling @Dodge. Surely now is the perfect time to release that audio of the Rashford offside incident? No?

Agree with you 100% mate, unfortunately it ain't down to me.

 

[SebastianBlue]

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’s 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!

Just saw this and all I can say is: hear, hear!

"Clear and obvious" is a farcical threshold that does not serve the purpose of VAR, fans' desires, or what is best for football, full stop.

It needs to be scrapped and legitimate referees, just trying to do a very difficult job the best they can, should be supported by VAR, (as well as paid substantially more to attract more and better officials and held to the same standard of accountability as managers, coaches, players, and club executives).

 

[meltonblue]

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’s 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!

Agree with the sentiment here, although not your second to last paragraph. I’d very happily go back to a world pre-VAR :)

 

[Paladin]

I worked for a regulated utility in the UK for forty years. As a privatised industry enjoying monopoly status in our area, we were heavily regulated. Auditors used to come along each year asking us to prove what we entered in our submissions was accurate. They could ask us anything, and we would have to give examples that verified our statements. This kept us honest.

The trouble with PGMOL and VAR is that they are their own regulators. They are accountable to nobody but themselves, with Webb being the top man, gradually weeding out those who don't toe the line or are incompetent (Swarbrick, Dean), and replacing them with his trusted allies (Moss). They are becoming an organisation with a dictator, assisted by cronies and yes men.

Webb has had a year to bed in now. He is talking about releasing VAR conversations for certain incidents, to demonstrate the transparency they claim to want. Which incidents though? Those chosen by Webb himself, because they will not be controversial.

This is not good enough. Coupled with the PGMOL statement today in response to Dean's revelation, we have an organisation that looks increasingly unfit for purpose.

They could build bridges and start to restore confidence immediately with some simple measures:

1. All VAR conversations for the duration of each game to be recorded and stored.

2. Create a team of independent auditors (experienced sports people from other sports, with no allegiances), tasked with reviewing all controversial incidents.

3. Webb to review on TV certain VAR incidents, but chosen based on public perception of the decision, not Webb's selected incidents.

If these charlatans know their conversations and decisions might enter the public domain, you can guarantee things like the Wolves penalty, the Rashford offside would have different, more reasonable outcomes and PGMOL apologies would be significantly reduced.

 

[Stephen230]

I worked for a regulated utility in the UK for forty years. As a privatised industry enjoying monopoly status in our area, we were heavily regulated. Auditors used to come along each year asking us to prove what we entered in our submissions was accurate. They could ask us anything, and we would have to give examples that verified our statements. This kept us honest.

The trouble with PGMOL and VAR is that they are their own regulators. They are accountable to nobody but themselves, with Webb being the top man, gradually weeding out those who don't toe the line or are incompetent (Swarbrick, Dean), and replacing them with his trusted allies (Moss). They are becoming an organisation with a dictator, assisted by cronies and yes men.

Webb has had a year to bed in now. He is talking about releasing VAR conversations for certain incidents, to demonstrate the transparency they claim to want. Which incidents though? Those chosen by Webb himself, because they will not be controversial.

This is not good enough. Coupled with the PGMOL statement today in response to Dean's revelation, we have an organisation that looks increasingly unfit for purpose.

They could build bridges and start to restore confidence immediately with some simple measures:

1. All VAR conversations for the duration of each game to be recorded and stored.

2. Create a team of independent auditors (experienced sports people from other sports, with no allegiances), tasked with reviewing all controversial incidents.

3. Webb to review on TV certain VAR incidents, but chosen based on public perception of the decision, not Webb's selected incidents.

If these charlatans know their conversations and decisions might enter the public domain, you can guarantee things like the Wolves penalty, the Rashford offside would have different, more reasonable outcomes and PGMOL apologies would be significantly reduced.

1 and 3 are fair enough. Not really sure how 2 could work though? How could you judge a decision in a sport who’s laws you don’t have a full understanding of?

 

[Paladin]

1 and 3 are fair enough. Not really sure how 2 could work though? How could you judge a decision in a sport who’s laws you don’t have a full understanding of?

They don't need to, necessarily. They can look for evidence of showing favour or discrimination. Or take for example the Dean incident. If hair pulling in rugby occurred, you wouldn't really need to know the letter of the law to realise it should have been penalised as foul play.

 

[Stephen230]

They don't need to, necessarily. They can look for evidence of showing favour or discrimination. Or take for example the Dean incident. If hair pulling in rugby occurred, you wouldn't really need to know the letter of the law to realise it should have been penalised as foul play.

I think we’ll have to disagree on that one mate.