Ref Watch

[Alan Harper's Tash]

I look forward to your upcoming answers.

 

[SebastianBlue]

I look forward to your upcoming answers.

 

[Theblueguy]

I’m not saying we didn’t contribute to not winning today but I was there and seen their keeper telling the ball boys to refrain from getting the ball back quick, he also had a drink before numerous dead ball kicks and then late in the game went down with a fictitious injury that entailed throwing the ball out so he could receive attention for this supposed injury.

We don't see that kind of stuff from TV as they pad it all out with replays.

 

[ChicagoBlue]

The standard of refereeing is reaching crisis levels.

Was there a single game this weekend where the refs and/or VAR didn’t make a big mistake?

 

[waspish]

Looks like these newer referees are just sheep and it’s the people on Var who are in control of the important decisions

 

[SebastianBlue]

The standard of refereeing is reaching crisis levels.

Was there a single game this weekend where the refs and/or VAR didn’t make a big mistake?

Not really. And the frequency of “mistakes” appears to be increasing with the new batch of officials and *certain* members of the old guard taking over VAR.

Of course, it’s all incompetence, nothing more, and will continue to be merely incompetence, even if it becomes a feature of every match in the future.

After all, the league have no power whatsoever to address the incompetence or make officiating (including VAR) more transparent. If they could, they would, but they can’t. The incompetence is a force of nature; human error—no matter how prevalent or egregious or seemingly mitigatible to reasonable observers—cannot be fixed.

It is a force of nature in football.

Inmutable. Unassailable. Eternal.

We fans must except this and understand the league are powerless to oppose it.

 

[crazyg]

Sure and I don’t either, but had the ref not blown, we’d have conceded unless Ederson had switched on in that moment.

And if my auntie (not that I've got many left) had balls, she'd be my uncle.
The last few pages have been pure conjecture, based on whataboutery.
The linesman flagged for offside, the referee blew his whistle, the game stopped.
End of story. Move on.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

And if my auntie (not that I've got many left) had balls, she'd be my uncle.
The last few pages have been pure conjecture, based on whataboutery.
The linesman flagged for offside, the referee blew his whistle, the game stopped.
End of story. Move on.

Awesome comparison. Not relevant, but awesome.

 

[crazyg]

Awesome comparison. Not relevant, but awesome.

As relevant as the last 20 or so pages.

 

[Stephen230]

Because the referees lean on it too much and the actual video referees miss blatantly obvious stuff.

Their video referral procedure still absolutely destroys football for efficiency and transparency. TV (and occasionally live) audiences can hear exactly what the ref is having reviewed as well as the video refs input. Not to mention the footage being reviewed is on the screen for the fans to see.

Other sports not being perfect with video referral doesn't mean football should just be left as is when the VAR system is flagrantly awful.

My point is that the only sport where video assistance has more less removed controversy is tennis. And that’s because it is dealing with matter of fact line decisions. The same way as goal line technology has, bar one incident, had the same effect in football.

The NFL for example have been tinkering with it for nearly 50 years and they still can’t settle on a way of working it that keeps everyone happy.

The thing with football is it has more decisions that are a matter of opinion rather than matters of fact than any other sport. You can prove if a ball has hit someone’s arm or not but no technology in the world can stop disagreement on whether it was deliberate.

Bottom line is if VAR and football are still going in a hundred years, people will still be arguing about it.