Ref Watch 2022-23

[JCRD]

Instead of VAR, would anyone be happier with just scrapping it but allowing referees to view replays? So it is still in the referees hands and for things like goals etc, it is upto the referee to view the replay.

I think there is a need for video and retrospective looks at stuff because the game is too quick now.

 

[Tucker]

Instead of VAR, would anyone be happier with just scrapping it but allowing referees to view replays? So it is still in the referees hands and for things like goals etc, it is upto the referee to view the replay.

I think there is a need for video and retrospective looks at stuff because the game is too quick now.

No, I think the current system could work well if done properly. Imagine how long it would take if the ref had to look at the replays. As it stands play can continue in many situations while VAR reviews take place.

I’d go one step further and stop the refs having to go and review their decisions. It’s a farce, they very rarely stick with their own call when a mistake has been pointed out. If it’s an obvious error or the ref hasn’t seen it, just let the VAR tell him to change it.

They need to give them a one minute time limit and accept that their will be mistakes. That’s human nature VAR should be a safety net against egregious errors, like a penalty being given when the foul was outside the box or the wrong player has been sent off etc. It shouldn’t be there to slow the game down like it currently does.

 

[JCRD]

No, I think the current system could work well if done properly. Imagine how long it would take if the ref had to look at the replays. As it stands play can continue in many situations while VAR reviews take place.

I’d go one step further and stop the refs having to go and review their decisions. It’s a farce, they very rarely stick with their own call when a mistake has been pointed out. If it’s an obvious error or the ref hasn’t seen it, just let the VAR tell him to change it.

They need to give them a one minute time limit and accept that their will be mistakes. That’s human nature VAR should be a safety net against egregious errors, like a penalty being given when the foul was outside the box or the wrong player has been sent off etc. It shouldn’t be there to slow the game down like it currently does.

Yeah I was basically getting at - its got to be one or the other... I just went the other way to you but agree that its got to be either or... I think the idea of both just muddies the water.

 

[cwy21]

Oliver has our big game this weekend with Tierney as VAR. Mike Dean had THREE! matches as VAR this match day.

 

[Dundalk_Spur]

If they let people hear the VAR conversations people might be more understanding, but also may reduce the dodgy, sorry, bad decisions.

 

[ralphs bald spot]

get rid of VAR and have the 4th official watching on a monitor and partnering up with the referee - keep the same teams of 4 officials so they work together and have the same expectations you would get better consistency a more sensible approach the game would flow better and you would have better accountability - you would still get debate but the one thing that var has proved is that football is down to interpretation its not black and white also leave the rules alone not one change made in recent years has improved the game

 

[Tucker]

Really good interview with retired rugby ref Nigel Owens. Makes a lot of good points about how football could improve the way it uses VAR and how the game should avoid the pitfall of relying too much on it.

TLDR

Football could improve the communication of decisions by refs and var, maybe by micing them up like Rugby.
Refs are Humans and can’t get everything right, VAR Should really only be there to catch the stuff a ref missies.
The flow of the game in football is one of the most enjoyable aspects and too many stoppages form Var can ruin that.

 

[cwy21]

I do think sometimes people need to remember that football is a sport that when played at the highest level almost every player is attempting to exaggerate if not cheat to fool the officiating crew from the opening whistle. That simply doesn't happen in rugby and is not a part of the culture.

 

[Tucker]

I do think sometimes people need to remember that football is a sport that when played at the highest level almost every player is attempting to exaggerate if not cheat to fool the officiating crew from the opening whistle. That simply doesn't happen in rugby and is not a part of the culture.

I don’t think that’s true at all. In fact I know it isn’t.

I get really tired of people holding rugby up as some kind of noble sport, played by these paragons of virtue, free of the corruptions that blight less regal sports, played by common urchins, like Football. It’s simply not the case. Rugby like any other professional sport has its own unique issues and it’s own hyper competitive players and coaches who will do whatever they need to to get an edge over the opposition.

Who remembers the fake blood scandal?

 

[mr ashley]

I don’t think that’s true at all. In fact I know it isn’t.

I get really tired of people holding rugby up as some kind of noble sport, played by these paragons of virtue, free of the corruptions that blight less regal sports, played by common urchins, like Football. It’s simply not the case. Rugby like any other professional sport has its own unique issues and it’s own hyper competitive players and coaches who will do whatever they need to to get an edge over the opposition.

Who remembers the fake blood scandal?

All true but I think when most people use the comparison they are considering how the players speak to the ref (politely). And as a result how much easier it is to have them miced up. Id agree that players respect their opponents about the same though, and cheat just as much. Just in different ways.
but no one is questioning the integrity or competence of rugby refs

 

[Spursmatty87]

Did anyone see how the offsides worked last night with the new technology?

 

[taidgh]

Did anyone see how the offsides worked last night with the new technology?

I did, yes.

 

[Fredo]

Did anyone see how the offsides worked last night with the new technology?

Yes personally thought it was really good and needs implementing in the PL.

 

[dirtyh]

they need to follow rugby and rugby league, rugby league especially is amazing how they use it. Essentially it still relies on the ref's on-field decision but if they think there could have been a foul, offside, forward pass, whatever they refer it for a final check and it's shown immediately several times on screens for everyone to see why the final decision is made. removes the 'grumpiness' as you can see why (even if it goes against you), it's fast and accurate and even imo adds something to the game.

the football version is atrocious because it still feels so subjective and typically ends up in the wrong decision regardless.

 

[cwy21]

Did anyone see how the offsides worked last night with the new technology?

Thankfully it stopped this travesty of a goal from counting....

 

[mr ashley]

Thankfully it stopped this travesty of a goal from counting....

Fair enough, looks like a quick decision is made.
but fuck me that is a harsh call. His kneecap was offside.
Im not comfortable with that degree of ‘level’ being called offside

 

[cwy21]

Fair enough, looks like a quick decision is made.
but fuck me that is a harsh call. His kneecap was offside.
Im not comfortable with that degree of ‘level’ being called offside

The video is edited. It was about 45 seconds from goal to offside. Still quicker than if they were drawing lines.

 

[mr ashley]

The video is edited. It was about 45 seconds from goal to offside. Still quicker than if they were drawing lines.

Yes, point stands but thanks for clearing it up.
I guess I’d prefer a “umpires call” option if it’s that close though.
Doesn’t feel right that the attacker can break the plane of offside by a toenail and be offside as result.

 

[cwy21]

Yes, point stands but thanks for clearing it up.
I guess I’d prefer a “umpires call” option if it’s that close though.
Doesn’t feel right that the attacker can break the plane of offside by a toenail and be offside as result.

How close is too close? If you measure to the mm and you choose a 5cm benefit to the attacker, would you feel any better if a Spurs goal is taken off for being 5.1cm offside?

 

[mr ashley]

How close is too close? If you measure to the mm and you choose a 5cm benefit to the attacker, would you feel any better if a Spurs goal is taken off for being 5.1cm offside?

I don’t know any more.
I feel like to be offside you should be far enough ahead of the defender to get an advantage (which this one clearly doesn’t).
just by being mathematically provable feels like it’s taken the argument away from its origins.