Referees reviewing handballs.

[TheH]

So it takes forever for VAR to award the first penalty.  They decide fairly early on that Lyanco's arm that is in a natural position if you stoop to head the ball in the direction he was running was not in a natural position.  Presumably the inordinate amount of time to confirm the penalty was that they couldn't work out if it was a handball in the build up.

Why does the on-pitch referee get the chance to look at the Lyanco handball, but not the one in the build up, that VAR agonised over for ever?  Bizarre.

[Whitey Grandad]

46 minutes ago, TheH said:

So it takes forever for VAR to award the first penalty.  They decide fairly early on that Lyanco's arm that is in a natural position if you stoop to head the ball in the direction he was running was not in a natural position.  Presumably the inordinate amount of time to confirm the penalty was that they couldn't work out if it was a handball in the build up.

Why does the on-pitch referee get the chance to look at the Lyanco handball, but not the one in the build up, that VAR agonised over for ever?  Bizarre.

The commentators said that VAR was looking at offside first.

It cannot have been a ‘clear and obvious error’ if the referee has to go and have a look at it in slow motion. It is a subjective decision and nobody but the referee should get involved. Their players were more concerned about a foul by McCarthy who made a good save. Nobody else anywhere in the ground thought it was worthy of a handball offence.

[TheH]

The commentators said VAR were looking at offside in the build up, but it was clearly and very obviously onside without any need of lines and the time taken.  There was a possible handball that the commentators initially mentioned, then later went on about offside.  I would suggest the prolonged delay, after VAR had quickly decided Lyanco's handball was handball was to get good angles on the handball by the Grimsby lad on their right wing.

[Whitey Grandad]

44 minutes ago, TheH said:

The commentators said VAR were looking at offside in the build up, but it was clearly and very obviously onside without any need of lines and the time taken.  There was a possible handball that the commentators initially mentioned, then later went on about offside.  I would suggest the prolonged delay, after VAR had quickly decided Lyanco's handball was handball was to get good angles on the handball by the Grimsby lad on their right wing.

The problem is that there is no communication and we just aren't told anything. They started to show a replay of the alleged handball last night and then cut it off.

[bpsaint]

VAR decisions should have a time limit. If the VAR official cannot find an issue with something within 30 seconds then the on field decision should stand. Its supposed to be used for clear and obvious errors, it wasn't designed to take up to 5 minutes to find an offside.

[SotonianWill]

21 hours ago, bpsaint said:

VAR decisions should have a time limit. If the VAR official cannot find an issue with something within 30 seconds then the on field decision should stand. Its supposed to be used for clear and obvious errors, it wasn't designed to take up to 5 minutes to find an offside.

brilliant idea. could make cheating more funny and interesting if players were to also hold back the ref, or stand in front of the screen to run down the clock. 

[SaintTex]

What infuriates me more with video review on the touchline is when the referee gets it wrong, even after looking at it at various angles in slow motion.

I get that it is easy to get it wrong on the pitch - might be 20 yards from the play, the speed of the play, etc. but hell...

Edited 3 March, 2023 by SaintTex

[Lord Duckhunter]

3 minutes ago, SaintTex said:

What infuriates me more with video review on the touchline is when the referee gets it wrong, even after looking at it at various angles in slow motion.

I get that it is easy to get it wrong on the pitch - might be 20 yards from the play, the speed of the play, etc. but hell...

“Get it wrong”,  as in rule against Saints? 

[Whitey Grandad]

23 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

“Get it wrong”,  as in rule against Saints? 

It makes no difference which teams are involved. The current situation with the interpretation of the handball law is a complete horlicks. The more the refereeing authorities fiddle with their instructions the worse things get.

[VectisSaint]

On 02/03/2023 at 11:14, TheH said:

So it takes forever for VAR to award the first penalty.  They decide fairly early on that Lyanco's arm that is in a natural position if you stoop to head the ball in the direction he was running was not in a natural position.  Presumably the inordinate amount of time to confirm the penalty was that they couldn't work out if it was a handball in the build up.

Why does the on-pitch referee get the chance to look at the Lyanco handball, but not the one in the build up, that VAR agonised over for ever?  Bizarre.

It did not take long to judge the penalty, the long time was taken looking at possible offsides, which would have made the handball irrelevant. There was not really much issue about the Lyanco handball. Really we should be thanking VAR for looking closely to see if there was any way the handball could be discounted. Clearly there was not really any doubt about the offsides. You are right that it took far far too long.

 

What is completely wrong is to have VAR in some FA Cup games (those where a PL team is at home) and not others. The competition either has VAR or it doesn't. It is totally unacceptable to have this difference in some matches. Personally  think VAR should be scrapped, especially for offside, but hey ho.

Edited 3 March, 2023 by VectisSaint

[Lord Duckhunter]

1 hour ago, Whitey Grandad said:

It makes no difference which teams are involved. The current situation with the interpretation of the handball law is a complete horlicks. The more the refereeing authorities fiddle with their instructions the worse things get.

Every fucking week we lose you complain about the ref, VAR,offsides,cheating, every fucking time. 

[Lord Duckhunter]

1 hour ago, VectisSaint said:

 

 

What is completely wrong is to have VAR in some FA Cup games (those where a PL team is at home) and not others. The competition either has VAR or it doesn't. It is totally unacceptable to have this difference in some matches. Personally  think VAR should be scrapped, especially for offside, but hey ho.

It’s not a league competition, the rules in one particular game don’t affect any other team apart from the 2 involved in that particular tie. Some games in the competition have professional refs, some don’t. They’re one off events to decide which 2 teams progress, what difference does it make to Sheffield Utd or Blackburn if there’s VAR at Man C v Burnley? 

Edited 3 March, 2023 by Lord Duckhunter

[Francis1947]

On 02/03/2023 at 16:57, Whitey Grandad said:

The problem is that there is no communication and we just aren't told anything. They started to show a replay of the alleged handball last night and then cut it off.

Whitey. 

I entirely agree with you. In Rugby Union,both in league matches and Internationals there is clear communication between the officials and the TMO. It is heard clearly on the TV broadcast or you can buy an earpiece for a couple of quid and listen in to all the comms between referee and players.

And very illuminating it is too. Especially the rapport and humour and respect that generally goes on between them.

A perfect example was in the 6 Nations match in Paris last week between France and Scotland.

The ref was a Rumanian guy,relatively inexperienced but pretty good in my opinion. 

He firstly gave a red card to a Scots player for a dangerous tackle to the head. Rightfully so in my opinion under the new rugby protocols. You heard the exact process he went through...height of tackle,degree of danger,any mitigating factors etc before he made his decision.

We, the fans,listened in to all the comms so we understood how the decision was made.

Later on a French player made a much more dangerous tackle to the head of the Scottish scrum half. For some inexplicable reason , you first heard the ref think it only warranted a yellow.

You then heard the conversation between the TMO and the assistant referees running the line,who persuaded him to take a look again and change his decision to a red.

There was no confusion whatsoever with the fans. We heard the exact process of how both decisions were made.

Wouldn't that be a great benefit in football matches. 

My gut feeling is that the standard of refereeing in England is so poor now, they would be embarrassed on how some decisions are made 

[Noodles34]

On 02/03/2023 at 16:58, bpsaint said:

VAR decisions should have a time limit. If the VAR official cannot find an issue with something within 30 seconds then the on field decision should stand. Its supposed to be used for clear and obvious errors, it wasn't designed to take up to 5 minutes to find an offside.

this all day long. 

[Whitey Grandad]

39 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Every fucking week we lose you complain about the ref, VAR,offsides,cheating, every fucking time. 

Not true. Much anger I detect in you, rockhopper.

If you feel the need to resort to obscene swearing then I fear for your future health.

You know very well that I am a referee who is no longer active. My record is clear on refereeing matters and I will support them and explain their decisions whenever I can.

I hate VAR for reasons that I have made clear many times and it naturally follows that I contest many of the offside decisions.

Cheating is an abomination in any sport and should rightly be decried.

You may be surprised to learn that I don’t give a toss about any result. I just want to see a good sporting game.

[Noodles34]

every time the ref goes to the monitor, you know it's coming, so you wonder, what's the point? The pricks in Stockley Park have already told him the decision. 

[Whitey Grandad]

2 minutes ago, Noodles34 said:

this all day long. 

Quite right. Anything that needs more than a few seconds cannot by definition have been clear and obvious.

[Whitey Grandad]

Just now, Noodles34 said:

every time the ref goes to the monitor, you know it's coming, so you wonder, what's the point? The pricks in Stockley Park have already told him the decision. 

It depends on the status and experience of the on field referee. The raw ones are too scared of standing up for their own decisions and feel that if they have been recommended to review they must have been wrong.

There is also confirmation bias. The more times that you see a replay the more you think that the action must have been premeditated because you know what’s coming next. You have lost the spontaneity of the initial observation.

[saintant]

15 minutes ago, Francis1947 said:

Whitey. 

I entirely agree with you. In Rugby Union,both in league matches and Internationals there is clear communication between the officials and the TMO. It is heard clearly on the TV broadcast or you can buy an earpiece for a couple of quid and listen in to all the comms between referee and players.

And very illuminating it is too. Especially the rapport and humour and respect that generally goes on between them.

A perfect example was in the 6 Nations match in Paris last week between France and Scotland.

The ref was a Rumanian guy,relatively inexperienced but pretty good in my opinion. 

He firstly gave a red card to a Scots player for a dangerous tackle to the head. Rightfully so in my opinion under the new rugby protocols. You heard the exact process he went through...height of tackle,degree of danger,any mitigating factors etc before he made his decision.

We, the fans,listened in to all the comms so we understood how the decision was made.

Later on a French player made a much more dangerous tackle to the head of the Scottish scrum half. For some inexplicable reason , you first heard the ref think it only warranted a yellow.

You then heard the conversation between the TMO and the assistant referees running the line,who persuaded him to take a look again and change his decision to a red.

There was no confusion whatsoever with the fans. We heard the exact process of how both decisions were made.

Wouldn't that be a great benefit in football matches. 

My gut feeling is that the standard of refereeing in England is so poor now, they would be embarrassed on how some decisions are made 

Very refreshing and as you allude to some of the useless football referees would find it very difficult and also embarrassing trying to explain how they come to their decisions.

[saintant]

4 minutes ago, Noodles34 said:

every time the ref goes to the monitor, you know it's coming, so you wonder, what's the point? The pricks in Stockley Park have already told him the decision. 

Yeah, cut out the middle man ie ref going to the monitor because it's a waste of everyone's time.

[Noodles34]

1 hour ago, Whitey Grandad said:

It depends on the status and experience of the on field referee. The raw ones are too scared of standing up for their own decisions and feel that if they have been recommended to review they must have been wrong.

There is also confirmation bias. The more times that you see a replay the more you think that the action must have been premeditated because you know what’s coming next. You have lost the spontaneity of the initial observation.

so, basically, that is all of them then. see below. 

How often do referees ignore VAR's advice?

It has become extremely rare for referees to go to the pitchside monitor and stick with their original decision after being advised to take another look by VAR. So much so the home crowd at Old Trafford could be heard cheering when referee Paul Tierney went to the monitor to look again at Gabriel Martinelli's goal for Arsenal against Manchester United, confident he was about to disallow it for a foul in the build-up, which he did.

However, referee Michael Oliver stuck with his handball call against Bournemouth in their match with Nottingham Forest on Saturday and, in a more high-profile example, in the Merseyside derby in February 2021, Everton clinched a 2-0 victory at Anfield thanks to a late penalty which was awarded by referee Chris Kavanagh, who opted to stick with his original decision after checking the pitchside monitor on VAR's advice.

[Lord Duckhunter]

1 hour ago, Whitey Grandad said:

 

 

You may be surprised to learn that I don’t give a toss about any result. I just want to see a good sporting game.

 

[Roo1976]

2 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

It’s not a league competition, the rules in one particular game don’t affect any other team apart from the 2 involved in that particular tie. Some games in the competition have professional refs, some don’t. They’re one off events to decide which 2 teams progress, what difference does it make to Sheffield Utd or Blackburn if there’s VAR at Man C v Burnley? 

but VAR made a difference to our game...............................................................................

[Lord Duckhunter]

18 minutes ago, Roo1976 said:

but VAR made a difference to our game...............................................................................

What’s that got to do with anything, it wasn’t as if VAR reviewed Saints indiscretions and not Grimsby’s. Both sides were subject to VAR  reviews. I’m sure The Dog & Duck could argue that a goal against them would have been disallowed by a better professional ref, but it doesn’t make a blind bit of difference to the competition. Both sides had the same amateur ref, and both sides had VAR in our game. It’s a one off game, unlike the league other results don’t make a blind bit of difference so it’s no big deal if some have different officiating than others. 

Edited 3 March, 2023 by Lord Duckhunter

[Roo1976]

11 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

What’s that got to do with anything, it wasn’t as if VAR reviewed Saints indiscretions and not Grimsby’s. Both sides were subject to VAR  reviews. I’m sure The Dog & Duck could argue that a goal against them would have been disallowed by a better professional ref, but it doesn’t make a blind bit of difference to the competition. Both sides had the same amateur ref, and both sides had VAR in our game. It’s a one off game, unlike the league other results don’t make a blind bit of difference so it’s no big deal if some have different officiating than others. 

If the game was at Grimsby it might have had some bearing on the out come,due to there being no VAR set up at lower divisional grounds ,that the point im try to make.

[Whitey Grandad]

56 minutes ago, Roo1976 said:

If the game was at Grimsby it might have had some bearing on the out come,due to there being no VAR set up at lower divisional grounds ,that the point im try to make.

That’s been a general criticism of VAR since it was first proposed. The same Laws and their proper interpretation should apply across all levels of football and across all countries. The way that the officials operate is changed by the presence of VAR and you might think that a Premier League team would be used to operating within it but are the officials? That referee on Wednesday has previously mainly operated without VAR having officiated at only five Premier League games. 
 

It’s no surprise if he’s overawed by it and takes his time and follows the lead of another referee sitting miles away in front of a flickering screen