Quantcast
VAR Thoughts? - Page 56 - FF - Football Forum - The Liverpool Way Jump to content
Lee909

VAR Thoughts?

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Frank Dacey said:

Apparently, they're not allowed to 'retire' referees on age grounds these days as that would be discriminatory. Presumably full-time referees are subject to employment law and so I suppose the only ways you could get rid of them would be demonstrable lack of fitness or demonstrable ineptitiude. Since Jon Moss has been lugging his belly around for the last 10 years presumably the fitness standards cant be that high and given that Lee Mason has been useless for years the bar for ineptitude must be unbelievably low.

There was an age limit at one point wasn’t there? I seem to remember Paul Durkin having to retire due to age when he was comfortably the best ref in the country. 
 

The Premier League should be embarrassed to have those refs I listed running games. If they still want to referee at their age let them do it at non-league level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Frank Dacey said:

Apparently, they're not allowed to 'retire' referees on age grounds these days as that would be discriminatory. Presumably full-time referees are subject to employment law and so I suppose the only ways you could get rid of them would be demonstrable lack of fitness or demonstrable ineptitiude. Since Jon Moss has been lugging his belly around for the last 10 years presumably the fitness standards cant be that high and given that Lee Mason has been useless for years the bar for ineptitude must be unbelievably low.

They have to pass a fitness exam once per season I believe. 

1 hour ago, Vincent Vega said:

There was an age limit at one point wasn’t there? I seem to remember Paul Durkin having to retire due to age when he was comfortably the best ref in the country. 
 

The Premier League should be embarrassed to have those refs I listed running games. If they still want to referee at their age let them do it at non-league level.

Yeah, it used to be 56 I think, but they were forced to scrap it recently. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Vincent Vega said:

Yep, all these need fucking off as soon as possible due to at least fitting into two of these categories:

 

Martin Atkinson - 50 at the end of this month.

Mike Dean - 52

Kevin Friend - 50 in July 

Andre Marriner - 50

Lee Mason - 50 in October 

Jon Moss - 50

Graham Scott - 52

Nothing to do with age. They are just fucking terrible at refereeing. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Baresi said:

That’s Uriah Rennie!

Yeah I know

 

The Collina of the Premier league 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Vincent Vega said:

Yep, all these need fucking off as soon as possible due to at least fitting into two of these categories:

 

Martin Atkinson - 50 at the end of this month.

Mike Dean - 52

Kevin Friend - 50 in July 

Andre Marriner - 50

Lee Mason - 50 in October 

Jon Moss - 50

Graham Scott - 52

All younger than me. I am a better ref though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm having a bad day. Or maybe Dermot's talking complete and utter drivel again. I don't know up from down anyore when it comes to football, it's such an utter shambles. 

Today's pearls of wisdom, talking about the Arsenal penalty yesterday.........

 

The problem is Michael Oliver is behind the play. He sees Sanchez come across with his boot high, I don't think he sees the air shot. I think he thinks it's Sanchez connecting with Laczaette, takes him down, that's why he gives a penalty.)

"He then relays to the VAR what he's seen, how he's seen it, and I think that's backed Paul Tierney into a corner. I don't think he can ask him to go to the monitor because you can't re-referee the football match. I think it's just a bit of a glitch in the process, because the referee's made an on-field decision, and the VAR can't re-referee the situation, they've got to stick with the on-field decision. But it's very, very lucky.

Lacazette's gone to play the ball in the air, Sanchez has come across to block, he's a defender, that's what he's trying to do, and Lacazette's momentum has taken him into Sanchez."

 

'Re-referee the match'? Isn't that what VAR is doing every single time it intervenes, or am I just missing his point?

 

Doesn't his last comment exactly describe what happened when a pen was given against Trent in the derby?!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The pundits have decided it shouldn't have been a pen. They also decided the far more innocuous touch on Welbeck in our game at Brighton was a pen. 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, DaveT said:

Maybe I'm having a bad day. Or maybe Dermot's talking complete and utter drivel again. I don't know up from down anyore when it comes to football, it's such an utter shambles. 

Today's pearls of wisdom, talking about the Arsenal penalty yesterday.........

 

The problem is Michael Oliver is behind the play. He sees Sanchez come across with his boot high, I don't think he sees the air shot. I think he thinks it's Sanchez connecting with Laczaette, takes him down, that's why he gives a penalty.)

"He then relays to the VAR what he's seen, how he's seen it, and I think that's backed Paul Tierney into a corner. I don't think he can ask him to go to the monitor because you can't re-referee the football match. I think it's just a bit of a glitch in the process, because the referee's made an on-field decision, and the VAR can't re-referee the situation, they've got to stick with the on-field decision. But it's very, very lucky.

Lacazette's gone to play the ball in the air, Sanchez has come across to block, he's a defender, that's what he's trying to do, and Lacazette's momentum has taken him into Sanchez."

 

'Re-referee the match'? Isn't that what VAR is doing every single time it intervenes, or am I just missing his point?

 

Doesn't his last comment exactly describe what happened when a pen was given against Trent in the derby?!

If you read this column every week, or however often it goes up, you will see that he contradicts himself every few weeks.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly. These lot always tie themselves in knots because they always try to justify the referee's decisions. "Re-refereeing" is exactly what is happening when VAR gets involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What adds to the confusion is that Gallagher is very inarticulate.

After the comments posted above someone did manage to drag out of him that what he meant by VAR cannot re-referee the game, is that VAR did not think the incident met the threshold for a "clear and obvious error".  In other words it's a subjective decision, VAR may have subjectively disagreed with the decision but it was not a clear and obvious error so can't do anything about it. End.

 

Of course he does also regularly contradict himself, and I don't think the obfuscation is accidental.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/03/2021 at 16:38, Trumo said:

 

I still see a fair amount of ridiculous VAR calls in Serie A and La Liga for example, and a lot of questionable refereeing decisions, but the main difference with their use of VAR is that the referee goes to the screen much more often, and they don't take absolutely ages faffing about drawing wonky lines.

 

It still beats me why the referee can't be in dialogue with the VAR official but at the same time go and view the footage themselves. If nothing else, it would quicken the process if they communicated and reviewed at the same time.

They have to be in dialogue, they're all miced up to each other. That's what annoyed me most about the Van Dijk tackle, after they made the decision they still had a good minutes of chatting to each other and seemingly none of the on field officials thought to ask how did he get injured? They literally had nothing to do but talk to each other while the physios were on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, DaveT said:

Maybe I'm having a bad day. Or maybe Dermot's talking complete and utter drivel again. I don't know up from down anyore when it comes to football, it's such an utter shambles. 

Today's pearls of wisdom, talking about the Arsenal penalty yesterday.........

 

The problem is Michael Oliver is behind the play. He sees Sanchez come across with his boot high, I don't think he sees the air shot. I think he thinks it's Sanchez connecting with Laczaette, takes him down, that's why he gives a penalty.)

"He then relays to the VAR what he's seen, how he's seen it, and I think that's backed Paul Tierney into a corner. I don't think he can ask him to go to the monitor because you can't re-referee the football match. I think it's just a bit of a glitch in the process, because the referee's made an on-field decision, and the VAR can't re-referee the situation, they've got to stick with the on-field decision. But it's very, very lucky.

Lacazette's gone to play the ball in the air, Sanchez has come across to block, he's a defender, that's what he's trying to do, and Lacazette's momentum has taken him into Sanchez."

 

'Re-referee the match'? Isn't that what VAR is doing every single time it intervenes, or am I just missing his point?

 

Doesn't his last comment exactly describe what happened when a pen was given against Trent in the derby?!

I think what he means by "re-refereeing the decision" is VAR is supposed to be there for something the ref has missed (or can't see because it's fucking microscopic). By Oliver telling VAR exactly what he saw, which is exactly what happened and Oliver thought that was a pen, it's a pen. Personally I think the key to all of this though is this line "He sees Sanchez come across with his boot high". Foul. I don't see why anyone needs more discussion at that point - a high boot in that situation (ie, you're not on your own) is a foul. The fact lacazette can't shoot has nothing to do with the high foot. If Oliver believes Sanchez had a high foot, unless he hasn't, what can VAR do or even should do? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sir roger said:

Is lifting your boot off the ground an automatic foul now ? 

How would you ever block a volley ?

No it isn't but if you don't get the ball and clean out the player then it's a foul. Sanchez had intended to block a shot but his intentions are worthless, its what he actually did that counts. The issue as always is consistency, in the Burnley game they got a peno and we didn't for 2 very similar challenges. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Football Supporters’ Association survey on VAR, a chance to tell someone who might get an audience with the PL how much you hate it (or love it if you’re a weirdo).

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Vincent Vega said:

Football Supporters’ Association survey on VAR, a chance to tell someone who might get an audience with the PL how much you hate it (or love it if you’re a weirdo).

 

I didn't like the set up of those questions. Some of the answers could be perceived as in favour of VAR, there should have been an option to say you hate it on lots of those questions. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, No2 said:

I didn't like the set up of those questions. Some of the answers could be perceived as in favour of VAR, there should have been an option to say you hate it on lots of those questions. 

I was neutral on a few like that, I expressed my opinion on the questions where I could say how shite it was.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×