The Refereeing Thread

[Davo]

6 minutes ago, mack said:

United player knocked the Chelsea players arm just before the handball. That's all I can think of to no pen that.

Or the Refs listened to Klopp whining in the media about United getting too many penalties.

 

[Unlimited]

I’m just surprised the on field referee decided to not award a VAR penalty 

Has that ever happened in the A-League?

[mack]

18 minutes ago, Unlimited said:

I’m just surprised the on field referee decided to not award a VAR penalty 

Has that ever happened in the A-League?

It just happened in the Newcastle game. Topor-Stanley tripped up one of the Nix attackers in the box, like 2 minutes later they stopped play and he went back to the monitor and looked at it for a few minutes and despite it being a pretty clear penalty he decided not to change his mind.

[marron]

Dortmund Sevilla this morning - I can remember techonology discussions 15 years ago, and using that exact scenario as a reason why it was always going to be shite.

Haaland gets a little shirt tug with NO hope of getting to the ball. Ref doesn't see it. WIth no stoppages in play, half a minute later scores a terrific goal. VAR says the ref has to go look. For some reason they're showing him Haaland's shoulder clash with the defender, then they're showing him the earlier shirt tug. Penalty. Goal never happened. Haaland misses the penalty. What a farce.

If they must use it, they still have it backwards.

Let the refs and ARs officiate. If they miss something that is CLEAR AND OBVIOUS - i.e., can be seen within 20 seconds - let the ref know and let them stop play right then. No need for them to look at it at all if it was CLEAR AND OBVIOUS. If they HAVE to look at it repeatedly to decide, it just can't be CLEAR AND OBVIOUS. If they have to look at it at all to make their mind up about it, it can't be. If the VAR can't make the call themselves within a short timeframe, it can't be.

 

[Davo]

Here's the video

The way I interpret this is the VAR saw the shirt pull and was checking to see whether he should get the on field referee to review the potential penalty. Since there was no stoppage in play he didn't get the on field referee to hold things up while he checked. Dortmund then go on to score and since every goal is checked the VAR stopped reviewing the potential penalty and reviewed the goal. He decided that there was a potential foul in the goal and got the on field referee to check. The ref decided there was a foul and the goal shouldn't stand, but then the VAR got him to review the penalty and the on field referee decided it was a penalty.

An argument can be made as to whether the penalty or the foul during the goal were correct or too soft but the actual process they followed seems to make sense. A lot of people (not saying you are Marron) seem to be claiming that the goal got cancelled because the penalty was awarded, including Optus Sport in the above tweet. Pretty sure that's wrong.

As for my opinion, I think the penalty is dumb but correct. Why pull his shirt if you didn't think he was a chance to get on the ball and wanted to hold him back? However I wouldn't have disallowed the goal for a foul. Looked to me like the defender came across, tried to put the shoulder into Haaland but just bounced straight off him. I don't see Haaland actually do anything other than get run into.

Also I hate the way they review the actual penalties. If the keeper moves his feet a millimeter off the line before the kick is taken the VAR checks it but if half of the players from each team encroach into the box they don't bother to check it (although this looks like one of the few penalties where everyone stayed out of the box). Same thing happened in the WSW game against City when McLaren scored the pen. Multiple players from both teams encroached but VAR didn't care. Had Margush left his line early and the goal wasn't scored they'd force a retake.

[btron3000]

55 minutes ago, marron said:

Dortmund Sevilla this morning - I can remember techonology discussions 15 years ago, and using that exact scenario as a reason why it was always going to be shite.

Haaland gets a little shirt tug with NO hope of getting to the ball. Ref doesn't see it. WIth no stoppages in play, half a minute later scores a terrific goal. VAR says the ref has to go look. For some reason they're showing him Haaland's shoulder clash with the defender, then they're showing him the earlier shirt tug. Penalty. Goal never happened. Haaland misses the penalty. What a farce.

If they must use it, they still have it backwards.

Let the refs and ARs officiate. If they miss something that is CLEAR AND OBVIOUS - i.e., can be seen within 20 seconds - let the ref know and let them stop play right then. No need for them to look at it at all if it was CLEAR AND OBVIOUS. If they HAVE to look at it repeatedly to decide, it just can't be CLEAR AND OBVIOUS. If they have to look at it at all to make their mind up about it, it can't be. If the VAR can't make the call themselves within a short timeframe, it can't be.

 

Wait, the guy who had his shirt tugged scored a goal and they brought it back to give him a penalty?? hahahahaha

Re: second paragraph, I've been banging on about this since it was introduced. Especially given the ref has to run off to watch on a tiny little tv, it's nonsensical. 

And now the A-league seemingly has a "half-pregnant" answer, which is "If I think it's clear and obvious, I'll overrule. If I'm not sure, I'll send the ref to the sideline tv".

Rubbish.

[btron3000]

4 minutes ago, Davo said:

Here's the video

He decided that there was a potential foul in the goal and got the on field referee to check. The ref decided there was a foul and the goal shouldn't stand

What? Really?

The defender ran across his path and initiated the contact. Oh man, if they called it back for that...

It's like anytime you fall over now it must be a free kick to the other team. Watching in slo-mo doesn't help.

VAR sux.

[marron]

52 minutes ago, btron3000 said:

Wait, the guy who had his shirt tugged scored a goal and they brought it back to give him a penalty?? hahahahaha

Re: second paragraph, I've been banging on about this since it was introduced. Especially given the ref has to run off to watch on a tiny little tv, it's nonsensical. 

And now the A-league seemingly has a "half-pregnant" answer, which is "If I think it's clear and obvious, I'll overrule. If I'm not sure, I'll send the ref to the sideline tv".

Rubbish.

Yeah. The second part is the wrong part isn't it. If the guy in the box on his own can't decide, then that should be enough to know there's nothing doing.

 

@Dave, yeah for sure. I've always been careful myself with language around it (not that it matters), but, essentially, goals are never cancelled or even disallowed, because the refs decision is final; if they have decided it wasn't a goal, it was never a goal, and that's that.

I'm not sure whether the goal wasn't one because of the foul; that would make sense in terms of the process and what you could see - but, as btron says, then we're down to, well, was it? Looking at things in slo-mo when judging fouls is problematic - in my eyes, it CANNOT make anything clear and obvious.

VAR was "supposed" to remove doubt and give definitive answers - it just doesn't. Even for close offsides.

[Davo]

Yeah I'm still against VAR, I just think that in the current framework the refs followed the process correctly. It's the process overall which sucks.

If we didn't have VAR in that game the referee would have missed the penalty, which nobody would have cared about because Haaland would never have got to the ball anyway. Then the goal would have been scored and the original decision was to allow the goal so it would have stood, which in my opinion was the correct decision. Sure it's a sample size of one but in this case no VAR would have been better.

The original intent for clear and obvious error makes sense if it's applied correctly. If the referee completely misses something because his vision is blocked or it happens in back play then the VAR should step in. If the referee gives a penalty for a foul then I don't see the need to review it to death unless the VAR can see that there was no foul at all (i.e. a clear and obvious error). Using slow motion replays to re-referee the decision isn't how VAR should be used. If you need to use a million replays to make a decision then whichever way you go half the fans will think you got it right and half will think it's wrong so there will always be controversy.

I'm less bothered by offside because it's something that you're trying to objectively measure rather than make a subjective call like a foul. This is where technology makes sense. I do think that they should include some sort of margin for error though. In cricket the Hawkeye system they use for LBW has a built in error margin and if it falls into that they go with the original umpires call. I think they should do that for offside. They should draw the lines as best they can and then apply the error margin. If it's within a certain margin it's effectively too close to call so they go with the original decision.

[alexd]

This ^^^^^

[marron]

Davo for president 

[Davo]

It was a matter of time before this happened but the linesman delaying the offside flag has led to a serious injury.

Salah was clearly offside but the assistant left the flag down, causing the keeper to come out and contest the ball. He gets a knee to the head and is knocked unconscious, then the flag goes up for offside.

I can tolerate leaving the flag down for the super close ones as that's where VAR makes sense, but when it's metres offside they need to call it. As soon as I saw that through ball I could tell he was off and the assistant was in the perfect position so he would have seen it even more clearly. Having the option to leave it to VAR is changing the way the assistants are refereeing offside. Calls that they would have comfortably made pre-VAR they're now second guessing.

[MathyouWSW]

I feared for Patricio. It gave me flashbacks of Cech's head knock years ago. I really hope he doesn't end up like him and has to wear a headgear as well.  I hope this mistake doesn't cost the Wolves in the upcoming games.

[Davo]

Ange blew up at the referee, his translator translated for him and the referee booked the translator for dissent.

If this loophole stays I can see a lot of managers employing translators in the future.

[Davo]

Surprised they don’t have goal line technology for UEFA’s World Cup qualifiers.

[MathyouWSW]

9 minutes ago, Davo said:

Surprised they don’t have goal line technology for UEFA’s World Cup qualifiers.

Same here. 

Especially for a tournament that means so much, they need to have the technology to make the correct decision. This could hurt Portugal.

[Davo]

 

[Paul01]

Brisbane coach gets carded for dissent

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2021/apr/04/disgrace-brisbane-roar-aggrieved-as-melbourne-victory-reach-w-league-grand-final?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

[matty]

On 28/03/2021 at 11:18 AM, Davo said:

Surprised they don’t have goal line technology for UEFA’s World Cup qualifiers.

That doesn't look like a definite goal to me.  Does that camera adjust for the angle it's on etc? Genuinely curious.

Also can't see all of the ball to know if the whole thing crossed the line.

[mack]

 

[Davo]

Dive

[mack]

Look at this VAR review for offside. 

https://streamable.com/4vifih

[Davo]

 

[Wobblies]

17 minutes ago, Davo said:

 

Had it been us..... Beath would have waved "Play on"

[Prydzopolis]

A good take on the current handball law after the Emre Can penalty in the CL quarter last night 

[mack]

If you're doing a Walk The Egyptian move and hit the ball then you have no complaints.

It won't matter what they change the rules to here they'll still be incompetent, we had that Georgievski penalty against Adelaide replicated by Andrew Durante in his match (just before he gave away a penalty for a handball that was given) but that time the ref & VAR didn't give it. It was far more consistent when they only had to consider if handling it was deliberate.

[MathyouWSW]

On 10/04/2021 at 10:43 PM, mack said:

Look at this VAR review for offside. 

https://streamable.com/4vifih

What ended up being the verdict?

[mack]

Offside I believe.

[pseudonym]

 

I wonder how Chris Beath will stuff this up

[Paul01]

What does this mean?