VAR overruling non obvious "errors"

[Nick Bateman]

The season has started with VAR getting involved overruling on-the-pitch decisions based on their own judgement and not obvious errors. This is a new interference, i believe, to jockey certain preferred teams to gain advantage.

In the United game, they gained a penalty from VAR not accepting the refs view that it was six of one half a dozen of the other when physically stronger (don't call me Shirley) Bassey tossed pushy upstart Mason Mount to the ground like a ragdoll in a fair manly stramash! Yet the week before Arsenal's William Saliva was permitted to almost remove Mount's shirt in his drive to impede the goalkeeper which resulted in their winner.  Crystal Palace's wondrous Eze free kick goal was chalked off because of a similar to Saliva's backing in against Chelsea by Marc Guehi.

VAR (Darren England) also failed to rule on a very obvious push on Bassey for ManU's deflected goal showing his bias for the preferred club.

VAR should not, in my opinion, make decisions which are interpretable, where its the VAR referee's view over the on-field refs. Yesterday we saw Anthony Gordon sent off by VAR after Hooper rightly gave him a yellow. Granted there were marks on Van Dyke's calf but Gordon did pull out at the last second.

They do this fake rugby miced up announcement. Rather than having the conversation between the officials when they consult the monitor as they would do in rugby, the Premier League give us this complete phony baloney referee audio statement.

I saw in UEFA and even in the "Mickey Mouse" world cup tournament the referees were resisting giving dives and striving to get decisions more right than wrong, allowing the football to excel.

It seems we have the exact opposite happening in the EPL this season. Fulham have already had 2 penalties out of 2 games in this campaign.

We're away to Chelsea next....

[LittleErn]

I don't often agree with you Nick, and I'm still not convinced that any ref is consciously biased, but I'm sure you are right about the unnecessary interference of VAR where the ref has clearly seen the offence and from which time it is a matter of opinion. VAR should only be involved in matters of "fact", e.g. was the ball over the line, or if the referee is not sure about what happened and ASKS for VAR enlightenment.

Although not convinced about bias, I can see an argument that points to the TV companies wanting to protect their big money earners - i.e. those clubs with the most fans worldwide - I just can't see any evidence to prove they do (yet).

[Willham]

Am I right to believe in rugby, the ref first mentions he wants something checking?

Like when something has possibly happened but he's unsure, he shouts it so that teams know there's something in the mix and then when play stops its looked at?

I dont watch loads of rugby so I might be wrong.

[Lighthouse]

I don't think there can be much argument that the officials and VAR officials are biased in favour of the bigger teams. I would go further and say this comes from the League itself who are dying to have a European League and only want the rich and successful teams in it from England. The inconsistency has grown since VAR. Fans are more confused over what is handball, what is offside, what is a blatant foul, what is an obstruction.

If Fulham wore red and United White the decisions on Sunday would not have been the same. I am not a crazy fan who thinks that my team is hard done by all the time. But I am not sure any convincing argument can be put up that VAR has smoothed things and made the game fairer.

[v]

Spot on Nick 

My thoughts in a nutshell.

Last week VAR conveniently 'forgot' to re-check the Brighton challenge on Josh King in the area. This week they conveniently 'rememembered' to re-check Bassey's challenge on Peggy Mount (even if 2 other skirmishes were happening in the box at the same time!)

Then the FA trot out Clattenberk to conveniently 'explain' it all to us poor misguided football fans - after the MOTD pundits had the temerity to call out Calamity Kavanagh on 2 wrong decisions 

[sunburywhite]

Am I right to believe in rugby, the ref first mentions he wants something checking?

Like when something has possibly happened but he's unsure, he shouts it so that teams know there's something in the mix and then when play stops its looked at?

I dont watch loads of rugby so I might be wrong.

Sadly you are wrong (to a degree)

Often VAR will draw the Refs attention to something that has happened which the ref didnt pick up on, i.e high tackle, illegal take out etc. Var is constantly looking at the play perhaps 20 seconds behind it and is there  to help the Ref

The Ref will ask VAR to confirm major decisions, was it a try? did he have a foot in touch?etc

Overall the two of them work hand in glove which isnt the case in football

[Willham]

Am I right to believe in rugby, the ref first mentions he wants something checking?

Like when something has possibly happened but he's unsure, he shouts it so that teams know there's something in the mix and then when play stops its looked at?

I dont watch loads of rugby so I might be wrong.

Sadly you are wrong (to a degree)

Often VAR will draw the Refs attention to something that has happened which the ref didnt pick up on, i.e high tackle, illegal take out etc. Var is constantly looking at the play perhaps 20 seconds behind it and is there  to help the Ref

The Ref will ask VAR to confirm major decisions, was it a try? did he have a foot in touch?etc

Overall the two of them work hand in glove which isnt the case in football

Interesting, thanks for the insight.

I mentioned in another post that a frustration I have with VAR is how it doesn't check throw ins and corner/goal kicks awarded,

Maybe throw ins would be a little excessive but goal kicks and corners are slow anyway, there's easily enough time to watch a quick replay and if its clear and obvious then overturn it. Or just give the ref 10 seconds to make a decision while the VAR team watch a replay.

I can't imagine rugby allowing that.

Although I would like to mention too, when I watch rugby, league or union, maybe more so union than league, I find there's calls going on all the time that contradict each other and commentators/full time spectators don't understand.

In my city of hull (major rugby league city) there's a concensus that they are disfavoured by referees.

So it isn't perfect in the other green either. We may use rugby as an example but it's not perfect.

I do still believe it's better though.

[RaySmith]

That VAR decision was just weird, announced long after the event, when no-one knew what the heck it was about - even which end of the ground it referred to - as Gary Lineker, who was there as a guest in the Riverside, said in his YouTube podcast.

People are bound to think there is big club bias involved, but whatever the reason, WHY did Var become involved in this typical pushing and shoving  we get today at corners-
 singling out a Fulham player, and not looking at the whole situation, where Man U were clearly the instigators, and Mount shoved into Bassey first, and he shrugged it off, sending the weaker Mount flying, though Bassey ended up being  tripped himself in the melee.

Incredible! Who is in charge of all this?

[bobbo]

I honestly think one word explains why we're all rightly not happy with VAR the word
" INCONSISTANT "     Hope I spelt it write .

[Woolly Mammoth]

I honestly think one word explains why we're all rightly not happy with VAR the word
" INCONSISTANT "     Hope I spelt it write .

You have spelt "it" right.
But you have spelt "write" wrong.

[Eton White]

I honestly think one word explains why we're all rightly not happy with VAR the word
" INCONSISTANT "    Hope I spelt it write .

You have spelt "it" right.
But you have spelt "write" wrong.

He's also spelt "INCONSISTENT" rong. 

[Super Mick]

The season has started with VAR getting involved overruling on-the-pitch decisions based on their own judgement and not obvious errors. This is a new interference, i believe, to jockey certain preferred teams to gain advantage.

In the United game, they gained a penalty from VAR not accepting the refs view that it was six of one half a dozen of the other when physically stronger (don't call me Shirley) Bassey tossed pushy upstart Mason Mount to the ground like a ragdoll in a fair manly stramash! Yet the week before Arsenal's William Saliva was permitted to almost remove Mount's shirt in his drive to impede the goalkeeper which resulted in their winner.  Crystal Palace's wondrous Eze free kick goal was chalked off because of a similar to Saliva's backing in against Chelsea by Marc Guehi.

VAR (Darren England) also failed to rule on a very obvious push on Bassey for ManU's deflected goal showing his bias for the preferred club.

VAR should not, in my opinion, make decisions which are interpretable, where its the VAR referee's view over the on-field refs. Yesterday we saw Anthony Gordon sent off by VAR after Hooper rightly gave him a yellow. Granted there were marks on Van Dyke's calf but Gordon did pull out at the last second.

They do this fake rugby miced up announcement. Rather than having the conversation between the officials when they consult the monitor as they would do in rugby, the Premier League give us this complete phony baloney referee audio statement.

I saw in UEFA and even in the "Mickey Mouse" world cup tournament the referees were resisting giving dives and striving to get decisions more right than wrong, allowing the football to excel.

It seems we have the exact opposite happening in the EPL this season. Fulham have already had 2 penalties out of 2 games in this campaign.

We're away to Chelsea next....

The season has started with VAR getting involved overruling on-the-pitch decisions based on their own judgement and not obvious errors. This is a new interference, i believe, to jockey certain preferred teams to gain advantage.

In the United game, they gained a penalty from VAR not accepting the refs view that it was six of one half a dozen of the other when physically stronger (don't call me Shirley) Bassey tossed pushy upstart Mason Mount to the ground like a ragdoll in a fair manly stramash! Yet the week before Arsenal's William Saliva was permitted to almost remove Mount's shirt in his drive to impede the goalkeeper which resulted in their winner.  Crystal Palace's wondrous Eze free kick goal was chalked off because of a similar to Saliva's backing in against Chelsea by Marc Guehi.

VAR (Darren England) also failed to rule on a very obvious push on Bassey for ManU's deflected goal showing his bias for the preferred club.

VAR should not, in my opinion, make decisions which are interpretable, where its the VAR referee's view over the on-field refs. Yesterday we saw Anthony Gordon sent off by VAR after Hooper rightly gave him a yellow. Granted there were marks on Van Dyke's calf but Gordon did pull out at the last second.

They do this fake rugby miced up announcement. Rather than having the conversation between the officials when they consult the monitor as they would do in rugby, the Premier League give us this complete phony baloney referee audio statement.

I saw in UEFA and even in the "Mickey Mouse" world cup tournament the referees were resisting giving dives and striving to get decisions more right than wrong, allowing the football to excel.

It seems we have the exact opposite happening in the EPL this season. Fulham have already had 2 penalties out of 2 games in this campaign.

We're away to Chelsea next....

Yeah the likes of Chelsea, Liverpool, Utd, City  can spend billions, but still need the officials in times of need.

[Ludlow Richard]

It's quite hard to remember a time before VAR. I stand to be corrected on the rest of this post.

In the old days, if a referee had seen a foul (for example) and had given a yellow card, then there was no scope for intervention by the FA, solely on the basis that the referee had seen the foul and had reached a decision.

If there had been an incident which the referee had not seen and did not mention in his report, then the FA could intervene and subsequently could impose a punishment.

What's happening today is VAR is coming up with an alternative view. So with Gordon's tackle, the referee had seen it and awarded a yellow. VAR then says "I think you should have another look at this", so off the referee meekly trots to the screen to be told that he's got it wrong. The referee has two choices then: go along with VAR and upgrade yellow to red; or stick with his original decision. And in 99% of cases the yellow gets upgraded to a red as the referee eats humble pie and concedes VAR is right and he's wrong.

So take the Bassey foul leading to the Man U penalty. The referee clearly saw the incident and (putting myself inside Kavanagh's head) presumably thought "six of one, half a dozen of the other, no-one's appealing, not a penalty, let play go on". VAR then calls him over, shows a slowed down version of the incident and suggests a penalty. Kavanagh then has a choice. Stick with his original feeling: no appeal, six of one etc, no penalty, play on. Or reverse his instinct and accept the off field VAR recommendation of a penalty. And we know what he went for.

It would help the acceptability of VAR if referees said more frequently "thanks VAR for showing me this, I understand why you are showing me this, but I think my original decision is correct and I'm sticking with it".

[Woolly Mammoth]

I honestly think one word explains why we're all rightly not happy with VAR the word
" INCONSISTANT "    Hope I spelt it write .

You have spelt "it" right.
But you have spelt "write" wrong.

He's also spelt "INCONSISTENT" rong. 

[Woolly Mammoth]

I honestly think one word explains why we're all rightly not happy with VAR the word
" INCONSISTANT "    Hope I spelt it write .

You have spelt "it" right.
But you have spelt "write" wrong.

He's also spelt "INCONSISTENT" rong. 

This is terrible news, we need to have a full investigation. as to why your word  " inconsistent " is right, but your word  "rong"  is wrong.

[SuffolkWhite]

It's quite hard to remember a time before VAR. I stand to be corrected on the rest of this post.

In the old days, if a referee had seen a foul (for example) and had given a yellow card, then there was no scope for intervention by the FA, solely on the basis that the referee had seen the foul and had reached a decision.

If there had been an incident which the referee had not seen and did not mention in his report, then the FA could intervene and subsequently could impose a punishment.

What's happening today is VAR is coming up with an alternative view. So with Gordon's tackle, the referee had seen it and awarded a yellow. VAR then says "I think you should have another look at this", so off the referee meekly trots to the screen to be told that he's got it wrong. The referee has two choices then: go along with VAR and upgrade yellow to red; or stick with his original decision. And in 99% of cases the yellow gets upgraded to a red as the referee eats humble pie and concedes VAR is right and he's wrong.

So take the Bassey foul leading to the Man U penalty. The referee clearly saw the incident and (putting myself inside Kavanagh's head) presumably thought "six of one, half a dozen of the other, no-one's appealing, not a penalty, let play go on". VAR then calls him over, shows a slowed down version of the incident and suggests a penalty. Kavanagh then has a choice. Stick with his original feeling: no appeal, six of one etc, no penalty, play on. Or reverse his instinct and accept the off field VAR recommendation of a penalty. And we know what he went for.

It would help the acceptability of VAR if referees said more frequently "thanks VAR for showing me this, I understand why you are showing me this, but I think my original decision is correct and I'm sticking with it".

Other issue is VAR didn't ask Ref to look at their goal, inconsistent or corrupt.

[The Cravenette]

The other point is, VAR were looking at it for 2 to 3 mins, probably from different angles, different speeds, at different points of the engagement. You can bet your bottom dollar they only showed Kavanagh the super slo-mo of Bassey pulling Mount over. So just showing the extremely edited highlights and no context.

[Fulham Tup North]

I honestly think one word explains why we're all rightly not happy with VAR the word
" INCONSISTANT "    Hope I spelt it write .

You have spelt "it" right.
But you have spelt "write" wrong.

He's also spelt "INCONSISTENT" rong. 

This is terrible news, we need to have a full investigation. as to why your word  " inconsistent " is right, but your word  "rong"  is wrong.

I think Bobbo should just delete his first message and try again... 
100 Times !!!

[bobbo]

I don't think you all realised I did it deliberately . However I am a really poor speller my kids constantly taking the pee out of me .