VAR decisions

I don’t agree but the real point is why is the ref blowing when it has been passed to a striker who is clear on goal. See outcome and then use VAR?

 

The best idea I’ve seen yet is giving the VAR role to ex-officials.

Poll, Wiley, Webb, Walton, Elleray etc etc

The PL’s message of use so far is that the referee on the pitch decision should largely be protected. Which means minimal use of pitchside screens and referee’s at Stockley Park working to protect their colleagues reputation on the pitch. The by-product is not always reaching the correct decisions, which is the whole point of the system. The officials collective reputation is being put above all else.

VAR officials not wanting to overturn and embarrass the on-field pitch. Who knows, it could be them next week. Best to play it safe and protect my mates. We can then blame the system and not the official.

So use ex-referees. They would have more time to invest in learning the system as they know that’s their one job - they don’t have to worry about being on the pitch on any subsequent weeks.

The other weekend Michael Oliver was doing VAR. Why?! Some may not think he’s the best on field official but the public consensus is that he is. Why is he sat watching a game for potential incident and not being put to far greater use actually officiating a game?

 

That we can agree on

 

I'm sure there's no "VAR agenda" against WFC but there will always be a bias against the smaller clubs and pro the bigger clubs. Of course there will be. It's human nature. VAR only overrules when it's a clear error but "a clear error" in itself isn't black and white. Is a half centimetre offside decision a clear error, can you be sure it's on/offside ? Is it always 100% clear whether or not the ball touched a hand ? Was it shoulder or arm ? A ref or VAR reviewer will get crucified if he calls a borderline decision against one of the big 6. There was very little criticism of the error at NUFC but imagine if that had been against Citeh or Liverpool and knocked them off the top. Not a chance the VAR reviewer would have missed it.

 

VAR should have overruled our first goal today. Delefeou was inside the box when the goal kick was taken...

 

As the commentator pointed out "...VAR can't be used from re-starts..."

 

A goal kick? or any freekick, corner or throw in? Because theyre also all restarts.

Just asking becauseit sounds odd.

 

I’d like someone from the club to explain why we are not getting any messages on the screen informing us when a VAR review is in progress/over. I thought that was a requirement, as well as showing a replay when a decision is overturned (very rare).

 

I believe there are 'checks' and then there are checks. Only the latter go on the screen. I presume although the penalty was checked as a matter of course today, it was never in significant doubt and so not a full-blown check.

 

Just reporting what the 'expert' said...

 

I have to say, my first impression was that Pererya was outside the box. I'm sure many refs in the past would have given that as a free kick. Credit where it's due that this guy pointed straight at the spot.

 

I think what it means is that the infringement was only spotted after the original VAR check. If it had been spotted then they would have ruled it out. Or they could argue it wasn’t a clear and obvious error*?

It did seem a bit strange on the tv as the way the ‘expert’ described it was very ambiguous.

* apart from the Arsenal defence that is

 

I'm pretty certain that I quoted him verbatim.

 

Very frustrating, it was a foul on Hughes for the first goal but probably not enough to be "clear and obvious".

 

Yes I think you did say exactly what they said. But it just doesn’t make sense (per what hornpete said) -

I think the person who said it wasn’t the expert but was quoting the expert, so I think they said it wrong?

If they were right it is very strange that you couldn’t use VAR in that situation. We will probably never know!

 

No ‘rub of the green’ to be got. He was in the box. Would have been scandalous if it wasn’t given.

 

I’ve just got home and seen it again. As much as I’m a Watford fan, I can’t bring myself to claim that - I really don’t think it was a foul having seen it close up.

 

Some extracts of the official VAR rules here (it’s not that interesting!). In the instance for our goal play restarted when Arsenal took the kick off.

On the one hand no one spotted it for 5-10 minutes after the goal anyway, but you could also argue it was a factual error and not judgement.

Either way, we have a point in the bag!

5.1.9
the referee and VAR should be alert to the possibility of an offending team/player trying to restart the game quickly to prevent a review. If the referee thinks a review might be necessary, the restart must be delayed to give time for the VAR to ‘check’ the decision/incident. Equally, VARs should be proactive and advise the referee if
there is a real possibility of a review so that the restart can be prevented

5.1.11 How does play restart after the review?
Once the referee has reached a final decision, the match must be restarted as follows:
• if a decision is not changed, play restarts according to the original decision
• if a decision is changed or a ‘missed’ offence is identified, play restarts with the correct
restart for the ‘new’ decision.
• if play was stopped for a review and the original decision is not overturned, play
restarts with a dropped ball where the ball was when play was stopped


8.12 Restarts–can a decision be changed after play has restarted?
If a restart has been taken, can previous decisions be reviewed and potentially changed?
Law 5 is clear that a referee cannot change a decision once play has restarted; referees will be encouraged not to allow play to restart if there is the possibility of a review. The only exception is for direct sending-off offences such as violent conduct where the disciplinary action can be taken but play does not revert to the restart associated with that offence (e.g. the Suarez ‘bite’ in the World Cup).

 

That was Anthony Taylor's best match at Vicarage Road yesterday. He got a chorus of boos at half time, and a couple of chants of "you don't know what you're doing" but that was it. A big improvement on his normal displays.

Yes, it was a foul on Hughes and he should have given it, but he was random with his freekicks throughout the game. Sometimes he'd give it sometimes he wouldn't. It was Watford's failing, to switch off from an offence which occurred over the half way line that led to a goal. There was a lot of ground to cover before the ball was in the net.

We did have a technical infringement for our first goal, and wouldn't that been glorious had the goal been disallowed because Deulofeu's foot was hovering over the line (not even planted on the ground). I think with all the crap decisions we've had so far this season, it was a just outcome. But VAR could not have done anything about it apparently. Another bizarre outcome from the laws of VAR. VAR cannot be used to check restarts, which I feel is absolutely ridiculous. All goals get checked, but because it was a restart Cleverley could have punched the ball in and the goal would have stood, had the referee thought it was a legal one (ala Southampton/Doucoure). That just cannot be right, but appears to be so. But isn't a freekick or a corner a restart? Like I say, it's another crazy one.

The penalty I thought was soft. The GD foul at Everton was far more of a penalty than yesterday IMO. But it's about bloody time we got one. Only the second penalty in over a season, or only the fourth one we've got in 81 premier league matches. David Luiz left a leg dangling, and Pereyra made the most of it. Contact was made, which prevented him going forward, so he's justified in going down. But there was not enough in it for me, however, it did look certain in real time when I saw it live. Once a referee gives it, it will never be overturned by VAR, unless there was no contact and Pereyra dived, which wasn't the case here.

So the VAR checks this season still sees the score as Watford 0 Opposition 3.

 

Ceballos didn't get any of the ball and definitely connected with Hughes's knee. Given that similar challenges were given as free kicks time and again against us, it was frustrating that this one wasn't.

 

Coincidentally there was a gust of wind through the northwest corner every time an arsenal player went down.

 

This is where it gets subjective. The tackle on Hughes looked like a foul but in the replay he clearly got the ball. No foul.

GD at Everton was a clear dive. Yesterday was a penalty.

VAR is crap and our referees are appalling. My only grumble for yesterday is the amount of injury time at the end when we were pushing. He spent all game doing that stupid motion of pointing at his watch, having to hurry Arsenal players off the pitch, booked the keeper for time wasting, two goals, 6 substitutions...and then only four minutes injury time seemed absurd. Frustrating as we were pushing for a winner.

 

1 of the goals was a penalty too, with all the delays that come with getting the players set and for the whistle to blow. 4 minutes was far too short but the tone was set in the first half where he only found 1 minute after two goals and that scrap on the touchline. And yeah, watch pointing seems to be the go to gesture for PL refs this season.

 

It is quite amusing that in this day and age of VAR we still rely on a man remembering to stop his watch to judge the length of a match worth millions.

 

Media was reporting whilst the game was on that VAR was not working and Stockley Park had a problem, hence possibly as to why there was no notifications on the scoreboard! whether that was right remains to be seen!

 

That'll surely be the next thing to go. IFAB have been dabbling with having fixed halves with a guaranteed amount of ball-in-play time. 30 mins I think I read, which would be slightly more than we see now on average.

 

ISTR that a ref can't send someone off (ie 2Y=R) for time-wasting?

 

Surely A.N. Other bloke with a stop watch could do it. A separate time-keeper well versed in the carious categories that require time to be added on. Or just have a 45 min. clock that gets stopped. As in rugby.

Why complicate everything? Handball? Time-keeping? Keep it simple but take that duty away from the ref. who has plenty of other stuff to do.

 

I know it seems stupid, but why only 30m? I presume things like throw ins are not watch stopping affairs?

It does seem ludicrously easy to fix. Have a clock, operated by a dedicated time keeper which stops for stoppages, not having a referee who has hundreds of decisions to me making at high speed, judge how many minutes to arbitrarily add on.

Make it visible to all, too. No point in getting to 90 and then finding out whether the game is all but over, or whether there is a chance you might push for a winning or draw-saving goal.

 

Sorry, I meant 30 minutes per half.

The idea is 60 minutes in total over a match. The clock would presumably stop for everything when the ball is dead and be overseen by a dedicated timekeeper rather than the on-field ref.

If they tried to hit 90 minutes of in-play time the players would be exhausted and every 3pm kick off would finish about 6pm.

 

Still seems daft to me. Just add on the time for substitutions, goal celebrations, injuries and VAR deliberations. The exact timings, not accepted norms. Time wasting is the only tricky one because it's subjective so the time-keeper might have to be a qualified ref. Still best to take the decision away from the onfield ref. though who could simply be left with trying to 'hurry things along'.

Penalties is a tricky one. Just a special free-kick really. I agree that if you were to extend added on time to other free-kicks, corners, goal-kicks and throw-ins we'd all be going home in the dark after a 3 p.m. k.o. in August.

Again, rugby seems to get it right. I don't think all dead ball situations are added on there. Lineouts for example? Correct me if I'm wrong egg fans. And they seem to end up with around 10 mins added on over the course of 80 mins. Again, a bit of a guesstimate. But, if extrapolated to our game, that would seem about right to me.

What gets me is that in all of this what's required is a drive towards simplicity. But, with the new handball rules (penalising attackers but not defenders) and allowing VAR to be a tool to mount a sad attempt by the refs' club to present themselves as super-human it sometimes seem as though the lunatics are in charge of the asylum.

And, please don't let any potential time-keeping changes be driven by TV schedules as I suspect is always a consideration. Do the right thing then let them adapt instead.

* I didn't think the Arsenil were particularly excessive on the time-wasting front yesterday. Leno got booked for stupidly trying to take a free-kick 10 yds away from where the foul was committed with a line inbetween. But 60 secs x2 for goal celebrations plus 30 secs ×6 for substitutions = 5 mins. So where the **** did 4 come from?

 

Watched Ref Watch and they really are being very thick about how they are implementing VAR. All the excuses they are coming out with are getting more and more ludicrous.

The Cleverley goal should have been disallowed on a technical infringement. Gallagher came out with "VAR cannot check restarts". That's rubbish. Why do they review the handball by a striker from a corner then? A corner or freekick is a restart, but they check that. VAR is supposed to check all goals. If a goal is scored from a restart, then it has to be reviewed. It's just not true to say they couldn't review Deulofeu having a foot over the penalty area line because it was a restart.

It's become farcical how they pick and choose. Liverpool should have been awarded a clear penalty against Newcastle. Everton's goal should have been disallowed when Calvert-Lewin climbed all over Cook. VAR is not working, no matter how the PGMOL try to blind every with science to say it is.

It's a "stick together" exercise where the referees are backing their colleagues, even in extreme circumstances. Their excuse book is bigger than the bible.

I'm not sure if they are deliberately trying to sabotage the reputation of VAR or just totally incompetent (probably the latter).

But one thing is clear, even if you thought that referees were pretty decent but just needed help technology, it's clear that's not the case. All we're seeing is they constantly get things wrong, VAR shows this up, but the AVAR is too gutless to overrule his mate.

Football needs VAR but not in the way it's being currently used. Right now it's a complete waste of time, and is devaluing football.