The VAR / Refereeing Thread
- Thread starter Matic
- Start date
Pompey Yid
Vital Champions League
100% no contact, dive by the Bees fella, should ave been the equaliser, said so at the time, Ref n VAR = shit!
Gary Onedaysoon
*Prediction Champion 20/21 & 21/22*
Was there contact with between Richarlison's right knee and Collins right knee? Even so, it was minimal.
Richarlison's celebration was quite muted which made me think at the time that he thought it was probably a foul.
Pompey Yid
Vital Champions League
Simple Niall, everybody hates us! esp Refs n VAR. COYS
Spursex
Alert Team
I couldn't see it, but if there was, it was in my mind another case of cheating, it was a blatant dive in my view - I've watched and watched it and can't see how VAR couldn't see it for what it was?
It's another failure of how refereeing bodies are approaching the game. They aren't looking to fix mistakes. They are just looking to fix massive blunders. But in doing so they are highlighting their colleagues making mistakes but not taking corrective action.
"Clear and obvious" needs to go and be replaced with "correct decision".
If Richarilsons goal was given it wouldn't have been ruled out. Just like the man city one in the cup. Blind man and his dog can see that it's the wrong decision but they set the bar so high that theyll almost never step in an make decision.
It's a farce.
Love totty
Vital Reserves Team
It's clear and obvious to me that something has to give. Before the slo-mo fans could argue all liked with no definitive evidence to support their partial views, so referees always had the benefit of doubt. Now we have multi-angle forensic analysis which brings retrospective clarity but still cannot replace the on field judgement of intent and degree in contact decisions. So the problem will never be resolved however long VAR decisions take. These decisions are only deemed contentious though when game changing events like pens and reds are involved. So the answer has to lie in changing the rules not in their application.
muttley
Alert Team
I actually don't agree that you need to rely on the on-field judgment of intent. We can see it sitting in our armchairs, perhaps even better than the ref.
I've always said that VAR was designed by FIFA on the basic axiom that 80% of decisions are subjective. That's why they allowed the video ref to assess whether the on-pitch ref made a "clear and obvious" error rather than look at the incident with relation to the laws of the game.
The big problem is, that it's more like 20% of decisions that are subjective, so the design principle of VAR is completely wrong. All we need the video ref to do is to compare the incident to the laws of the game and advise the on-pitch referee to either retain or change their original decision. We need to lose the paranoia about someone other than the on pitch referee making a decision. I would go as far as putting the 4th official in overall charge of the game and have the on-pitch / video-refs and linesmen as their team. I'd happily have what we call the 4th official dishing cards out to the benches.
A few spurious claims in this report …
The one glaring error though , is that they are not seeing the incompetence of the on field referee, thats where one thing needs to vastly improve . …also the claim that the majority of supporters are in favour of VAR ….. where does that come from . When was the poll? ….
.
.
.
.
The Premier League claim the “majority” of supporters are in favour of VAR and the technology has led to a 14 per cent increase in correct decisions; Sky Sports senior reporter Rob Dorsett sits down with Tony Scholes to discuss VAR’s performance and ideas for improvement
The Premier League has admitted there have been 20 wrong VAR decisions this season but insists, according to a new survey, the "majority" of supporters are in favour of the technology – which they claim has led to a 14 per cent increase in correct decisions.
The details of that survey, conducted by the Premier League themselves, have not been made public, but Tony Scholes, the Premier League's chief football officer, sat down with senior reporter Rob Dorsett to discuss VAR's performance this season and plans to improve technology.
"VAR is, and remains, a very effective tool in supporting the match officials on the pitch," Scholes says.https://www.skysports.com/football/...ghlights-of-every-match-in-the-2022-23-season
Two years ago, the Premier League set up an independent key match incidents panel (KMI panel), which assesses all the big decisions made by referees in every Premier League game.
The panel is made up of former players, former coaches and referees, who report their opinions so the Premier League and the Professional Match Game Officials Limited (PGMOL) can improve standards.
"The purpose of that panel is to analyse and take a view on every key decision made by the match officials in every single one of the 380 games," Scholes explains.
"The output of that analysis is used to help coach the referees, to help give PGMOL management a view as to where the game, as represented by these former players and coaches, doesn't agree with the approach that the referees are taking."
What about the stats for this season?
This season, the KMI panel has decided:
"These two elements, I believe, affect the whole reputation of VAR. The first is the amount of time it is taking to check decisions.
"We are doing too many checks, we're taking too long in doing them as well. It's to a degree understandable, given the level of scrutiny these guys are under. But the reviews are taking too long and it's affecting the flow of the game and we're extremely aware of that and the need to improve that speed while always maintaining the accuracy."
The second area is the "in-stadium experience" for supporters, which Scholes says simply is not good enough.
"It's nowhere near good enough. We know it's not. It affects supporters' enjoyment of the game and we know it needs to change."
But Scholes goes on to say the Premier League's major frustration is that it is powerless to change this.
"We're constrained by IFAB at the moment," he laments. "IFAB are very clear on their rules as to what we can and can't say, both during the VAR process and post the VAR process. We cannot play the audio.
"My personal view is we're on a journey and that we'll get to a point where both the video and the audio is played live and then played again afterwards to explain the decision.
"How far we are away from that, I don't know. That's not in our hands. That's decided by IFAB. But we will continue to lobby them to get to a place where VAR is as open, transparent and informative to supporters and all stakeholders as it is possible to do."
"PGMOL is identifying referees, who are perhaps operating in the EFL or the National League, who they believe have got the attributes required in order to be a good VAR.
"Those people who are then selected will go through a training programme with the intention of developing a group of specialist VARs to supplement, not replace, those members of the select group who at the moment operate very effectively as VARs, as well as on the pitch."
At the moment, two separate systems are being trialled, but he says there are technical concerns with both.
When a number of players are between the cameras and the ball, there have been some decisions where it has been hard to identify whether a specific body part is that of an attacker or a defender.
Scholes says until those concerns are completely eradicated, the Premier League will not consider introducing it.
"It's what we call the edge cases. So those cases where many things are occurring at once, you might have a lot of bodies in one place, and it's the ability of the system to identify different parts of the body.
"For the vast majority of cases, there won't be an issue. But we want to be clear in our competition before we introduce anything that will give us unintended or unanticipated problems in other areas."
Scholes says if those problems can be ironed out, semi-automated offside technology may be put to clubs to vote on later this year.
The one glaring error though , is that they are not seeing the incompetence of the on field referee, thats where one thing needs to vastly improve . …also the claim that the majority of supporters are in favour of VAR ….. where does that come from . When was the poll? ….
.
.
.
.
The Premier League claim the “majority” of supporters are in favour of VAR and the technology has led to a 14 per cent increase in correct decisions; Sky Sports senior reporter Rob Dorsett sits down with Tony Scholes to discuss VAR’s performance and ideas for improvement
The Premier League has admitted there have been 20 wrong VAR decisions this season but insists, according to a new survey, the "majority" of supporters are in favour of the technology – which they claim has led to a 14 per cent increase in correct decisions.
The details of that survey, conducted by the Premier League themselves, have not been made public, but Tony Scholes, the Premier League's chief football officer, sat down with senior reporter Rob Dorsett to discuss VAR's performance this season and plans to improve technology.
Do the stats show VAR is working?
The latest Premier League statistics show before VAR was introduced, 82 per cent of refereeing decisions were correct. Now, since VAR was introduced, 96 per cent of decisions are correct."VAR is, and remains, a very effective tool in supporting the match officials on the pitch," Scholes says.https://www.skysports.com/football/...ghlights-of-every-match-in-the-2022-23-season
Two years ago, the Premier League set up an independent key match incidents panel (KMI panel), which assesses all the big decisions made by referees in every Premier League game.
The panel is made up of former players, former coaches and referees, who report their opinions so the Premier League and the Professional Match Game Officials Limited (PGMOL) can improve standards.
"The purpose of that panel is to analyse and take a view on every key decision made by the match officials in every single one of the 380 games," Scholes explains.
"The output of that analysis is used to help coach the referees, to help give PGMOL management a view as to where the game, as represented by these former players and coaches, doesn't agree with the approach that the referees are taking."
What about the stats for this season?
This season, the KMI panel has decided:
- VAR has intervened correctly on 57 occasions.
- There have been 20 VAR errors so far - but the Premier League says 17 of those have been a failure of VAR to intervene when the panel felt it should have done.
- There have been three "wrong" decisions this season when VAR has intervened:
- One of those errors was a factual mistake - when Luis Diaz's goal for Liverpool was disallowed against Tottenham, when the VAR failed to properly communicate their decision that Diaz was onside when he scored.
- There have been two "subjective" errors when VAR intervened (and the panel felt it should not have done):
- Sander Berge's goal against Nottingham Forest in September which would have put Sheffield United 2-1 up, but the panel felt that goal was incorrectly disallowed for handball after a VAR check.
- Also in September - when Arsenal played Manchester United and Antony Taylor gave a penalty for Aaron Wan-Bissaka's foul on Kai Havertz, only for the penalty decision to be overturned because the VAR felt the contact was not sufficient to bring Havertz down.
Does the Premier League accept there are issues with VAR?
Yes. Scholes says there are two major issues he wants to see addressed with VAR going forward."These two elements, I believe, affect the whole reputation of VAR. The first is the amount of time it is taking to check decisions.
"We are doing too many checks, we're taking too long in doing them as well. It's to a degree understandable, given the level of scrutiny these guys are under. But the reviews are taking too long and it's affecting the flow of the game and we're extremely aware of that and the need to improve that speed while always maintaining the accuracy."
The second area is the "in-stadium experience" for supporters, which Scholes says simply is not good enough.
"It's nowhere near good enough. We know it's not. It affects supporters' enjoyment of the game and we know it needs to change."
But Scholes goes on to say the Premier League's major frustration is that it is powerless to change this.
"We're constrained by IFAB at the moment," he laments. "IFAB are very clear on their rules as to what we can and can't say, both during the VAR process and post the VAR process. We cannot play the audio.
"My personal view is we're on a journey and that we'll get to a point where both the video and the audio is played live and then played again afterwards to explain the decision.
"How far we are away from that, I don't know. That's not in our hands. That's decided by IFAB. But we will continue to lobby them to get to a place where VAR is as open, transparent and informative to supporters and all stakeholders as it is possible to do."
What are the Premier League and PGMOL doing to improve standards?
Scholes has revealed for the first time both the Premier League and PGMOL have begun a new project, aimed at identifying future specialist VARs already working as referees further down the football pyramid."PGMOL is identifying referees, who are perhaps operating in the EFL or the National League, who they believe have got the attributes required in order to be a good VAR.
"Those people who are then selected will go through a training programme with the intention of developing a group of specialist VARs to supplement, not replace, those members of the select group who at the moment operate very effectively as VARs, as well as on the pitch."
When will the PL introduce semi-automated offsides, as UEFA and FIFA have?
Scholes says there are plans to introduce it, but it may not be in place for the start of next season.At the moment, two separate systems are being trialled, but he says there are technical concerns with both.
When a number of players are between the cameras and the ball, there have been some decisions where it has been hard to identify whether a specific body part is that of an attacker or a defender.
Scholes says until those concerns are completely eradicated, the Premier League will not consider introducing it.
"It's what we call the edge cases. So those cases where many things are occurring at once, you might have a lot of bodies in one place, and it's the ability of the system to identify different parts of the body.
"For the vast majority of cases, there won't be an issue. But we want to be clear in our competition before we introduce anything that will give us unintended or unanticipated problems in other areas."
Scholes says if those problems can be ironed out, semi-automated offside technology may be put to clubs to vote on later this year.
VAR: In-stadium experience poor for fans - Premier League chief football officer
By Simon StoneBBC SportLast updated on
7 February 20247 February 2024.From the section Football
248
VAR: How referees make decisions
Video assistant referee decisions are taking too long and offer a poor in-stadium experience, a senior Premier League official says.
Chief football officer Tony Scholes feels VAR is largely positive addition to the Premier League.
He said that the number of correct decisions being made has increased from 82% in the period before it was introduced in 2019 to 96% now.
But he acknowledges "clearly everything in the world of VAR is not perfect".
The two areas of specific concern are the time taken to reach decisions and the experience of fans.
Although football's rule making body Ifab has extended the trial of stadium announcements by referees - where they confirm what decisions have been made - there are no plans for real-time audio to be released in the manner of international cricket or rugby.
Scholes feels it will eventually come but, for now, the Premier League can do nothing.
"The in-stadium VAR experience for supporters is poor," he said. "It's nowhere near good enough. We know it's not.
"It affects supporters' enjoyment of the game, and we know it needs to change.
"My personal view is we're on a journey and that will come and we'll get to a point where both the video and the audio is played live and then played afterwards to explain the decision.
"We're constrained by Ifab at the moment. They are very clear at the moment we cannot use the audio. We will continue to lobby them to get to a place where VAR is as open, transparent and informative to supporters as it is possible to be."
A Key Match Incident Panel, which includes ex-players, examines big decisions after every match round and Scholes revealed it has found that during the 2023-24 season so far, there have been:
- 57 'correct' VAR interventions, 24 of which were for occurrences on the pitch that would otherwise have been left as wrong decisions.
- 20 errors, 17 of them relating to incidents where VAR should have got involved but didn't.
- Two instances of VAR incorrectly overturning on-field decisions - including a penalty decision for Arsenal's Kai Havertz against Manchester United in September which was overruled by VAR, with head of elite refereeing Howard Webb even claiming it was a "clear and obvious error" and a "good use of VAR".
A number of Premier League managers including Wolves boss Gary O'Neil, Sheffield United's Chris Wilder, Arsenal's Mikel Arteta, Liverpool's Jurgen Klopp and Brighton's Roberto De Zerbi have been critical of VAR and of refereeing standards, alongside many pundits and some players this season.
Webb has been pushing for more transparency including releasing audio of VAR decisions on regular televised shows.
Listen to VAR audio of disallowed Luis Diaz goal
Scholes still feels a major improvement is required.
"We're doing too many checks and we're taking too long in doing them," he said. "To a degree it's understandable given the level of scrutiny these guys are under, from ourselves, also from you guys [the media] as well as from supporters.
"But the reviews are taking too long and it's affecting the flow of the game. We're extremely aware of that and the need to improve their speed, whilst always maintaining the accuracy."
Scholes used to be Stoke City's chief executive and understands that opinions at clubs may not tally with some of the more positive observations coming out of the Premier League.
But he said: "It's an unfair assessment to say the quality is poor. The beauty of the independent panel means that we can do some kind of quantitative measuring of the accuracy of their decision making. The panel's results would suggest that match officiating in the Premier League is at least as good, if not better than it's ever been."
A crackdown on player behaviour has worked, added Scholes, with 145 yellow cards for time wasting compared to 67 at the same point last year and 112 bookings for dissent so far - up from 48.
"Referees are doing as we asked them," he said. "The players are responding. We don't see the mass confrontations like we were doing before. We still see a little bit of surrounding match officials but nowhere near the level it was."
And more added time means more goals, says Scholes. "We are at 3.2 goals per match now - 730 goals so far. A record breaking amount at the weekend with 45 goals scored. And interestingly a lot of those goals are taking place in added time."
On the question of decision-making accuracy, Scholes sounded a "note of caution" around the calls for semi-automated offside, as seen in the 2022 Qatar men's World Cup.
He said: "We don't believe it will improve the accuracy of decision making. What it will do is speed up the time of decision making. It's extremely important in that regard. We are testing a couple of systems at the moment and we hope to be going to clubs for a decision later in the year. But that's not a definite at the moment."
Last edited by a moderator:
Pompey Yid
Vital Champions League
Twaddle or put more "street" what a load of BOLLOX! COYS
muttley
Alert Team
They think the 2 biggest issues are "time" and "in stadium comms"
Just shows in itself that they just don't see the elephant in the room.
Bunch of idiots
TQ2Spurs
Vital Champions League
So......penalties can be awarded now when no contact is made?
In the Burnley game a player lunged at Tossard who leapt over the leg but lost his balance doing so and fell over. There was no contact. The referee gave a penalty and VAR confirmed it, seems a bit harsh to me.
In the Burnley game a player lunged at Tossard who leapt over the leg but lost his balance doing so and fell over. There was no contact. The referee gave a penalty and VAR confirmed it, seems a bit harsh to me.
Love totty
Vital Reserves Team
Another cockup not flagged by VAR. If awarding possession wrongly after a stoppage in not a clear cut error, what is?
muttley
Alert Team
I just don't understand why the video ref who is in direct comms with the on pitch ref just can't remind the ref at the restart who the ball goes back to. It's no different from the ref asking the video ref whether it's a corner or goal kick.
Even if Tierney made a mistake, I don't see why the video ref just couldn't say "hi mate, looks like you're giving that ball back to the wrong team".
So many of these little errors could be eradicated if they started applying common sense and leveraging the tech. Howard Webb should just ignore FIFA / IFAB and pioneer a change in the use of tech. I would in his shoes.
vinniecopenhagen
Vital Football Hero
Apparently Mark Clattenburg,who is the Referees Analyst, went to speak to Tierney in the dressing room after the match but Tierney refused to see him, surely this is an admission that he fucked up and there has to be sanctions but it will never happen. They are a law unto themselves unfortunately.
Like it Mutters. I want to see league table stats on teams that has seen the most free kicks against its players before a yellow is given to the opposition, showing number of free kicks awarded against each opposotion player. We know that most weeks we see at least two opposotion players commit four or more fouls before a booking is given and that those same players will foul us again with no further card shown.
