|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xThere's a hierarchy of rules which get punished in order which I full well understand. My point is if they're going to get pedantic then why pick and choose what to be pedantic about. The keeper coming off the line is a clear breach of the rules and had a material effect on the outcome of the penalty, so that needed to be corrected. The players encroaching were in clear breach of the rules but neither affected the outcome of the penalty nor gained an advantage, so that didn’t need to be corrected. Thats about as simple as an explanation gets. Except - it was not included in VAR originally, it is not included in the VAR elsewhere such as the EPL. The FFA included it this year and said the VAR would not be pedantic about it unless it was blatant. Birighitti came off his line by less than 6 inches (back foot) half a second before the ball was hit while Petratos varied his speed as he came in. To my mind while technically a clear breach that is not blatant it is a minimal timing issue. Basically the AR has one job in this instance why the hell do you involve VAR.
This is not a question of the VAR though, even though the linesman used it instead of calling it himself (which he should have done). The reason this was pulled up and the penalty retaken was because the rules were changed this winter. With or without VAR that penalty gets retaken. The “advancing off the line” ploy by keepers has been perfected over recent years such that thry changed the rules (the old rules should have dealt with it but didn’t due to some ambiguity) so the law was clarified and simplified and it reads (words to the effect) one foot must remain on or over the line up until the Ball was struck. Theres no allowance for being 6 inches off you’d line, or even one inch. Keepers must stay on their line now - if they don’t and they save it then it’s a retake. The mariners keeper new the rules Don't forget it used to be 2 feet on the line and rooted to the spot, then it was 2 feet on the line and you could move along it, then they changed it again to only 1 foot on the line. The rule was fine before they got involved. Both feet on the line, you can move along it if you want. Mind you I don't care how they've changed it to one foot now. The rule that shits me in pens is that you can feint or baulk(sp?) in the run up. I wish they'd take that out. To me that's borderline cheating. Penalties are heavily, heavily weighted in favour of the taker so why give them yet another advantage? The runup should be in one continuous motion. Slow, fast, 1 step whatever. Not any more you can’t.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xThere's a hierarchy of rules which get punished in order which I full well understand. My point is if they're going to get pedantic then why pick and choose what to be pedantic about. The keeper coming off the line is a clear breach of the rules and had a material effect on the outcome of the penalty, so that needed to be corrected. The players encroaching were in clear breach of the rules but neither affected the outcome of the penalty nor gained an advantage, so that didn’t need to be corrected. Thats about as simple as an explanation gets. Except - it was not included in VAR originally, it is not included in the VAR elsewhere such as the EPL. The FFA included it this year and said the VAR would not be pedantic about it unless it was blatant. Birighitti came off his line by less than 6 inches (back foot) half a second before the ball was hit while Petratos varied his speed as he came in. To my mind while technically a clear breach that is not blatant it is a minimal timing issue. Basically the AR has one job in this instance why the hell do you involve VAR.
This is not a question of the VAR though, even though the linesman used it instead of calling it himself (which he should have done). The reason this was pulled up and the penalty retaken was because the rules were changed this winter. With or without VAR that penalty gets retaken. The “advancing off the line” ploy by keepers has been perfected over recent years such that thry changed the rules (the old rules should have dealt with it but didn’t due to some ambiguity) so the law was clarified and simplified and it reads (words to the effect) one foot must remain on or over the line up until the Ball was struck. Theres no allowance for being 6 inches off you’d line, or even one inch. Keepers must stay on their line now - if they don’t and they save it then it’s a retake. The mariners keeper new the rules Don't forget it used to be 2 feet on the line and rooted to the spot, then it was 2 feet on the line and you could move along it, then they changed it again to only 1 foot on the line. The rule was fine before they got involved. Both feet on the line, you can move along it if you want. Mind you I don't care how they've changed it to one foot now. The rule that shits me in pens is that you can feint or baulk(sp?) in the run up. I wish they'd take that out. To me that's borderline cheating. Penalties are heavily, heavily weighted in favour of the taker so why give them yet another advantage? The runup should be in one continuous motion. Slow, fast, 1 step whatever. Not any more you can’t. Can feint or baulk in the run up just not once you've completed your run.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
patjennings
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.7K,
Visits: 0
|
+xReferees rarely punish encroachment unless an advantage is subsequently gained. In this case both mariners and jets encroached and it had no material effect on the result of the penalty - so the referee is applying the spirit of the law and not the letter of the law. That’s a good thing imo. Except the Director of Referees has said the referee and the VAR erred by not disallowing the penalty again after encroachment by the attacking side in the original retake. TBH - it would have saved us all the trouble if GG hadn't had his hands straight up in the air and on the balance of play a draw is a fair result..
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
The ref looked at this and waved it away. Then the VAR got involved. https://www.facebook.com/optussport/videos/2546611545400014/If that's a pen then football is fucked.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
|
|
|
|
|
ErogenousZone
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.6K,
Visits: 0
|
Fuck VAR.
|
|
|
|
|
someguyjc
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.1K,
Visits: 0
|
Fox football podcast today with Peacock & Bozza discussing VAR and the decisions so far this year with Strebre Delovski. It's very much worth the listen. Sheds some light on why and how the recent decisions have been made. Some of these new rules are frustrating (especially the offside stuff) but it's good to know how the refs are working at the moment. https://podcasts.google.com/?feed=aHR0cHM6Ly9yc3Mud2hvb3Noa2FhLmNvbS9yc3MvcG9kY2FzdC9pZC8xMDk1&episode=NDU2MzYzNzgtNTZjYi00MjY4LWE3MTEtMzUwOWYzYjJlZWVk&hl=en-AU&ved=2ahUKEwiikuaHy8PlAhWF8HMBHX2PD8cQieUEegQIAxAE&ep=6&at=1572424864876
|
|
|
|
|
NicCarBel
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3K,
Visits: 0
|
So for those of us who don't have facebook, these are..?
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+xSo for those of us who don't have facebook, these are..? Examples of fucked VAR calls. Sorry about the links. They come up on my feed. Not sure where else you'd find them. Twitter probably. Just once I'd like to see the ref go over to the monitor and stick with his original decision.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
NicCarBel
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xSo for those of us who don't have facebook, these are..? Examples of fucked VAR calls. Sorry about the links. They come up on my feed. Not sure where else you'd find them. Twitter probably. Just once I'd like to see the ref go over to the monitor and stick with his original decision. What games are these? Might be able to look them up. It just leads me to login, so I can't even say I know what games they come from
|
|
|
|
|
AriEsman
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 34,
Visits: 0
|
Maybe I am a little bit silly, yet I thought VAR was for "clearly obvious errors". Well, if you need a replay(s) of an incident, then in my thought process, it means it isn't obvious. Maybe I am wrong yet I would like to see access to replays removed for the VAR and have them adjudicate on obvious calls. I stopped watching NRL because of their bunker bullshit among other things. Hopefully the world game doesn't go down the same useless path.
|
|
|
|
|
hotrod
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.9K,
Visits: 0
|
+xMaybe I am a little bit silly, yet I thought VAR was for "clearly obvious errors". Well, if you need a replay(s) of an incident, then in my thought process, it means it isn't obvious. Maybe I am wrong yet I would like to see access to replays removed for the VAR and have them adjudicate on obvious calls. I stopped watching NRL because of their bunker bullshit among other things. Hopefully the world game doesn't go down the same useless path. Agree 100%. Was always intended for clear an obvious errors. 50/50 calls and marginal off-sides should be ignored. Just review stuff the ref might have missed or if it a clear and obvious error. It's not that difficult. That video of that substitute warming up behinf the goal and stopping the ball going out and getting a red card is an example of stupidity! Why should the other team benefit from that. The ball was going to be dead and would have made no difference. Instead the VAR gets involved and although it is technically correct just doesn't pass the pub test.
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xSo for those of us who don't have facebook, these are..? Examples of fucked VAR calls. Sorry about the links. They come up on my feed. Not sure where else you'd find them. Twitter probably. Just once I'd like to see the ref go over to the monitor and stick with his original decision. What games are these? Might be able to look them up. It just leads me to login, so I can't even say I know what games they come from Here you go. https://sport.optus.com.au/articles/os754/six-var-decisions-that-will-make-you-scratch-your-head
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
IFAB to reissue guidance on “clear and obvious errors” stating that if you have to look for an error for a significant time then it’s not cheat and obvious” and it’s become too “foresnsic”
|
|
|
|
|
AnthonyC
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 611,
Visits: 0
|
How far you go back to check for indiscretions is also an issue. The Meredith no goal, PG v N/ castle, should not have gone as far back as it did, under IFAB laws.
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
3:22 mark of this. https://www.a-league.com.au/news/adelaide-united-v-western-sydney-wanderers-a-league-goals-highlights-video-updates-reportAccording to Beath the arm was in an 'unnatural position'. What a fucking joke. I'd like to see him stand there and have someone blast a ball a hundred kilometres an hour at him, from 5 metres, turn his head to protect himself and not have the arm slightly move away from the body. If anything the movements from Georgevski were completely natural. To make it worse he was standing only 10 metres away and waved it on initially. Not a single person would have complained about that if it wasn't subject to 10 000 replays.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
+x3:22 mark of this. https://www.a-league.com.au/news/adelaide-united-v-western-sydney-wanderers-a-league-goals-highlights-video-updates-reportAccording to Beath the arm was in an 'unnatural position'. What a fucking joke. I'd like to see him stand there and have someone blast a ball a hundred kilometres an hour at him, from 5 metres, turn his head to protect himself and not have the arm slightly move away from the body. If anything the movements from Georgevski were completely natural. To make it worse he was standing only 10 metres away and waved it on initially. Not a single person would have complained about that if it wasn't subject to 10 000 replays. Alternatively Georgevski could have tucked his arms in further to prevent contact with the ball or, at the risk to his face, tucked them behind his back.
It’s not fair to the attacking side not to give that penalty. That’s where the statement “benefit of the doubt to the attacking side” should come in.
It’s not fair to Georgevski to give him a yellow or red. The penalty is enough punishment.
Without VAR Beath gives that as a penalty first time. I’ve seen him give similar pens pre-VAR at Brisbane games - in this case he just abdicates responsibility and waits for VAR to confirm.
|
|
|
|
|
Clarency
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 43,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x3:22 mark of this. https://www.a-league.com.au/news/adelaide-united-v-western-sydney-wanderers-a-league-goals-highlights-video-updates-reportAccording to Beath the arm was in an 'unnatural position'. What a fucking joke. I'd like to see him stand there and have someone blast a ball a hundred kilometres an hour at him, from 5 metres, turn his head to protect himself and not have the arm slightly move away from the body. If anything the movements from Georgevski were completely natural. To make it worse he was standing only 10 metres away and waved it on initially. Not a single person would have complained about that if it wasn't subject to 10 000 replays. .... in this case he just abdicates responsibility and waits for VAR to confirm. Add that to the list of reasons why I hate VAR. Referees shouldn't be "abdicating" they should be doing their job.
|
|
|
|
|
Clarency
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 43,
Visits: 0
|
+xIFAB to reissue guidance on “clear and obvious errors” stating that if you have to look for an error for a significant time then it’s not cheat and obvious” and it’s become too “foresnsic”
This is the biggest problem with it. Officials are now micromanaging and its destroying the gameday experience. All they have to do is tell VAR: 1. Calls must be made within 5-10 seconds of the incident in real time. 2. Evaluation of play must be made in standard view (no zoom) and standard speed (no slomo). If no call can be made it isn't a clear and obvious error.
|
|
|
|
|
Savic
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 975,
Visits: 0
|
VAR is the worst thing to happen to football since the CFG. It's far, far worse in fact.
Name should be changed to what it really is anyway - VAMA - Video Assisted McDonald's Advertising.
Seriously, what can we do to get rid of it? This is our game..
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xIFAB to reissue guidance on “clear and obvious errors” stating that if you have to look for an error for a significant time then it’s not cheat and obvious” and it’s become too “foresnsic”
This is the biggest problem with it. Officials are now micromanaging and its destroying the gameday experience. All they have to do is tell VAR: 1. Calls must be made within 5-10 seconds of the incident in real time. 2. Evaluation of play must be made in standard view (no zoom) and standard speed (no slomo). If no call can be made it isn't a clear and obvious error. Reading this it looks like IFAB had one understanding of how it would be used but that isn’t being followed. I like their use of the term “it shouldn’t be used for Forensic examination of incidents” which is perfect - but that means ARs have to go back to calling things in real time not waiting and seeing if a goal is scored.
|
|
|
|
|
localstar
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+xVAR is the worst thing to happen to football since the CFG. It's far, far worse in fact. Name should be changed to what it really is anyway - VAMA - Video Assisted McDonald's Advertising. Seriously, what can we do to get rid of it? This is our game.. Georgevski almost led a player walk-off after the second penalty decision. Maybe this will actually happen one day. Everyone involved in the game- fans, officials, players must keep attacking VAR, and maybe one day the "powers that be" will actually take notice. Louis Fenton slammed the VAR earlier this season, and he hasn't been seen since, so there is probably an agenda going on...
|
|
|
|
|
Clarency
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 43,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xIFAB to reissue guidance on “clear and obvious errors” stating that if you have to look for an error for a significant time then it’s not cheat and obvious” and it’s become too “foresnsic”
This is the biggest problem with it. Officials are now micromanaging and its destroying the gameday experience. All they have to do is tell VAR: 1. Calls must be made within 5-10 seconds of the incident in real time. 2. Evaluation of play must be made in standard view (no zoom) and standard speed (no slomo). If no call can be made it isn't a clear and obvious error. Reading this it looks like IFAB had one understanding of how it would be used but that isn’t being followed. I like their use of the term “it shouldn’t be used for Forensic examination of incidents” which is perfect - but that means ARs have to go back to calling things in real time not waiting and seeing if a goal is scored. There's no but, ARs doing their jobs is the way it should be. During the Adelaide vs WSW match one of the WSW defenders blasted the sideline for failing to call a clear offside and allowing an unnecessary run of play in 40c heat. I called it as BS on the reddit match thread, and everyone quickly chimmed in saying referees have been instructed to let the VAR make the decision. As though that is a better way to officiate! Urgh...
|
|
|
|
|
tsf
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xVAR is the worst thing to happen to football since the CFG. It's far, far worse in fact. Name should be changed to what it really is anyway - VAMA - Video Assisted McDonald's Advertising. Seriously, what can we do to get rid of it? This is our game.. Louis Fenton slammed the VAR earlier this season, and he hasn't been seen since, so there is probably an agenda going on... Are you suggesting the deep state has killed him?
|
|
|
|
|
MarkfromCroydon
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.7K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xIFAB to reissue guidance on “clear and obvious errors” stating that if you have to look for an error for a significant time then it’s not cheat and obvious” and it’s become too “foresnsic”
This is the biggest problem with it. Officials are now micromanaging and its destroying the gameday experience. All they have to do is tell VAR: 1. Calls must be made within 5-10 seconds of the incident in real time. 2. Evaluation of play must be made in standard view (no zoom) and standard speed (no slomo). If no call can be made it isn't a clear and obvious error. Reading this it looks like IFAB had one understanding of how it would be used but that isn’t being followed. I like their use of the term “it shouldn’t be used for Forensic examination of incidents” which is perfect - but that means ARs have to go back to calling things in real time not waiting and seeing if a goal is scored. There's no but, ARs doing their jobs is the way it should be. During the Adelaide vs WSW match one of the WSW defenders blasted the sideline for failing to call a clear offside and allowing an unnecessary run of play in 40c heat. I called it as BS on the reddit match thread, and everyone quickly chimmed in saying referees have been instructed to let the VAR make the decision. As though that is a better way to officiate! Urgh... The AR’s are instructed to keep their flag down and they have to do so because of VAR. VAR, as the law is currently written, cannot overturn an offside decision and ‘rule in’ a goal if the referee has blown his whistle to pay the free kick for offside. Free kicks are not subject to VAR review, and offside is a free kick offence. Once the referee awards a free kick for offside, the VAR cannot review the decision.
As such, the correct procedure is to wait till the goal is scored, or the goal scoring chance ends, then put the flag up. If the ball goes in the goal, the referee then blows the whistle to award the goal and allow VAR to check the goal.
The goal can then be checked by VAR to see if the AR was correct and there was an offside offence.
The problem is in the way the law is written.
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xIFAB to reissue guidance on “clear and obvious errors” stating that if you have to look for an error for a significant time then it’s not cheat and obvious” and it’s become too “foresnsic”
This is the biggest problem with it. Officials are now micromanaging and its destroying the gameday experience. All they have to do is tell VAR: 1. Calls must be made within 5-10 seconds of the incident in real time. 2. Evaluation of play must be made in standard view (no zoom) and standard speed (no slomo). If no call can be made it isn't a clear and obvious error. Reading this it looks like IFAB had one understanding of how it would be used but that isn’t being followed. I like their use of the term “it shouldn’t be used for Forensic examination of incidents” which is perfect - but that means ARs have to go back to calling things in real time not waiting and seeing if a goal is scored. There's no but, ARs doing their jobs is the way it should be. During the Adelaide vs WSW match one of the WSW defenders blasted the sideline for failing to call a clear offside and allowing an unnecessary run of play in 40c heat. I called it as BS on the reddit match thread, and everyone quickly chimmed in saying referees have been instructed to let the VAR make the decision. As though that is a better way to officiate! Urgh... The AR’s are instructed to keep their flag down and they have to do so because of VAR. VAR, as the law is currently written, cannot overturn an offside decision and ‘rule in’ a goal if the referee has blown his whistle to pay the free kick for offside. Free kicks are not subject to VAR review, and offside is a free kick offence. Once the referee awards a free kick for offside, the VAR cannot review the decision.
As such, the correct procedure is to wait till the goal is scored, or the goal scoring chance ends, then put the flag up. If the ball goes in the goal, the referee then blows the whistle to award the goal and allow VAR to check the goal.
The goal can then be checked by VAR to see if the AR was correct and there was an offside offence.
The problem is in the way the law is written.
Agreed. This is the mess they’ve got themselves in to though.
Offside is a tough one to fix but take Dukes potential red card the other night - normally the AR behind play would pick that up but they’ve stopped looking for shot like that and jetting VAR device
same with the last penalty. Beath doesn’t decide on handball, he waits for VAR - that all has to stop and they have to referee the game again. How they deal with offside is the big question though
|
|
|
|
|
someguyjc
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xIFAB to reissue guidance on “clear and obvious errors” stating that if you have to look for an error for a significant time then it’s not cheat and obvious” and it’s become too “foresnsic”
This is the biggest problem with it. Officials are now micromanaging and its destroying the gameday experience. All they have to do is tell VAR: 1. Calls must be made within 5-10 seconds of the incident in real time. 2. Evaluation of play must be made in standard view (no zoom) and standard speed (no slomo). If no call can be made it isn't a clear and obvious error. Reading this it looks like IFAB had one understanding of how it would be used but that isn’t being followed. I like their use of the term “it shouldn’t be used for Forensic examination of incidents” which is perfect - but that means ARs have to go back to calling things in real time not waiting and seeing if a goal is scored. There's no but, ARs doing their jobs is the way it should be. During the Adelaide vs WSW match one of the WSW defenders blasted the sideline for failing to call a clear offside and allowing an unnecessary run of play in 40c heat. I called it as BS on the reddit match thread, and everyone quickly chimmed in saying referees have been instructed to let the VAR make the decision. As though that is a better way to officiate! Urgh... I'd recommend taking the time to listen to the fox podcast with Strebre Delovski and Bozza from the start of the season ( https://player.whooshkaa.com/episode?id=453812). They go over the VAR processes in detail and in particular they confirm that the ARs have been instructed to keep their flags down for the most part. They also spend time on the new handball rules. Personally I don't necessarily like these rules and processes, but it's important to understand how the HAL refs have been instructed and how they are interpreting the rules.
|
|
|
|
|
MarkfromCroydon
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.7K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xIFAB to reissue guidance on “clear and obvious errors” stating that if you have to look for an error for a significant time then it’s not cheat and obvious” and it’s become too “foresnsic”
This is the biggest problem with it. Officials are now micromanaging and its destroying the gameday experience. All they have to do is tell VAR: 1. Calls must be made within 5-10 seconds of the incident in real time. 2. Evaluation of play must be made in standard view (no zoom) and standard speed (no slomo). If no call can be made it isn't a clear and obvious error. Reading this it looks like IFAB had one understanding of how it would be used but that isn’t being followed. I like their use of the term “it shouldn’t be used for Forensic examination of incidents” which is perfect - but that means ARs have to go back to calling things in real time not waiting and seeing if a goal is scored. There's no but, ARs doing their jobs is the way it should be. During the Adelaide vs WSW match one of the WSW defenders blasted the sideline for failing to call a clear offside and allowing an unnecessary run of play in 40c heat. I called it as BS on the reddit match thread, and everyone quickly chimmed in saying referees have been instructed to let the VAR make the decision. As though that is a better way to officiate! Urgh... The AR’s are instructed to keep their flag down and they have to do so because of VAR. VAR, as the law is currently written, cannot overturn an offside decision and ‘rule in’ a goal if the referee has blown his whistle to pay the free kick for offside. Free kicks are not subject to VAR review, and offside is a free kick offence. Once the referee awards a free kick for offside, the VAR cannot review the decision.
As such, the correct procedure is to wait till the goal is scored, or the goal scoring chance ends, then put the flag up. If the ball goes in the goal, the referee then blows the whistle to award the goal and allow VAR to check the goal.
The goal can then be checked by VAR to see if the AR was correct and there was an offside offence.
The problem is in the way the law is written.
Agreed. This is the mess they’ve got themselves in to though.
Offside is a tough one to fix but take Dukes potential red card the other night - normally the AR behind play would pick that up but they’ve stopped looking for shot like that and jetting VAR device
same with the last penalty. Beath doesn’t decide on handball, he waits for VAR - that all has to stop and they have to referee the game again. How they deal with offside is the big question though Simple fix. GET RID OF VAR!!!!!!! Anyway, enough of my rant.
|
|
|
|
|
hotrod
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.9K,
Visits: 0
|
They just need to stick to "clear and obvious" errors. If the VAR is having to go back and forth with slow-mo and different angle and forensic checking of angles and distances, it is not "clear and obvious". Trying to figure out offsides by millimetres is BS, no clear and obvious. Last week with Glory's disallowed 7th goal, again not clear and obvious. If there is a "clear and obvious" fuck up by the central ref, then let the VAR have a word in his ear. Grant's red card was clear and obvious, once shown on the replay, on one angle and in a single slow-mo replay. If it had gotten down to different angles and slow-mo rocking back and forth, then to me that is not clear and obvious. I just can't understand why they can't just assume the "clear and obvious" approach and take it from there. Better still, give each side two challenges for each half. It would be up to the on-field captain to call for a VAR check. If it was clearly wrong, they lose it, if it is a borderline 50/50 call or a "clear and obvious" error by the ref they keep it. That way it they mess up two calls they lose it and then no more VAR for them and play will just keep on flowing. The refs should still retain VAR for after goals are scored or on the award of penalties, where's the game has stopped.
|
|
|
|
|
Clarency
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 43,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xIFAB to reissue guidance on “clear and obvious errors” stating that if you have to look for an error for a significant time then it’s not cheat and obvious” and it’s become too “foresnsic”
This is the biggest problem with it. Officials are now micromanaging and its destroying the gameday experience. All they have to do is tell VAR: 1. Calls must be made within 5-10 seconds of the incident in real time. 2. Evaluation of play must be made in standard view (no zoom) and standard speed (no slomo). If no call can be made it isn't a clear and obvious error. Reading this it looks like IFAB had one understanding of how it would be used but that isn’t being followed. I like their use of the term “it shouldn’t be used for Forensic examination of incidents” which is perfect - but that means ARs have to go back to calling things in real time not waiting and seeing if a goal is scored. There's no but, ARs doing their jobs is the way it should be. During the Adelaide vs WSW match one of the WSW defenders blasted the sideline for failing to call a clear offside and allowing an unnecessary run of play in 40c heat. I called it as BS on the reddit match thread, and everyone quickly chimmed in saying referees have been instructed to let the VAR make the decision. As though that is a better way to officiate! Urgh... I'd recommend taking the time to listen to the fox podcast with Strebre Delovski and Bozza from the start of the season ( https://player.whooshkaa.com/episode?id=453812). They go over the VAR processes in detail and in particular they confirm that the ARs have been instructed to keep their flags down for the most part. They also spend time on the new handball rules. Personally I don't necessarily like these rules and processes, but it's important to understand how the HAL refs have been instructed and how they are interpreting the rules. I had several people tell me what the changes involved. Still BS. Any change that leads onfield officials to belay decisions is a poor change. We saw that this past weekend several times.
|
|
|
|