• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Technology And Refereeing

I went to a Bundesliga game game yesterday (werder Vs Hertha).
It ended 0-0 but Werder had a goal chalked off about 10 mins.
It was quite surreal, all the normal celebration etc. Then the annoyance of it being disallowed.
What was interesting was it used to give a foul in the centre circle, a foul which was significant in the goal happening/not happening.

It will take some getting used to. But it worked brilliantly. (And added atmosphere!)
 
Bedfordspurs said:
2 players injured in ten first half and one claimed it was because of the break from the AVR delay
Click to expand...

It could be delays for head or serious injuries.

I personally liked the correct decision but not the delays.
Liverpool must love it! Could have been 2-5...:)
 
monkeybarry said:
I went to a Bundesliga game game yesterday (werder Vs Hertha).
It ended 0-0 but Werder had a goal chalked off about 10 mins.
It was quite surreal, all the normal celebration etc. Then the annoyance of it being disallowed.
What was interesting was it used to give a foul in the centre circle, a foul which was significant in the goal happening/not happening.

It will take some getting used to. But it worked brilliantly. (And added atmosphere!)
Click to expand...
I can’t possibly think of a way it added atmosphere in the situation you describe? Sounds bloody annoying?!
 
I suppose it gives both sets of fans something to cheer about. I agree that sounds annoying. One of the risks is that it will take away the spontaneous joy if every goal gets scrutinised.

On Pardew's claim, I'll add that there is no rule that requires a player to stand still and cool down during the delay. A professional player should be aware of the risk and use warming up exercises if necessary.

VAR is new and referees need to learn how best to use it. It must have merit when you have Shearer and Pardew criticising the system. An issue is that some referees ignore it while Marriner Pawson opted to use it eight times. There needs to be more consistency. Four minutes for a penalty decision seems excessive, but it was the right decision (supposedly), which should have given Liverpool a chance to stay in the cup (imagine the we woz robbed claims if the penalty had been denied).

What was the total delay for the eight referrals? A cap on the time, like in the NFL, would make sense. The technology is there to remove obvious errors from the game and if its not clear in say 90 seconds the decision is likely to remain controversial.
 
Last edited:
Gazza Dazzla said:
I can’t possibly think of a way it added atmosphere in the situation you describe? Sounds bloody annoying?!
Click to expand...
No more annoying than a ref checking something with a linesman then disallowing the goal. Same principle, just an accurate decision. It happened quickly and efficiently (it is Germany).
 
jts1882 said:
I suppose it gives both sets of fans something to cheer about. I agree that sounds annoying. One of the risks is that it will take away the spontaneous joy if every goal gets scrutinised.

On Pardew's claim, I'll add that there is no rule that requires a player to stand still and cool down during the delay. A professional player should be aware of the risk and use warming up exercises if necessary.

VAR is new and referees need to learn how best to use it. It must have merit when you have Shearer and Pardew criticising the system. An issue is that some referees ignore it while Marriner opted to use it eight times. There needs to be more consistency. Four minutes for a penalty decision seems excessive, but it was the right decision (supposedly), which should have given Liverpool a chance to stay in the cup (imagine the we woz robbed claims if the penalty had been denied).

What was the total delay for the eight referrals? A cap on the time, like in the NFL, would make sense. The technology is there to remove obvious errors from the game and if its not clear in say 90 seconds the decision is likely to remain controversial.
Click to expand...
Anyone that thinks every goal is going to be scrutinized seriously needs to take a step back and think.

The game is quick, sometimes a ref won't quite see what happens, for many reasons, so giving him (or her) the facility to check something they were 50/50 on that led to a goal (or penalty) seems really beneficial to the game
 
monkeybarry said:
No more annoying than a ref checking something with a linesman then disallowing the goal. Same principle, just an accurate decision. It happened quickly and efficiently (it is Germany).
Click to expand...
Right fair enough, thought this was another minute plus decision making excercise again.

I’m not against VAR at all as long as it’s used correctly and transparently, but in England it’s a bit of a joke currently.
 
This is so going the way of kick ins and step counts for goalkeepers

Fans inside the stadium now need to make a concerted effort to boo every delay

Danny Baker made a good point yesterday

What numbs a crowd is the idea that now THEY aren't the people at the event, they are just watching something that is being judged and relayed from some remote office. Supporters are now just extras at their own event. VAR MUST BE ABANDONED.

https://twitter.com/x/status/957349810343956481
 
Last edited:
It’s a tool, it’s only as useful as the person wielding it, between the usual incompetence and an unconscious reticence to accept a reduction in authority I’m not surprised it’s taking time to show its value.
 
StephenH said:
It could be delays for head or serious injuries.

I personally liked the correct decision but not the delays.
Liverpool must love it! Could have been 2-5...:)
Click to expand...

No it was the welsh centre forward who went off injured for Brom. He clearly made the shape of a TV when asked what happened and pardew alluded to it afterwards.
 
The problem is it starts to give refs a reason to do it constantly rather than make a decision and hold themselves accountable

In rugby it’s constantly a case of is there a reason not to award the try.. refs doubt themselves and won’t make a clear decision without checking

It’s why I said it has to be a very quick review as the technology is meant to clear it up easily... if it can’t then stick with the original call
 
Bedfordspurs said:
The problem is it starts to give refs a reason to do it constantly rather than make a decision and hold themselves accountable

In rugby it’s constantly a case of is there a reason not to award the try.. refs doubt themselves and won’t make a clear decision without checking

It’s why I said it has to be a very quick review as the technology is meant to clear it up easily... if it can’t then stick with the original call
Click to expand...

It was talked about earlier in the thread that the match referee on the pitch cannot opt for a review. He has to make the decision, and then the VAR decides whether it should be overturned, or whether the match referee should have the option to review it pitchside. That's why there can be few seconds delay before the VAR intervenes.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
It was talked about earlier in the thread that the match referee on the pitch cannot opt for a review. He has to make the decision, and then the VAR decides whether it should be overturned, or whether the match referee should have the option to review it pitchside. That's why there can be few seconds delay before the VAR intervenes.
Click to expand...

That i get.. it’s what I said happens in rugby
It’s the time it takes though.
Make a decision to go to VAR. Then someone watching it should make a call
The ref IMO shouldn’t get to review it himself and then check or doubt his decision
 
Bedfordspurs said:
That i get.. it’s what I said happens in rugby
It’s the time it takes though.
Make a decision to go to VAR. Then someone watching it should make a call
The ref IMO shouldn’t get to review it himself and then check or doubt his decision
Click to expand...

Sorry, misunderstood your first sentence which I thought was referring to football.
And yes, I agree with the last part. If ref makes a call, and a VAR can't be sure it was wrong with 12+ (?) camera angles, then the original call should stand.
 
Gutter Boy said:
This is so going the way of kick ins and step counts for goalkeepers

Fans inside the stadium now need to make a concerted effort to boo every delay

Danny Baker made a good point yesterday

https://twitter.com/x/status/957349810343956481
Click to expand...

What a load of rubbish. Its more important the process is improved and streamlined than abandoned. And I think fans should appreciate the right decisions being made.

What does Bakers tweet even mean? Because someone unsighted is viewing things they somehow arent at the event? WTF?

If Im a fan, what do I prefer?

Break in play while players contest with referee and argue and whine? or a Break in play while the correct decision is made?

The latter, every time.

Despite the defeat, Klopp seemed patient with the review system, and said it may take time for the process to smoothen out.

"Did it disrupt the flow? Which flow?! Of course it will change things. Is it nice that West Brom celebrate a goal and then someone tells them it's not a goal? But that's what we always wanted, that if a goal should be disallowed, it should be disallowed.

"Usually in these situations after the game I have to explain a defeat which maybe was not deserved because we didn't get a penalty and they scored another goal. It's normal at the beginning that it takes a little longer. It will become a little bit smoother I think in the future."

Klopp lost, the game was effected by the system, and yet he takes the rather sensible view of understanding its early days and it will improve - and that its important that the right decisions are made. His MOTD interview was a little more detailed and came across well.

For me it would be much simpler for the 4th official (a qualified ref) to make the decision. Ref on pitch isnt sure, calls over, gets a decision. Job done.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back