Author Topic: The VAR thread  (Read 58306 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.


  • RTR Veterans
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2,093
    • View Profile
Re: The VAR thread
« Reply #60 on: Thu 17 Jan 2019 20:26 »

Why do VAR referees have to be actual referees?  Opening up the position to those who are way short of those fitness levels and may not have the man-management skills of referees, such as they are, will give a massively larger pool from which to source the very best at making VAR decisions. It's such a different skill that it's unlikely the best at one will also be the best at the other.

Agree, as long as the final decision remains with the on field official to retain their ability to interpret the Law as is required and appropriate.

Am I correct in thinking that none of the VAR decisions made this weekend were actually reviewed by the onfield official?
I was at Burnley on Saturday and the whole situation was farcical. Those of us who actually paid to go to the game had any idea what was happening because Simon Hooper just stood in the penalty area and then, after about 90 seconds, he blew the whistle which Vydra thought was the signal to take the penalty only then to be stopped in his tracks by Hooper's raised arm, quickly followed by the AR's raised flag and offside was given --not against Vydra but against Sam Vokes who had not interfered with play at all ---the ball having gone way over his head.
At no point did Simon Hooper go to look at the incident and, on viewing the other incidents, I don't think that any other onfield official reviewed a decision.

Is this going to be the normal procedure?

I'm pretty sure that offside was given against Vydra. Hence there was no need for the referee t o look at the monitor.

I think the procedure in England will generally be that the referee does not look at the monitor but accepts the information from the VAR.

I know there has been mixed views on this. Personally I generally think it helps for the referee to go and look - the radio commentators for the Palace V Grimsby game were quite confused by Atkinson suddenly pulling a red card out after he'd shown a yellow. They were asking if it was for dissent, etc.

I think going to the monitor can help with the referee's credibility, particularly when it's the second minute of a game, and make it clearer what is happening (it would be different if the officials were mic'ed up).

How will this work if say the referee has already cautioned a couple of players for "orange" tackles but then another similar tackle occurs which is not seen by the referee but is seen by the reviewer (and which in his opinion is a red but would be deemed by the referee as orange and a caution under the way he has been refereeing the game)? Also presumably even if he looks at the monitor the referee is not allowed to show a yellow (which could also potentially be a second yellow for that player).

I'm not sure I fully understand the question - the VAR looks at everything anyway so if there were two similar tackles in the 8th and 82nd minute of the match, one of which resulted in the referee showing a yellow card and the second of which the referee didn't show a yellow card, the VAR should theoretically either recommend a red card for both challenges if they think it was SFP or allow the referee's decision to stand in both cases if they don't think they were red card tackles.

If the referee has fully seen the first incident and is happy with YC why should he be overruled by VAR suggesting a RC (especially if the protocol in England is that the referee doesn't go and look at a monitor)? If there is a suggestion for RC then surely the onfield referee should be the final arbiter and must review it on the monitor.  As shown on here regularly one man's YC foul is another's orange is another's RC.

I tend to agree with you that the referee should go and look at the monitor for subjective decisions.

However, the PGMO would argue that the VAR should only be suggesting that a decision be changed if it was clearly wrong - hence if a tackle is in the 'orange' category I would suggest that a referee failing to show a red card should not be regarded as being clearly wrong.

The decision by Martin Atkinson in the Crystal Palace V Grimsby game is more the type of challenge which would be upgraded from yellow to red, which I think the majority of people would agree with.