|
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Affy_Moose
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 26
1
« on: Thu 26 Feb 2026 15:45 »
Absolutely bonkers decision. A 2nd yellow is one thing, but to then upgrade it to red is beyond belief.
Point of contact is Achilles, yes. But that’s just as much in the ‘fouled’ player as it is Kelly. Kelly’s leg doesn’t move in an unusual way to suggest any malice. He is literally just landing after going up for a header.
Kelly's leg does move in an unexpected way. I didn't watch this live, so caught up today on the furore. The way it is being described is not what occurred. Kelly initially jumps in a straight line, and then extends his right leg in an unexpected way - coming down heavily on the opponent's leg. The way it is being described makes it seem like a straight jump up and down, which it wasn't. Now - if you're giving yellow, then it's wrong. If we're considering it as a sanctionable foul then it isn't yellow - it's red. It's well above disregarding safety - it's observably endangering safety. It's an interesting debate to be had, but it's certainly not the vanilla decision some are making it out to be. Most debate online seems to be missing how VAR operates however. UEFA - and other FAs - expect wrong second yellows (missed reds) to be reviewed on the pitch and corrected. It matters for the periods of the ban. The same would also be true of a wrong straight red, that can and should be corrected to a 'correct' 2YC. I appreciate fans don't love that (as they get excited about the prospect of a reprieve only to still lose their player). The way to fix that would presumably to make the VAR message and purpose for review more clear (i.e. VAR review - potential upgrade of 2YC to RC; or potential downgrade of RC to 2YC).
2
« on: Sun 04 Jan 2026 12:41 »
As an AR though it is easier to judge as you're not looking through bodies (in the main)
It would now be conceivably impossible for an AR to judge offside in quite a few situations. You can have ‘daylight’ between an attacker and the defender, but have that daylight blocked by other non-involved attackers. Therefore impossible to judge.
3
« on: Mon 29 Dec 2025 19:54 »
The Law - at large - has a principle of de minimis, insofar as that it does not concern itself with trifling matters. Football isn’t all that different.
ARs have two jobs - be aware of the throw in position/action and whatever is going on on the pitch. You can only really focus on one.
It’s a combination of priorities, and not getting hung up on throw ins which may be partially illegal (e.g. second foot lifted slightly off the ground, front foot slightly over the whole line, ball not quite released correctly).
For foul throws, you only want to be cracking down on egregious examples. Tiny infractions invite criticism of being officious and ‘making it about them’ and certainly don’t help with match control.
See also: throw ins and free kicks taken from the position of award. Again - trifling differences, we don’t get hung up on.
Edit: by all means feel free to disagree, but that’s basically how it is. The game at the very top level is coached on match control as much as it is on accuracy. You don’t manage top level games for searching for every tiny infraction - that gets coached out of referees a long way short of the Premier League.
Just look at the Arsenal - Bayern ‘penalty’ debate from a couple of seasons ago when the referee called the claims for handball “a kid’s penalty”. Unless a throw-in is egregiously wrong, they don’t get called. It’s not kids football.
4
« on: Mon 01 Dec 2025 21:24 »
I’ve not seen a freeze frame yet, but if Enzo is in an offside position for the Chelsea goal; is anyone chalking it off for interfering?
Chelsea 1-1 Arsenal: Should Trevoh Chalobah's opening goal have been disallowed due to Enzo Fernandez being in an offside position? https://www.skysports.com/share/13477896
Yes - I saw it live and was very surprised there was no delay. I presume the player simply was onside due to an angle I hadn’t seen. You can’t challenge from an offside position a defender on the line and prevent them a good opportunity to clear the ball. Looked clear cut for me at the time, but as I say, I presumed I’d missed something.
6
« on: Fri 14 Nov 2025 13:24 »
Probably a bit early, but I’m sure it must be in UEFA and FIFA’s thoughts about who will go to the World Cup next summer
11 referees went from the continent to Qatar 2022
Kovacs
Makkelie
Marcinak
Lahoz
Oliver
Taylor
Orsato
Siebert
Turpin
Vincic
Frappart
The UEFA seminar in March saw
Peljto
Oliver
Taylor
Letexier
Turpin
Siebert
Zwayer
Guida
Mariani
Gozubuyuk
Makkelie
Eskas
Marcinak
Pinheiro
Kovacs
Kruzliak
Vincic
Gil Manzano
Sanchez Martinez
Scharer
Halil Meler
Nyberg
I can’t see both Taylor and Oliver going. It’ll be Oliver… who I think is vastly overrated and is not as good as Taylor.
If they replicate the same number..My list at the moment would be..
Definitely
Oliver
Letexier
Turpin
Mariani
Marcinak
Scharer
Vincic
Kovacs
Zwayer
Then two from…
Peljito
Nyberg
Eskas
With Eskas and Nyberg the favourites
It wouldn’t surprise me if Peljito went
Wasn't Eskas the official who gave the dreadful handball and incorrect second yellow against Aberdeen in the Europa League playoff? He also covered Scotland v Greece, and he looked very raw. Quite a number of very basic factual errors in that game.
7
« on: Tue 11 Nov 2025 10:23 »
As a Liverpool supporter I’m naturally disappointed with the decision but don’t use it as an excuse for a deserved defeat. I’m sure I’ll be accused of wearing red-tinted glasses but here goes…..
I think from Kavanagh’s position his view would see Robertson directly in front of the goalkeeper. From the angle shown on television (which does not match the referee’s position) it’s clear that Robertson is not in the goalkeeper’s line of sight. There’s a video from behind the goal (which admittedly wouldn’t be available to VAR) that shows Donarumma having a completely uninterrupted view of the ball as it comes towards him. He also took a step to his right immediately before the ball was headed goalwards which although not relevant to a refereeing decision may explain why he didn’t get close to saving it.
The delay in raising the flag seemed longer than I’d expect and I did wonder if there was some doubt in the officials’ decision making.
Given the angle from which VAR would view the incident-and even this, like most refereeing decisions, is a subjective call-I thought VAR should have asked the referee to have a look at the monitor.
Of course the real answer is scrap VAR but unfortunately that genie is well and truly out of the bottle and ruining the game every week. In happier times a decision like this would have been grumbled about over a pint or two after the match and by the time we got home it would be a fading memory.
This is the fundamental problem with VAR. It was wrongly sold to fans as though it would make things fairer when it actually makes me as a fan feel so much more frustrated.
Previously I'd moan about a bad decision but it was easier to accept because it was made in the moment. When you get this horrific inconsistency despite the delays, and justifications like 'it was error but not enough of an error for VAR to intervene" then I'm sorry but something is just wrong. To anyone who thought about it logically in advance, VAR for subjective decisions could never work because the decision about whether something is a foul is entirely subjective.
Ironically, VAR for factual matter - such as offside - should be great but when those offsides become subjective we end up with the same issues. I believe the goal should have counted as Robertson did not impact the keeper at all. I compare that with Brentford's equaliser against Chelsea earlier this season where an offside player tried to play the ball in front of a defender, and shockingly the VAR didn't even consider the offside offence or the player's actions, and quickly allowed the goal to stand. That's a massive failing of the VAR process.
I hate VAR. It's ruining the game, and it's only going to get worse.
That's partly true. The game certainly accepted marginally incorrect offside calls (one way or the other) and they were just part of the game. Stakeholders in football now don't like those now being almost all correct. However, it's certainly not true that football readily accepted wrong decisions previously. Just look at the Championship, or Women's football. To anyone who thought about it logically in advance, VAR for subjective decisions could never work because the decision about whether something is a foul is entirely subjective. If everything in football was objective we wouldn't need referees. Subjective decisions can still be observably wrong. When you get this horrific inconsistency despite the delays, and justifications like 'it was error but not enough of an error for VAR to intervene" then I'm sorry but something is just wrong. This is completely unavoidable as soon as you have more than one party making decisions. The alternative is no second check (so gross miscarriages of justices are allowed and accepted to happen), or we review and re-referee every single decision. You can put 100 FIFA referees in a room; or 100 QCs in a room; or 100 scientists in a room and they will largely agree (close to unanimously) on the vast majority of decisions. However, so long as subjectivity exists then logic demands that you'll arrive at a decision that splits decisions. Now you have to decide what you do - do you park the decision and put it to the vote of a jury? Or do you allow a principle decision maker to make the best decision they can on the basis of the information they have available? Unfortunately, you cannot have top level football in 2025 with 30+ cameras and millions of viewers, and not have VAR. As frustrating as it can be, football won't accept the alternative.
8
« on: Mon 10 Nov 2025 19:08 »
You can’t solely rely on the LotG for decisions like this. The LotG intentionally do not get into specific detail (such as we’re all aware that Law 12 for instance doesn’t mention studs showing, or point of contact etc).
UEFA’s training considers the proximity of the player to the goal line and to the goalkeeper and whether they make any movement. They particularly care if the ball goes through a player (I.e. between their legs) or if they have to duck or move out of the way.
I understand why people are annoyed (I hate McTominay’s goal v Spain being disallowed) but the training and coaching expects this to be disallowed.
The goalkeeper may well have been impacted and his decision making cannot be committed until he knows if Robertson is likely to play the ball or not.
It’s not as obviously offside as some other examples we’ve seen in the past (such as the Dutch offside in the last Euros) but it’s not obviously wrong at all. I expected offside to be given.
As an aside, attacking teams need to wise up. These situations occur because it’s very much en vogue to place an attacker close to the goalkeeper, and defending teams don’t put players on the posts. Decisions like these are becoming quite common for ARs and they’re hugely difficult to judge - especially without VAR.
The attacker needs to get out of the way as soon as the ball is close to being touched by an attacker from the corner - otherwise they are very much at risk of either directly making contact with a goalkeeper and offside not even being in question or - like this situation - giving the onfield officials a decision to make.
9
« on: Sat 06 Sep 2025 00:27 »
Interesting situation around 70 mins in, a handball by Scotland #22 with the Danish striker otherwise through on goal (albeit from a distance). Siebert stuck with his on field decision of yellow after review, indicating a push, but surely that means the foul should be reversed? If it’s a punishable handball I don’t see any option other than red card.
I may be wrong, but I suspect the protocol is that if you reject an OFR to upgrade you don’t have the opportunity to adjust the restart. Though, I say this, and I’m also certain that the referee has total discretion for the restart… Either way, it’s never an OFR for red as UEFA don’t want handballs given where attackers have an impact on defender body positions - especially in situations that are far from egregious.
10
« on: Mon 01 Sep 2025 09:28 »
We all know how bad the VAR decision was but Rob Jones could have stuck with his original decision, it seems so many refs when they go to the monitor are afraid to go against VAR.....Why??
Because the powers that be seriously disapprove of doubling down on a wrong decision. So that's always in the back of the referee's mind - if I get this wrong a second time, then there can be significant repercussions. In UEFA, that could easily be the end of your international season. I appreciate domestic football is different, but it's understandable that a) getting a decision wrong twice is unacceptable, and b) still allowing enough leeway to knock back a review in light of a) is immensely difficult to balance. This is one of the inherent difficulties with VAR.
11
« on: Thu 28 Aug 2025 20:23 »
Potentially incorrect offside decision unfortunately, let’s hope it doesn’t cost Grimsby or else there will be lots of protest.
There’s no reasonable interpretation that Maguire’s touch constituted deliberate play. It completely lacks control - the ball is played at him from a short distance, with speed, isn’t expected, and his reaction is instinctive and with no time to move his body, set, or prepare. In fact, it’s a very good clip to demonstrate what doesn’t constitute a deliberate play (but would have under the pre-2022(?) Law 11 application).
12
« on: Tue 26 Aug 2025 12:52 »
To judge by the SFA Handbook (last season's version is still available on the SFA website), some development categories have been eliminated, so that the sequence now runs 3D > 3 > 2 > 1. It would appear that Messrs McCunnie, Hay, Hogarth and Stirling were all promoted to Category 2 in 2024, though some may have reached that level in mid-season. Jamie Wilkie was elevated to Category 2 in 2023. Others will know more than I do, but it appears that the new regime favours rapid promotion.
Yes. For 3-4 seasons, a 'Select' and 'Performance' Category were established, when previously an official would go 3 > 2 > 1dev > 1 or 3 > SARdev > SAR The Select officials were effectively the established Premiership officials. Performance included those making a push for Premiership, those now established as L2/L1 officials (having completed/passed their development 'probation'), and those 'relegated' from Select and on their way back down. Removing Select/Performance allows for both quicker progression (and indeed, from a cynical point of view, quicker 'demotion' without the need to address it formally). I also believe that the legacy category system had blocks such as a position in the Performance category was required to be a 4th official in the Premiership etc. I believe such minimum categories are required throughout the pyramid for certain fixtures (either explicitly and publicly available to all officials, or used by the appointments team less formally - i.e. minimum categories for probationary rounds of the Scottish Cup; higher minimum categories for first two rounds proper etc).
13
« on: Tue 26 Aug 2025 11:46 »
By my reckoning, that now leaves just a few Category 1 officials to not have had a game so far - John Beaton, Kevin Clancy, Calum Scott, Colin Steven, Steven Kirkland and Colin Whyte. The first three are all out together in a Champions League qualifier next Wednesday and Clancy was also VAR for a qualifier last week so I’d say it’s probably safe to assume they’re all still Category 1. Colin Steven was due to have a game in the opening round of fixtures before being replaced late on, so may just be injured/unavailable.
The latter two are more unknown. Obviously all Scottish officials are part time so it may just be a case of not being able to fit availability around work/holidays. Friendly appointments are also also not widely published so they may have just had no competitive games yet, but have been involved in friendlies.
Colin Whyte and Steven Kirkland dropped out of Category 1 at the end of last season. I believe there were 5 lost in total.
14
« on: Thu 21 Aug 2025 11:57 »
2. It is interesting that in this instance the AVAR seemed to take quite a lot of interest in the "continuous TV replays" of the incident so are the Sky (and other broadcasters) editorial teams in effect able to influence their decision making?
I found that quite troubling. Along with the references during the Darren England offside error to the VAR manager ‘Oli’ giving instructions to the VAR to stop the game - it seems the VAR is not operating in the isolation it should be in my opinion.
Some elements of the article surprised me, and that was certainly one, I would be a bit concerned that an official would care a jot what the broadcasters are saying/doing.
There is a broadcast feed that is available. Broadcasters - by pure manpower, resource, and investment alone - can manipulate and jump between angles quicker than VAR can. Imagine the outcry that an angle (and subsequently a correct decision) was missed because VAR opted not to use a broadcast feed? That would be quite correctly highly criticised. You use the tools available, and the broadcast feed can find the 'right' angle quicker than VAR/AVAR and the VAR technician can.
15
« on: Tue 19 Aug 2025 11:42 »
In a nutshell, a match referee appointed to the fixture in which a penalty has been awarded, has possibly not seen the incident at all, yet a game changing decision has been made with VAR in attendance.
This is unacceptable.
We don't know that to be true at all. That's entirely conjecture.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 26
|
Home
Search
Contact
Login
Register
Show Posts