RateTheRef

Even Dale Johnson has come out against VAR.

edited out as we do not allow allegations of corruption on this forum for legal reasons

"David Coote, the video assistant referee in chare of Saturday's Merseyside derby, did not forget VAR rules during the match"

Soooooo he's just incompetent then?

I think Mr Coote needs sending on a VAR refresher course or perhaps more wisely kept right away from it. 

We've had many a discussion on here about who should actually do the role of VAR & it's been suggested many times that being a top flight referee does not automatically mean you will make a good VAR - Mr Coote appears to be proof of that fact!

This stupid requirement that you need to be able to pass a fitness test needs to be dropped, whether it's a PGMOL or FIFA rule. All the talent "sitting on the bench" of retired officials who are simply not this incompetent and can still give to the game and means our current on field officials are slightly less fatigued from the constant travelling.

The worrying thing is, Coote is saying if he had seen that happen as a referee in a game he wouldn't have sent off the player? 

And Clattenburg in the Mail also states that VAR did look at Pickford's challenge and decided it was not a RC offence with which MC disagrees.

This is where Football doesn't seem to learn from itself.

This is a national mockery, you don't have to be a Liverpool or even an Everton fan, you don't have to like a PL team, you don't even have to like football to see how dangerous that was. Then you find out it didn't result in any kind of punishment which surprises you even more because you'd have thought that wouldn't be acceptable.

No wonder Gary Neville is saying Football needs a complete overhaul, because on this evidence he is clearly correct.

 

Would thad Sian have made the correct call in the first place, Aguero would not have reacted the way he did. 

Nobody seemed bothered at the time.

I'm sorry I'm just very confused by both Latetackle and flipmode's posts respectively.

One seems very on par, we'll if she hadn't have dressed like that.....

The other it seems to be forgotten that, Sian post her hand up and pulled his off of her, there was no jesty smile from her or anything. She was probably a tad more bothered than you perceived.

Quote from: Matt on Sat 17 Oct 2020 19:53

Quote from: bmb on Sat 17 Oct 2020 19:50

Unfortunately the facts are that in checking whether it was a penalty or not the first thing the VAR will check will be whether the attacking player was offside, as he was that then negates the rest of the check. That is a fault of the VAR protocol. As the player was offside & that was the first offence it is not a penalty within the LOTG. Do I agree with the fact that is where the check ends - no certainly not especially when a bad tackle ends up being unpunished. That is just the sort of thing that VAR should have been bought in to ensure does not go unsanctioned and certainly more so than if a toenail is offside. I don't however write the LOTG or the VAR protocol & those who do do not factor in common sense or that an incident can continue after the first part of it (in this case the offside) occurs.

Well, according to the PGMOL it could have been a red card, VAR should've checked the tackle, could've recommended Oliver view it.

I think that should be "should have been a red" not "could have" !!

Quote from: Matt on Sat 17 Oct 2020 19:49

Liverpool have asked for an explanation on the VAR decisions for today, specifically looking at 3 areas.

• Why no review and subsequent action on Pickford chall?
  
• Which part of Mane's body deemed offside?
• At what moment did VAR decide to freeze-frame?

Source - https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11669/12106875/liverpool-ask-premier-league-to-investigate-var-decisions-during-draw-at-everton

1st part is easy - VAR protocol does not factor it in.  To determine if it was a penalty/red the first thing to establish was whether he was offside or not. As he was then the check effectively ends as there can be no penalty. Hopefully if nothing else it will lead to another review of the VAR protocol as it currently stands and it will be extended to allow for review to determine if there is a red card offence that follows despite the offside ruling out a penalty. There has to be more common sense allowed to be used, imo. For me this is exactly what VAR should be looking at instead of seeing if a toenail or eyelash or something equally ridiculous is 0.1mm offside!

Point 1 - PGMOL have contradicted you. The reasoning is insufficient in the protection of players. As I said earlier, if this below par protection of players continue it will go down the litigious route . If reports of Van Dijk being out for 8-9 months are accurate, that's a lot of of compensation that could be claimed back.

No they said it could have been a red but would be under the "SUBJECTIVE" category.

Liverpool have asked for an explanation on the VAR decisions for today, specifically looking at 3 areas.

• Why no review and subsequent action on Pickford chall?
  
• Which part of Mane's body deemed offside?
• At what moment did VAR decide to freeze-frame?

Source - https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11669/12106875/liverpool-ask-premier-league-to-investigate-var-decisions-during-draw-at-everton

I’m struggling to understand a few parts of this match but can someone explain why Coote was checking whether Van Dijk was offside leading up to the Pickford incident ? Was it to consider a penalty ?

Check player was onside If Y move on, If N end of review.
Check Penalty - If Y move on
Check Red Card - If Y move on
Award Penalty.