• 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

Bedfordspurs said:
Takes around a minute for a penalty to be taken

3.5 minutes is too long

You have 3 incidents in a game and that’s 10 minutes

They will then bring in ad breaks for tv to fill the gap at this rate
Click to expand...

From the second the whistle is blown?
It really doesn't.

Ten minutes a game is easily wasted by players chasing after the ref to complain about something anyway.

And that assumes three instances where there is a significant event for the ref to check. Basically a goal or penalty. (Maybe a violent conduct incident).

Give the ref the power to double major decisions.
Punish players properly for chasing after the ref.
Result = massive improvement in the game.

I have to say the ref in Germany was excellent too. One instance where a player looked like giving him a bit of grief, he shut it down straight away. There was no more in the game.

Respect..... something the PL could do with learning.
 
monkeybarry said:
From the second the whistle is blown?
It really doesn't.

Ten minutes a game is easily wasted by players chasing after the ref to complain about something anyway.

And that assumes three instances where there is a significant event for the ref to check. Basically a goal or penalty. (Maybe a violent conduct incident).

Give the ref the power to double major decisions.
Punish players properly for chasing after the ref.
Result = massive improvement in the game.

I have to say the ref in Germany was excellent too. One instance where a player looked like giving him a bit of grief, he shut it down straight away. There was no more in the game.

Respect..... something the PL could do with learning.
Click to expand...

The average game has the ball in play 62 minutes IIRC out of the 90

The ref recover on average 5 minutes in added time so that’s 67 minutes

That leaves 23 minutes with the ball out of play

I personally had never seen penalties take so long to be taken as they were this weekend
 
methode%2Ftimes%2Fprod%2Fweb%2Fbin%2F180b269e-047a-11e8-a1f7-c3a235510a0a.png
 
Bedfordspurs said:
But its in addition to those things isn't it?

And the big VAR decisions have taken 3 minute plus so far and still been debatable
Click to expand...

Those big VAR decisions have been in the handful of games where it has been used here. The graphic indicates an average of 1 minute in the 800 games they analysed. One minute is surprisingly little, but if its less than 5 minutes then I don't see that being a deal breaker. The VAR time also overlaps with the time players spend protesting decisions. The referee can send them away and review the decision so sometimes VAR could save time.

I don't think anyone thinks the Anfield game was a good example. Four minutes to make the penalty decision was too long. Eight instances is also excessive, with the referee failing to use his judgement. It is supposed to remove clear egregious errors, not provide extra opportunity to make a close subjective judgement or to duck a decision. I think the NFL method with the decision on the field standing unless video review can reverse the call is the best approach.* It requires the referee to make a decision and then gives a short time (I'd say 90s max) to check for a clear and indisputable error. The Anfield game failed both with referee indecision and excessively long reviews.

* I also like how it works in rugby generally. The referee usually asks a clear question, "can you check the grounding", "was he in touch", although the "can you see any reason not to award the try" is a bit vague (albeit the referee has decide it was probably a try). Some of the reviews are a bit lengthy, so I think the NFL "Jeopardy" (or should it be "Countdown" here) approach is better suited for football.
 
Why the ref was running over to view it I just cant fathom. Either give him a mobile device to carry and review things on (bad idea, but better than what they did) or simply have another official make the shout.
 
StephenH said:
I find it REALLY irritating and a deal breaker for me.
Click to expand...
It can be a middle ground.
The ref has a question mark in his mind, he asks VAR about a specific incident.
Ref makes a decision based on that. Basically like in rugby.

It also has the added advantage of two people offering an educated decision, so will stop the moaning.
 
monkeybarry said:
Put it on the big screen:D
Click to expand...

That was one of the things the pundits were bitching about at the weekend, "oh the fans dont know whats going on so it should be up on the big screen".

While Ive no real issue with it in principle, I also think its a bloody nonsense. The fans dont know whats going on now when the ref consults his linesman, or is speaking to players and all that. Its no different. What they do know is that post a VAR incident the chances of the correct decision being made are near 100% though, which they really shouldnt complain about.

SPeaking of which, and comparisons to Rugby, I think the ref should be mic'd up (already is, but) such that the way the players speak to him is broadcast as well. Huge fines for disrespect, name and shame, and lets get some respect back into the game.
 
The refs would have mind their P&Q's also.
You would have the commentators apologising every 30 seconds and some of the profanities would even be from the players. :eek:
 
monkeybarry said:
It can be a middle ground.
The ref has a question mark in his mind, he asks VAR about a specific incident.
Ref makes a decision based on that. Basically like in rugby.

It also has the added advantage of two people offering an educated decision, so will stop the moaning.
Click to expand...

Re the bolded bit, do you (or anyone) know if that is how it works in other countries (as opposed to the system we are currently testing, where the ref can't refer anything, it is all initiated from the VAR to the ref)?
 
I think it needs to be a two way thing.

The ref needs to be able to call for help in situations where he isnt sure. Just watch MOTD on any given week and there will be at least a handful of decisions made by the ref who is miles away and barely sighted. He needs to be able to say "I think thats a pen, can you confirm?" "That looks like a foul, was there contact?"

Equally, if the ref completely misses something, then absolutely the VAR should make him aware. Maybe he'll listen, maybe jhe wont, but the call needs to be made.
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
I think it needs to be a two way thing.

The ref needs to be able to call for help in situations where he isnt sure. Just watch MOTD on any given week and there will be at least a handful of decisions made by the ref who is miles away and barely sighted. He needs to be able to say "I think thats a pen, can you confirm?" "That looks like a foul, was there contact?"

Equally, if the ref completely misses something, then absolutely the VAR should make him aware. Maybe he'll listen, maybe jhe wont, but the call needs to be made.
Click to expand...

agreed, there should be a constant conversation between the two parties
 
At the end of the day, with the speed at which the game moves these days, its not even reasonable to expect a ref to keep up with play, pick up all the details everywhere and make the right decisions at all times.

Put it this way, if there was no officiating in football, and we decided to introduce it now - what we have wouldnt even make the short list of solutions.
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
At the end of the day, with the speed at which the game moves these days, its not even reasonable to expect a ref to keep up with play, pick up all the details everywhere and make the right decisions at all times.

Put it this way, if there was no officiating in football, and we decided to introduce it now - what we have wouldnt even make the short list of solutions.
Click to expand...
Agree re the speed.
I was watching highlights of the Bundesliga and they showed where the linesman was looking for an offside because it happened so quickly (the movement of the ball and three/four players) that it's understandable he didn't see it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back