|
|
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 844
Under 18 Player
|
Under 18 Player
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 844 |
Yes and the monitors are there. But not one ref went to view it and we’re heading into match week 10
Last edited by elimmel; 24/10/19 01:47 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 8,595
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 8,595 |
Yes and the monitors are there. But not one ref went to view it and we’re heading into match week 10 Why should the ref's employ a dog and then bark themselves? Surely they can rely on those already employed reading and scrutinising the monitors? VAR slows things up enough as it is, without the ref's trundling off to view a monitor when he has the relevant information already in his ear.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
|
OP
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
Yes and the monitors are there. But not one ref went to view it and we’re heading into match week 10 Why should the ref's employ a dog and then bark themselves? Surely they can rely on those already employed reading and scrutinising the monitors? VAR slows things up enough as it is, without the ref's trundling off to view a monitor when he has the relevant information already in his ear. Injuries slows things even more and as often, should those be scrapped as well? In rugby they do it even more, the only thing is that it should be communicated and the screen watched by the public, it will be as interesting as the game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,746
Under 23 Player
|
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,746 |
Yes and the monitors are there. But not one ref went to view it and we’re heading into match week 10 Why should the ref's employ a dog and then bark themselves? Surely they can rely on those already employed reading and scrutinising the monitors? VAR slows things up enough as it is, without the ref's trundling off to view a monitor when he has the relevant information already in his ear. Yes I understand what you are saying but when VAR is new and we look at the experience of the referee Atkinson against that of the VAR official we are talking about 15 years in PL v 15 games in the PL. Given that level of experience difference we are not going to get much reversed unless the man in the middle can own up to his error.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
|
OP
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
Yes and the monitors are there. But not one ref went to view it and we’re heading into match week 10 Why should the ref's employ a dog and then bark themselves? Surely they can rely on those already employed reading and scrutinising the monitors? VAR slows things up enough as it is, without the ref's trundling off to view a monitor when he has the relevant information already in his ear. Yes I understand what you are saying but when VAR is new and we look at the experience of the referee Atkinson against that of the VAR official we are talking about 15 years in PL v 15 games in the PL. Given that level of experience difference we are not going to get much reversed unless the man in the middle can own up to his error. Carra used virtual reality to show that the ref didn't see the foul https://youtu.be/LRDmbMPKzRE
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 22,394
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 22,394 |
Best get that introduced into the game too then.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 505
Under 18 Player
|
|
Under 18 Player
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 505 |
It's really quite simple. Just correct every wrong call - that's it! No need to worry about embarrassing the ref - no other sport does. So far, we use VAR to get every single handball right, every single fractional offside right.... but it's been absolutely useless at overturning the ref's wrong decisions on pens and goals. So what's the point? If incorrect decisions are allowed to stand - or the refs can't be bothered to check the monitors - or we can't overturn anything a ref has called that leads to a pen or a goal then there's no point having it at all.
VAR is fine - the way we use it is moronic. VAR is not supposed to overturn a decision, it was always said that the ref will take the final decision. However, they should go and check the bloody monitor. That said, it is still better having it than not even now, at least for the offside decisions which is very difficult to judge without technology. VAR should overturn what is wrong. If a ref's handball or offside decision can be correct - then so should their goal and penalty decisions. It's all or nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 505
Under 18 Player
|
|
Under 18 Player
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 505 |
Yes and the monitors are there. But not one ref went to view it and we’re heading into match week 10 Why should the ref's employ a dog and then bark themselves? Surely they can rely on those already employed reading and scrutinising the monitors? VAR slows things up enough as it is, without the ref's trundling off to view a monitor when he has the relevant information already in his ear. Because they invested thousands in pitch side monitors.... why put them there and not use them?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
|
OP
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
It's really quite simple. Just correct every wrong call - that's it! No need to worry about embarrassing the ref - no other sport does. So far, we use VAR to get every single handball right, every single fractional offside right.... but it's been absolutely useless at overturning the ref's wrong decisions on pens and goals. So what's the point? If incorrect decisions are allowed to stand - or the refs can't be bothered to check the monitors - or we can't overturn anything a ref has called that leads to a pen or a goal then there's no point having it at all.
VAR is fine - the way we use it is moronic. VAR is not supposed to overturn a decision, it was always said that the ref will take the final decision. However, they should go and check the bloody monitor. That said, it is still better having it than not even now, at least for the offside decisions which is very difficult to judge without technology. VAR should overturn what is wrong. If a ref's handball or offside decision can be correct - then so should their goal and penalty decisions. It's all or nothing. Fouls are not always clear cut compared to offsides, goals and even handballs, thus could be open to interpretation. As such, the principle is for the main ref to decide. I am not against leaving it to the VAR refs, anyway they could even had a quick vote like in boxing if they don't all agree, but from day 1, it was said that the final decision is for the main ref, he just needs to move his ass and check on the monitor. The slowing down of the game is not a big issue, games are stopped for injuries, sometimes fake, you just need to get the crowd interested by showing on the big screens. The problem is while waiting nothing seems to happen.
Last edited by EnergisedReds; 25/10/19 02:39 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,746
Under 23 Player
|
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,746 |
It's really quite simple. Just correct every wrong call - that's it! No need to worry about embarrassing the ref - no other sport does. So far, we use VAR to get every single handball right, every single fractional offside right.... but it's been absolutely useless at overturning the ref's wrong decisions on pens and goals. So what's the point? If incorrect decisions are allowed to stand - or the refs can't be bothered to check the monitors - or we can't overturn anything a ref has called that leads to a pen or a goal then there's no point having it at all.
VAR is fine - the way we use it is moronic. VAR is not supposed to overturn a decision, it was always said that the ref will take the final decision. However, they should go and check the bloody monitor. That said, it is still better having it than not even now, at least for the offside decisions which is very difficult to judge without technology. VAR should overturn what is wrong. If a ref's handball or offside decision can be correct - then so should their goal and penalty decisions. It's all or nothing. Fouls are not always clear cut compared to offsides, goals and even handballs, thus could be open to interpretation. As such, the principle is for the main ref to decide. I am not against leaving it to the VAR refs, anyway they could even had a quick vote like in boxing if they don't all agree, but from day 1, it was said that the final decision is for the main ref, he just needs to move his ass and check on the monitor. The slowing down of the game is not a big issue, games are stopped for injuries, sometimes fake, you just need to get the crowd interested by showing on the big screens. The problem is while waiting nothing seems to happen. Yes decision should always lie with the officials on the pitch. Rugby League has done this almost perfectly. Rugby Union is not far behind. Cricket decisions are made by the third umpire but in most cases that is an extremely experienced official using technology that gets better each year. The non use of the technology (not using the screens) by the person in charge (the man in the middle) is what is infuriating people. They need to set a date. Say, 1st Jan, and start using the stuff at their disposal. Between now and then perhaps they should undergo some more training to incorporate it into the game. With the new rules this season such as; Players being subbed going off at nearest point. No attacking players in a defensive wall. Ball hits ref it's a uncontested drop ball etc.etc. Is it possible that not enough training has gone into VAR and all the help available to make the right decisions? I will always hate VAR but if everything is being seen to be done perhaps I can learn to accept it a bit more. The current set up is spoiling the enjoyment not only of watching it but also programmes where match updates are being relayed to the masses on a Saturday afternoon on TV and the commentators cannot fathom what is going on either.
Last edited by AccaBoosty; 25/10/19 11:44 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
