Zatman Posted January 11 Share Posted January 11 6 hours ago, tinker said: Stick it on the big screen, not sure why they don't tbh. In rugby they dont go to the screen but show it on the big screen but They also trust the TMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turvontour Posted January 11 Share Posted January 11 6 hours ago, PieFacE said: I agree. This is why I think a "Challenge" type system for everything outside of offsides/goal line could work. Where each team can challenge decisions x amount of times a game (something sensible like 2 or 3 i dunno). That way the ref wouldn't be reviewing decisions based on input from other referees. Team challenges a decision VAR team set the monitor up or whatever they do Ref goes to monitor and reviews the decision with no input from anyone else Wouldn't be a perfect system as i'm sure it would be abused in some ways, to be frank I haven't sat and thought about all the pros and cons of it. But I like the idea of removing outside influence from ref's decisions. 3 challenges each team per game? Haha. Welcome to 130 minute matches. The bloke to the left of me would still leave on 80th min though. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turvontour Posted January 11 Share Posted January 11 On 04/01/2024 at 14:28, MrBlack said: The second the ref is asked to look at it again it's planted the seed that he got the call wrong. So 99% of the time the ref will change their call. The commentators even joke about it "oh, the refs been called to the monitor, we know what this means" The system needs scrapping in its current form. It's just full of flaws. It's not right or wrong though it's subjective. This is the huge flaw in VAR, as if it somehow has the right answer. It's all just opinion that can't be agreed in. The ref wasn't right or wrong to let the Calvert Lewin tackle play on. VAR were not right or wrong to make him review it. The ref was not right or wrong to overturn and send him off. The powers that be were not right or wrong to overturn it. It's all opinion. We've just widened the opinion and confused the whole thing. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PieFacE Posted January 11 VT Supporter Share Posted January 11 50 minutes ago, turvontour said: 3 challenges each team per game? Haha. Welcome to 130 minute matches. Well in theory it should be quicker cos you wouldn't have VAR checking things before the ref does. I think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted January 12 Author VT Supporter Share Posted January 12 10 hours ago, Zatman said: In rugby they dont go to the screen but show it on the big screen but They also trust the TMO And you get to hear the conversation as it happens which makes a huge difference. At least you can hear the logic even if you disagree with the decision 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 8 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: And you get to hear the conversation as it happens which makes a huge difference. At least you can hear the logic even if you disagree with the decision But rugby is - largely - a game of respect all round. Football is not. The players are disrepectful, the fans are disrespectful (to the point where they can't even sit together due to stupidity). You can't just mash the two approaches together IMO. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted January 12 Author VT Supporter Share Posted January 12 29 minutes ago, bobzy said: But rugby is - largely - a game of respect all round. Football is not. The players are disrepectful, the fans are disrespectful (to the point where they can't even sit together due to stupidity). You can't just mash the two approaches together IMO. You can’t. But I don’t really think that’s relevant to this point. Half the problem at the moment is people not being able to understand why a decision is given. Quite a lot of this VAR audio being released has resulted in people at least understanding the logic behind decisions. I think being able to hear the ref discussing that in real time, even if it’s just for the tv audience, would be a massive help in calming the backlash. it doesn’t fix the problems with VAR, but it would help. I don’t see how the respect or lack of it in the sport is relevant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 7 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: You can’t. But I don’t really think that’s relevant to this point. Half the problem at the moment is people not being able to understand why a decision is given. Quite a lot of this VAR audio being released has resulted in people at least understanding the logic behind decisions. I think being able to hear the ref discussing that in real time, even if it’s just for the tv audience, would be a massive help in calming the backlash. it doesn’t fix the problems with VAR, but it would help. I don’t see how the respect or lack of it in the sport is relevant I don't think it helps, really. People have their views on the incident - listening to a VAR say "well there's contact, so it's a penalty" won't calm down the amount of "VAR is shit" stuff. And the respect is around showing something on a large screen with the audio between the referees made available. Players already surround refs on a match basis, fans already give referees abuse. You don't need to then open up the world of discussion between officials to invoke more of it (which, I think, is what would happen). In rugby - and I'm not a fan, so don't watch many games at all - everyone just seems to accept a decision, even if they disagree. That is almost the polar opposite of football Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted January 12 Author VT Supporter Share Posted January 12 11 minutes ago, bobzy said: I don't think it helps, really. People have their views on the incident - listening to a VAR say "well there's contact, so it's a penalty" won't calm down the amount of "VAR is shit" stuff. And the respect is around showing something on a large screen with the audio between the referees made available. Players already surround refs on a match basis, fans already give referees abuse. You don't need to then open up the world of discussion between officials to invoke more of it (which, I think, is what would happen). In rugby - and I'm not a fan, so don't watch many games at all - everyone just seems to accept a decision, even if they disagree. That is almost the polar opposite of football Yeah I disagree. I think it would help massively Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 1 hour ago, Stevo985 said: You can’t. But I don’t really think that’s relevant to this point. Half the problem at the moment is people not being able to understand why a decision is given. Quite a lot of this VAR audio being released has resulted in people at least understanding the logic behind decisions. I think being able to hear the ref discussing that in real time, even if it’s just for the tv audience, would be a massive help in calming the backlash. it doesn’t fix the problems with VAR, but it would help. I don’t see how the respect or lack of it in the sport is relevant agree with that but not in the ground, or replays on the big screen in the grounds the problem with football is that its not black and white - they can show 50k people something, they explain a perfectly sound logic and explanation as to why something was given, they wont convince all 50k people that they are correct, the blindness from bias ensures that will never happen, instead all that will happen is flame fanning, which then changes the atmosphere leads to an increase in pressure, could lead to crowd trouble, would almost definitely IMO lead to an influence on the ref for the rest of the game as he tries to calm it down and win the crowd back and that's where maybe the respect in ruby comes in, I'm not sure as i don't know die hard rugby fans in the same way that I know plenty of die hard football fans but I don't think the same aggression exists and I don't think the same bias exists, i've certainly never heard a worcester warriors fan claim there's a referee agenda against them keeping them down 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmygreaves Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 42 minutes ago, villa4europe said: agree with that but not in the ground, or replays on the big screen in the grounds the problem with football is that its not black and white - they can show 50k people something, they explain a perfectly sound logic and explanation as to why something was given, they wont convince all 50k people that they are correct, the blindness from bias ensures that will never happen, instead all that will happen is flame fanning, which then changes the atmosphere leads to an increase in pressure, could lead to crowd trouble, would almost definitely IMO lead to an influence on the ref for the rest of the game as he tries to calm it down and win the crowd back and that's where maybe the respect in ruby comes in, I'm not sure as i don't know die hard rugby fans in the same way that I know plenty of die hard football fans but I don't think the same aggression exists and I don't think the same bias exists, i've certainly never heard a worcester warriors fan claim there's a referee agenda against them keeping them down There's way more nuance in lots of Rugby decisions than you seem to think, it's very similar to football in many regards. The respect of refs in rugby comes from the fact they explain their decisions constantly. That fundamentally does not happen in football at all levels. This is where the frustration is born from and the lack of respect. Football refs don't ever need to justify their actions which is why it's so annoying when decisions are given against you. When you ask why a decision was made many times a player is simply waved away.... That's not respect. If refs want to be respected in football they need to earn it. Unfortunately they are not required to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted January 12 Author VT Supporter Share Posted January 12 1 hour ago, villa4europe said: agree with that but not in the ground, or replays on the big screen in the grounds the problem with football is that its not black and white - they can show 50k people something, they explain a perfectly sound logic and explanation as to why something was given, they wont convince all 50k people that they are correct, the blindness from bias ensures that will never happen, instead all that will happen is flame fanning, which then changes the atmosphere leads to an increase in pressure, could lead to crowd trouble, would almost definitely IMO lead to an influence on the ref for the rest of the game as he tries to calm it down and win the crowd back and that's where maybe the respect in ruby comes in, I'm not sure as i don't know die hard rugby fans in the same way that I know plenty of die hard football fans but I don't think the same aggression exists and I don't think the same bias exists, i've certainly never heard a worcester warriors fan claim there's a referee agenda against them keeping them down It's not about convincing people it's correct, it's about showing them why a decision has been made Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: It's not about convincing people it's correct, it's about showing them why a decision has been made But to me you are potentially inciting more anger As a rule they already don't show say the tackle that results in a penalty on the big screen during the half time highlights a ref comes out on a speaker and says "i showed DCL a red card because his studs were showing" while the big screen shows that you think people wont be absolutely furious? that extra knowledge and explanation being given to the fans makes things worse not better Edited January 12 by villa4europe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted January 12 Author VT Supporter Share Posted January 12 5 minutes ago, villa4europe said: But to me you are potentially inciting more anger As a rule they already don't show say the tackle that results in a penalty on the big screen during the half time highlights a ref comes out on a speaker and says "i showed DCL a red card because his studs were showing" while the big screen shows that you think people wont be absolutely furious? that extra knowledge and explanation being given to the fans makes things worse not better I never said it was for in the ground. Same with rugby, it’s for the tv audience Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turvontour Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 1 hour ago, villa4europe said: But to me you are potentially inciting more anger As a rule they already don't show say the tackle that results in a penalty on the big screen during the half time highlights a ref comes out on a speaker and says "i showed DCL a red card because his studs were showing" while the big screen shows that you think people wont be absolutely furious? that extra knowledge and explanation being given to the fans makes things worse not better I agree. Why should the referee have to explain to the crowd why he is making a decision. He literally wont be able to win in most scenarios and will cause even more problems. I'd prefer explanation from the players as to why they can't hit a barn door on 100k a week. Not a ref making tough decisions on 100k a year. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted January 12 Author VT Supporter Share Posted January 12 6 minutes ago, turvontour said: I agree. Why should the referee have to explain to the crowd why he is making a decision. He literally wont be able to win in most scenarios and will cause even more problems. I'd prefer explanation from the players as to why they can't hit a barn door on 100k a week. Not a ref making tough decisions on 100k a year. He’s not explaining it. Why are people making up shit Its being able to hear the conversation between the ref and the VAR. That way people can hear the logic used behind the decision Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 4 hours ago, Stevo985 said: Yeah I disagree. I think it would help massively Massively? In what way? Let's take the Sheffield United non-handball against us. Was seemingly a very quick review; VAR might have said "hit his sleeve, not a penalty" game moves on. Two things with this; a] apparently that's no longer the handball rule, so just shows the ref as incorrect and b] if anything, it makes people more annoyed that the handball wasn't given. Most of the dodgy penalties we've seen recently have been given on the pitch and then not overturned (Duran, Isak, Fernandes from memory). Releasing audio saying "there's contact, can't be overturned" doesn't really help anything, does it? I fail to see how releasing the audio would assist anything. You could argue that it makes the process more transparent - which is fair - but that's the only benefit I can think of. Everything else is a net negative, if anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 Before they can release any live audio they need to sort the rules out so they actually make sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurtsimonw Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 On 11/01/2024 at 14:29, Stevo985 said: I've got no problem with them being told to check things like that, but clearly we're still in this shit situation where refs feel obliged to overturn their decision if they're being told to check. Probably because of the high bar/clear and obvious bollocks. The ref in the middle should be free to review his own decision and make his own mind up. If he's been told to check this he shouldn't be thinking "I must be wrong so I'm going to change it" He should be free to say "yeah I've seen it again and I'm happy with my original decision" I'd like to see the stats on how many decisions have been stuck with. The only one that comes to mind is the Villa penalty v Palace. Genuinely can't think of another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 *sigh* 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts