General officiating/rules

[bobzy]

14 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

It is, but they could learn a lot about how to effectively and concisely communicate. Phases of play has nothing to do with it, the game is stopped at this point, and it's an absolute mess

There’s two different things happening, though. People (multiple) on the pitch and people (multiple) in a room somewhere. Rugby has 2 people. 2. This is at best 6, and in an atmosphere/game that demands quick checks and correct decisions simultaneously.

Maybe the solution is to have VAR say the actual outcome. “He’s offside” or “he’s onside”.

[Davkaus]

1 minute ago, bobzy said:

 

Maybe the solution is to have VAR say the actual outcome. “He’s offside” or “he’s onside”.

Definitely a very simple and obvious improvement.

On the number of people, I'd also question why the VAR needs a techie to drive the tool, adding not just an extra person into the conversation, but a critical one who needs to be instructed on everything that the VAR wants to do and see.

It's ridiculous to me that the VARs aren't trained to use the tools themselves, half of the conversation was about which frame and angle they wanted, they should just be able to do that themselves.

[MrBlack]

5 minutes ago, bobzy said:

There’s two different things happening, though. People (multiple) on the pitch and people (multiple) in a room somewhere. Rugby has 2 people. 2. This is at best 6, and in an atmosphere/game that demands quick checks and correct decisions simultaneously.

Maybe the solution is to have VAR say the actual outcome. “He’s offside” or “he’s onside”.

But that's got nothing to do with rugby phases or the way the game is played like you initially conplained about...

So adopting the "2" people communicating during VAR checks,  like rugby,  would be a good thing no?

[bobzy]

1 minute ago, MrBlack said:

But that's got nothing to do with rugby phases or the way the game is played like you initially conplained about...

So adopting the "2" people communicating during VAR checks,  like rugby,  would be a good thing no?

The phases is an overall point rather than the specific offside call. They also take a good while to check decisions from what I remember - but the checks are fewer.

I don’t know if 2 people works in football. Do you need the assistant referee on the same loop as the referee so they can communicate in play? I’d say so. So you can’t really get away from less than 4 (ref, 2 x assistants and 1 x VAR). 

[blandy]

1 hour ago, Stevo985 said:

I think that many glaring errors is too many with VAR. 

Fair enough. And understandable. I know you don’t think this, or at least I’m fairly sure you don’t, but anyone thinking VAR was going to get rid of all human errors was overly optimistic.

I completely get the “ more trouble than it’s worth” view, but I’m certain that if it was binned off, there would be a load of media stuff immediately saying “ if only VAR was brought back, that kind of refereeing error could be corrected”. It’s a circus. 
I totally agree with @rodders0223 though that the VAR lot should have just told the ref, even though it is against protocol. Better a minor fuss over “the VAR wasn’t strictly allowed to say they’ve messed up” than undermining the whole thing by following some beauracratic line.

[Genie]

15 minutes ago, blandy said:

I’m certain that if it was binned off, there would be a load of media stuff immediately saying “ if only VAR was brought back, that kind of refereeing error could be corrected”

Yep, they can’t put the genie back in the lamp now. They need to make it work

Edited October 3, 2023 by Genie

[tomav84]

anyone really any happier now we've heard them? it was my argument all along having the dialogue released will do nothing but annoy everyone more. we can hear them panicking and blundering their way through the decision whilst ignoring the 1 person that seems to know what's what. it's one thing brushing something off as an honest mistake, another to hear for ourselves what absolute imbeciles we have refereeing the so called best league in the world

it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to talk and remove all doubt

[Genie]

9 minutes ago, tomav84 said:

anyone really any happier now we've heard them? it was my argument all along having the dialogue released will do nothing but annoy everyone more. we can hear them panicking and blundering their way through the decision whilst ignoring the 1 person that seems to know what's what. it's one thing brushing something off as an honest mistake, another to hear for ourselves what absolute imbeciles we have refereeing the so called best league in the world

it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to talk and remove all doubt

It should have been a bog standard bit of admin but the whole thing sounded chaotic and stressful. No surprise they still make stupid errors.

[AlwaysAVFC]

8 minutes ago, Genie said:

Yep, they can’t put the genie back in the lamp now. They need to make it work

Aside from the shit show that has happened, it does highlight the value of VAR (if it was done properly)

You can see why the lineman has stuck his flag up. I'm sure the body positions meant it looked offside in real time on the touchline, yet on replay it very clearly wasn't. 

However the knock on result of this is they're not now going to stick their flag up unless they are 100% sure it was offside (so comfortably offside) Increasing the risk of injuries to players when there has actually been an offside as well as the issue that there would only be a check if a goal was scored which wouldn't stop someone scoring from say a corner obtained after the incident. 

So many things to sort out, which ultimately can't be, without pretty much an instant decision.

[foreveryoung]

Just listened to the audio, they sound so amateur to me, why are they talking in the build up, shut the **** up!! Listen to how they handle it in the Rugby, 1 person, the ref takes hold of the conversation, asks the questions, confirms the outcome, not a 3-4 way banter. Sounds like the VAR is in control, not the ref, shit scared he is to over rule the VAR, an we wonder why they are messing up so much, it's right there.

Always wonder how many games they have to watch at one time.

[The_Steve]

1 hour ago, tomav84 said:

anyone really any happier now we've heard them? it was my argument all along having the dialogue released will do nothing but annoy everyone more. we can hear them panicking and blundering their way through the decision whilst ignoring the 1 person that seems to know what's what. it's one thing brushing something off as an honest mistake, another to hear for ourselves what absolute imbeciles we have refereeing the so called best league in the world

it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to talk and remove all doubt

I had to double-check that I wasn't listening to a parody - they are that incompetent and ignore the only person with actual knowledge and insight before realising it's all too late.

[Straggler]

I'm happier now they have released the audio. It brings no satisfaction regarding that one decision, but I am happy that the substandard decision making process that I suspected was there is in fact the case. It seems the main reason the live process isn't broadcast is because the officials don't want to expose how bad they are at their job. This goes right to the top, it is not a matter of knowing the rules, it is organisational, process, training, communication. There isn't really an excuse for how badly handled this moment was. Yes it was human error, but given the time, money and experience that has been plunged into VAR the atmosphere and confusion evident in the audio should not be possible.

I don't feel sorry for them at all. Calm decision making under pressure is the job description. Loads of professions do this sort of thing every day. Think of a Dr working in A&E. The actual consequences of a poor decision from VAR in the big scheme of things is hardly life or death, there is no excuse for any hint of rushing. It should be calm, precise and clearly communicated.

If they were confident in their work and their processes there would be no problem with having them visible. At the moment it looks like the lack of scrutiny has allowed them to build an organisation that is fundamentally flawed.

[Demitri_C]

Listening to that audio wow they are a complete and utter embarrassment. 

Sack the lot of them

[AndyClarke]

It's quite sad that the one person on the audio whose (I presume) job is to do as he is told and offer no opinion (the replay guy), is actually the only one who questions the decision!

[Mic09]

Being an on field referee has to be very difficult. 

But being on VAR should be a job for a switched on 13 year old.

All they to do after each goal is select the right frame for any controversial situation, watch it, if in doubt ask the on field referee to have a look.

That is it.

There is no need for any talking, there is no need for an assistant VAR and an operator. It should be a referee with a screen and a rewind button and access to different cameras.

I was the biggest fan of VAR. But now we saw how it really works, I am not so much anymore (in the current format).

 

[Davkaus]

6 minutes ago, AndyClarke said:

It's quite sad that the one person on the audio whose (I presume) job is to do as he is told and offer no opinion (the replay guy), is actually the only one who questions the decision!

"Are you happy with this?" should have had their arseholes clenching up. "I'm not allowed to tell you that you're **** up, but you're really **** up"

[Davkaus]

4 minutes ago, Mic09 said:

There is no need for any talking, there is no need for an assistant VAR and an operator. It should be a referee with a screen and a rewind button and access to different cameras.

Agreed 100% on the replay op, the job shouldn't need to exist, it's like some old school businessman paying someone to type their emails. They should be trained to use the tools of their job.

There's possibly a place for an assistant though, so someone is still keeping an eye on the live feeds while the main VAR digs deeper into any reviews, etc - keep in mind these reviews often occur while the ball is still in play.

[ThunderPower_14]

That's thoroughly embarrassing for the PGMOL. Wow. Mistakes happen, but it just sounded like an absolute shambles in there which stopped the mistake from being identified and corrected.

Cricket 3rd umpires are usually broadcast talking their way through the decision, and I think it works and makes sense. 

I'd say broadcast the VAR officials live, mostly so that they know they're being broadcast and conduct themselves thoroughly, systematically and professionally. That'll stop the exact chaos that caused this mistake. 

[tinker]

37 minutes ago, AndyClarke said:

It's quite sad that the one person on the audio whose (I presume) job is to do as he is told and offer no opinion (the replay guy), is actually the only one who questions the decision!

He's the only calm one involved, the others are frantic. Whoever set this system up should be sacked, the implementation is a complete mess.

The live audio feed from VAR should not be in the refs ears until he needs them. Having them give the ref running commentary of the whole match is a distraction and isn't what it for. You can clearly hear them saying "their both holding" well before the offside and you can hear the ref out of breath at the same time. 

[Davkaus]

53 minutes ago, tinker said:

 

The live audio feed from VAR should not be in the refs ears until he needs them. 

This is the case, it says as much on the video. The recording is all of the audio from the VAR room but they choose when to broadcast to the ref