Dogawful Officiating

[wormy]

He had absolutely no control over the game.

 

And yes, we'd be aggrieved at such a penalty being given but as ever, the application of the rules are an absolute joke. You can guarantee if it was given to Arsenal, or any of the other usual suspects, they wouldn't have been so desperate to overturn. Seen it suggested elsewhere and am in agreement that if VAR can't come to a conclusion within a prescribed time frame, it's obviously not a clear and obvious error, so referee's decision stands, however shit it looks after 15 minutes of post-match analysis. 

[Dr Venkman]

Personally think putting a time limit on VAR is a terrible idea as it just adds pressure and increases the likelihood of more mistakes. He never had control of the game though, agreed there, he was pathetic.

[80]

8 minutes ago, Dr Venkman said:

Personally think putting a time limit on VAR is a terrible idea as it just adds pressure and increases the likelihood of more mistakes. He never had control of the game though, agreed there, he was pathetic.

But not clear and obvious mistakes, surely?

[TheHoob]

Probably just end up causing further shitshow arguments about whether they got the right angles to the VAR in the prescribed period etc. Not sure what the fix is. 

 

Micing up the ref and somehow making the VAR more transparent maybe? 

 

 

Edited May 7, 2023 by TheHoob

[wormy]

I'll always be up for refs being mic'd up.

[Viana]

1 hour ago, Dr Venkman said:

Personally think putting a time limit on VAR is a terrible idea as it just adds pressure and increases the likelihood of more mistakes. He never had control of the game though, agreed there, he was pathetic.

You’re right. 
 

I also believe the current system isn’t working. Go to the monitor has become shorthand for “you’ve made a mistake”. Thats why the same referee gave a soft penalty against us at Brentford after several minutes studying the screen.

 

Meanwhile, Longstaff gets clattered and nothing is done but for some mealy-mouthed explanation after the fact. Those VAR calls are increasingly a second referee deciding what they think and applying unintended pressure to those on the field. Offsides I will always understand as there’s not a subjective interpretation, but outside of that you’re just asking for trouble.

[Danh1]

3 minutes ago, Viana said:

You’re right. 
 

I also believe the current system isn’t working. Go to the monitor has become shorthand for “you’ve made a mistake”. Thats why the same referee gave a soft penalty against us at Brentford after several minutes studying the screen.

 

Meanwhile, Longstaff gets clattered and nothing is done but for some mealy-mouthed explanation after the fact. Those VAR calls are increasingly a second referee deciding what they think and applying unintended pressure to those on the field. Offsides I will always understand as there’s not a subjective interpretation, but outside of that you’re just asking for trouble.

You say that about offsides but look at that shocker at Forest. 
 

VAR is shite. Would rather be angry about a human error than one that’s been made despite having the use of technology and the benefit of rewatching the incident numerous times. 

[Guest]

My prayers have been answered 

[Kanj]

After seeing the many replays, it looked like it was leg first; no clue if it actually hit his hand or not. My issue is the application - I saw Wilson's shoulder apparently CLEARLY hit to overturn, Thiago not be called for handball v West Ham, yesterday's Man United non-call; it's just fucking shite. The application is not clear across every match and VAR intervention seems a complete fucking waste. Was Isak truly offside based on the grainy angle versus Liverpool and we go 2-0 up and thats +3 for us versus 0? Was there not a clear tug on Isak's shirt yesterday in the box that has been given in the past in other matches? The reffing is bonkers. I know this type of stuff happens to others too. 

[Pancrate1892]

23 hours ago, Kanji said:

After seeing the many replays, it looked like it was leg first; no clue if it actually hit his hand or not. My issue is the application - I saw Wilson's shoulder apparently CLEARLY hit to overturn, Thiago not be called for handball v West Ham, yesterday's Man United non-call; it's just fucking shite. The application is not clear across every match and VAR intervention seems a complete fucking waste. Was Isak truly offside based on the grainy angle versus Liverpool and we go 2-0 up and thats +3 for us versus 0? Was there not a clear tug on Isak's shirt yesterday in the box that has been given in the past in other matches? The reffing is bonkers. I know this type of stuff happens to others too. 

Your spot on. The thing that irks me is when they present the premier league table without VAR and say the likes of us aren't that much better off, but it's not VAR itself, it's the application of VAR like you say. They basically want to look at all the incorrect VAR calls and not include the correct ones to see the real difference.  And the 50/50s that go either way, for example every 50/50 has went for Liverpool except maybe rashford at old Trafford (always hard for the officials to know which to cater for, man utd or Liverpool) but then every 40/60, 30/70 has went for Liverpool, that's the difference 

[morpeth mag]

27 minutes ago, Pancrate1892 said:

Your spot on. The thing that irks me is when they present the premier league table without VAR and say the likes of us aren't that much better off, but it's not VAR itself, it's the application of VAR like you say. They basically want to look at all the incorrect VAR calls and not include the correct ones to see the real difference.  And the 50/50s that go either way, for example every 50/50 has went for Liverpool except maybe rashford at old Trafford (always hard for the officials to know which to cater for, man utd or Liverpool) but then every 40/60, 30/70 has went for Liverpool, that's the difference 

PGMOL review each VAR intervention and come to a conclusion as to whether the intervention was correct or not. Earlier in the season they released figures saying 42 of the 48 reviews were correct. Our non goal against Palace was one of the six. Really you want to look over time to see if there is a pattern in the errors. Do top teams get decisions? Home teams? Etc

I suspect we don't have enough data yet for any bias to be statistically significant.

[Yorkie]

23 hours ago, Jack27 said:

My prayers have been answered 

 

Will be very interesting to see how and which ones they choose to release, like. 

 

Having to listen to the referees during the game will be another horrendous imposition created by this collective shitshow, but sadly it's absolutely necessary at this point.

[gbandit]

They’d made way more than six appalling decisions when they did that review but they identified six which were absolutely irrefutable. Every game we see errors and every week there’s at least one or two which are appalling

[ohmelads]

That was all just PGMOL marking their own homework and giving themselves a decent score. Total nonsense. 

[arnonel]

Can someone explain the difference between Darwin Nunez penalty (which Liv got), and Anderson one from the weekend? 

Havent seen replays mind you

 

 

Edited May 9, 2023 by arnonel

[Pancrate1892]

6 minutes ago, ohmelads said:

That was all just PGMOL marking their own homework and giving themselves a decent score. Total nonsense. 

That's what I mean. It's fucking bullshit 

[Kanj]

6 minutes ago, arnonel said:

Can someone explain the difference between Darwin Nunez penalty (which Liv got), and Anderson one from the weekend? 

Havent seen replays mind you

 

 

 

 

I felt both weren't penalties, that the player's had the ball, made the touch, and then hurled themselves into the defender and fell over. 

[Kid Icarus]

29 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

 

Will be very interesting to see how and which ones they choose to release, like. 

 

Having to listen to the referees during the game will be another horrendous imposition created by this collective shitshow, but sadly it's absolutely necessary at this point.

Why is it absolutely necessary? What do you think it solves? As someone who's so vehemently against VAR I thought you would have seen this as another 'correction' than creates more problems than it solves. 

[Yorkie]

7 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

38 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

 

Will be very interesting to see how and which ones they choose to release, like. 

 

Having to listen to the referees during the game will be another horrendous imposition created by this collective shitshow, but sadly it's absolutely necessary at this point.

Expand  

Why is it absolutely necessary? What do you think it solves? As someone who's so vehemently against VAR I thought you would have seen this as another 'correction' than creates more problems than it solves

 

I think it's absolutely necessary in the interests of transparency and accountability. Sets of fans are having the piss taken out of them every week because they are being left with no explanation for decisions made.

 

It could also benefit the referees themselves: rather than being continuously accused of being incompetent and/or corrupt, they'll only be accused of being incompetent.  (I don't believe there is any corruption from officials). On the other hand, you might doubt how much of a net gain there would be from the officials' point of view: mic'ing them up means they become more established characters in the whole pantomime and probably greater targets for abuse. 

 

For the record I'm not 100% against VAR. I just think it has far too great an intervention currently and I think the whole landscape of refereeing is in a far worse state now than it was pre-VAR. 

[80]

As a side note, I'd probably quintuple referees' wages right down the league structure. The game can afford it and it would make the job much more massively attractive and viable for anyone fit, intelligent and committed, whilst helping reward transparency and disincentivise corruption.

 

I think we overlook the significance of people being asked to wield authority over players who in some cases literally earn more in a day than they do in a year.

[Thomson Mouse]

Been saying it for ages, either they’re mic’d up or the get interviewed after the game and talk through any high risk decisions 

 

Edit: maybe mic’d up is better so you can hear the players as well

 

 

Edited May 9, 2023 by Thomson Mouse

[Yorkie]

20 minutes ago, 80 said:

As a side note, I'd probably quintuple referees' wages right down the league structure. The game can afford it and it would make the job much more massively attractive and viable for anyone fit, intelligent and committed, whilst helping reward transparency and disincentivise corruption.

 

I think we overlook the significance of people being asked to wield authority over players who in some cases literally earn more in a day than they do in a year.

 

Totally agree. It looks like one of the most unappealing professions going. I've no idea what the numbers are though, maybe there are thousands aspiring to join this regime where you're being publicly ganged-up-on, abused, scrutinised to unprecedented degrees, all the while being expected to apply a system that is rife with flaws. Christ knows what budding linesmen are thinking these days given VAR renders their officiating of offsides all but redundant. 

[gbandit]

It’s an extremely difficult job, and I think in lots of ways officiating has improved in recent years. I think the game flows a lot more now. However, the handball law is a disgrace. I think offsides will get a lot simpler with the new system that’s going to be employed so it really comes down to them applying the rules more consistently. What’s pissing people off is seeing certain teams benefit over others consistently. That needs to stop immediately 

[80]

Just now, Yorkie said:

 

Totally agree. It looks like one of the most unappealing professions going. I've no idea what the numbers are though, maybe there are thousands aspiring to be join this regime where you're being publicly ganged-up-on, abused, scrutinised to unprecedented degrees, all the while being expected to apply a system that is rife with flaws. Christ knows what budding linesmen are thinking these days given VAR renders their officiating of offsides all but redundant. 

I don't know, but even if there are thousands wanting the job, they may not be the right kind of people. "Hypothetically" maybe the job as it stands appeals to bitter, talentless little Hitlers. Exactly the kind who might love to feel they're getting one over on the world.

 

As I understand it, outside the Premier League, you could often take home more money as a plasterer or a lower tier salesman. With that in mind, who could be too surprised about what starts out as a bit of harmless spot fixing to pay for a much needed holiday?

[Bimpy474]

7 hours ago, Yorkie said:

 

Will be very interesting to see how and which ones they choose to release, like. 

 

Having to listen to the referees during the game will be another horrendous imposition created by this collective shitshow, but sadly it's absolutely necessary at this point.

 

They have to release all or none, otherwise they'll choose not to release anything controversial, and carry on protecting the big clubs more than they already do.

 

 

Edited May 9, 2023 by Bimpy474