GWT: EPL - Matchweek 4

[KJS14]

That other angle showed enough. They talk about that other angle showing AWB didn't trip Havertz.

I'm not arguing whether it was a foul. Just thought that was crazy that he barely watched it

 

[hatterson]

My biggest takeaway from that video was that the on-field referee barely even looked at the replay. He just had the VAR guys tell him what they think happened while running over to the screen, looked at one angle for 5 seconds, and then made the call lol

That’s actually how VAR is supposed to work.

The ref makes a call and tell VAR what he saw. VAR looks at it to determine if they feel it’s a clear and obvious error. If it is, they send the ref to the monitor and show him the best evidence to support their case that they believe it’s clear and obvious.

They’re not trying to show him enough angles to fully relitigate the call, they’re showing him the replays that show what they believe is an error as clearly as they can.

If the ref isn’t fully convinced he can ask for other angles, but the point is to have the pitch side monitor review be fairly quick and routine as opposed to the on field guy just reanalyzing everything.

 

[Jussi]

I'm not arguing whether it was a foul. Just thought that was crazy that he barely watched it

Based on the communication, they trust each other and the angle they showed was very conclusive.

 

[ItsFineImFine]

My biggest takeaway from that video was that the on-field referee barely even looked at the replay. He just had the VAR guys tell him what they think happened while running over to the screen, looked at one angle for 5 seconds, and then made the call lol

That's how it should be. The VAR guys are in a quieter room with a bigass TV let them decide.

Why is the on-field ref making any decisions? It makes VAR decisions take longer too just have the specialists do it (I realize in England they don't have VAR specialists but you get the point). A rugby ref isn't going to the sidelines to look at a little TV every 5 minutes, someone just tells him in his ear what happened.

 

[The Abusement Park]

My biggest takeaway from that video was that the on-field referee barely even looked at the replay. He just had the VAR guys tell him what they think happened while running over to the screen, looked at one angle for 5 seconds, and then made the call lol

I mean yeah? That's how it should be no?

 

[KJS14]

That’s actually how VAR is supposed to work.

The ref makes a call and tell VAR what he saw. VAR looks at it to determine if they feel it’s a clear and obvious error. If it is, they send the ref to the monitor and show him the best evidence to support their case that they believe it’s clear and obvious.

They’re not trying to show him enough angles to fully relitigate the call, they’re showing him the replays that show what they believe is an error as clearly as they can.

If the ref isn’t fully convinced he can ask for other angles, but the point is to have the pitch side monitor review be fairly quick and routine as opposed to the on field guy just reanalyzing everything.

Based on the communication, they trust each other and the angle they showed was very conclusive.

That's how it should be. The VAR guys are in a quieter room with a bigass TV let them decide.

Why is the on-field ref making any decisions? It makes VAR decisions take longer too just have the specialists do it (I realize in England they don't have VAR specialists but you get the point). A rugby ref isn't going to the sidelines to look at a little TV every 5 minutes, someone just tells him in his ear what happened.

I mean yeah? That's how it should be no?

Maybe I just haven't seen many instances of the on-field ref going to the monitor to compare this one to, but it felt overly quick to me. Just seemed to me like he barely even watched the play before deciding to overturn his own call. I get that he's getting help from communication with the VAR ref as well, but if the goal is to not slow down the game even more, then why not just empower VAR to overturn the call?

 

[The Abusement Park]

Maybe I just haven't seen many instances of the on-field ref going to the monitor to compare this one to, but it felt overly quick to me. Just seemed to me like he barely even watched the play before deciding to overturn his own call. I get that he's getting help from communication with the VAR ref as well, but if the goal is to not slow down the game even more, then why not just empower VAR to overturn the call?

I don’t see the issue? VAR thought it was the wrong call, pulled up the best angle of the foul for the ref and made his decision. That’s exactly how VAR should be used.

 

[AlanHUK]

All that's for naught when he puts in this kind of a defensive effort:




Antony for all his offensive woes at least has put in the defensive effort this season.

And despite his 'defensive effort' he's still only completing the same number of tackles per 90 as Sancho.

As for 'that's all for nought', scoring more and conceding less is the object of the game, so I guess if you want results start Sancho, if you want 'defensive effort' (someone running around not achieving much) start Antony?

Havertz dove and tripped on a United player's leg.

Rashford dove and tripped on Danilo's leg, since he was on his way down before contact.

So where United incorrectly given a penalty against Forest, or correctly saved from one against Arsenal? can't have it both ways

 

[Jussi]

And despite his 'defensive effort' he's still only completing the same number of tackles per 90 as Sancho.





Rashford dove and tripped on Danilo's leg, since he was on his way down before contact.

So where United incorrectly given a penalty against Forest, or correctly saved from one against Arsenal? can't have it both ways

Antony back checks a lot more than Sancho. He's at least putting in the effort. Sancho? Well it tends to be more like in those clips. Hatterson posted about his lack of effort last season already.

I can't comment on the Rashford one since I missed all the replays due to being at the toilet at the time it happened, and barely got out in time to see Bruno scoring.

 

[hatterson]

Maybe I just haven't seen many instances of the on-field ref going to the monitor to compare this one to, but it felt overly quick to me. Just seemed to me like he barely even watched the play before deciding to overturn his own call. I get that he's getting help from communication with the VAR ref as well, but if the goal is to not slow down the game even more, then why not just empower VAR to overturn the call?

The goal is to have the final decision in all matters that are judgement calls still sit with the on field ref, therefore he's sent to the monitor to make the call.

In matters that don't involve subjective judgement (e.g. was the player in an offside position prior to playing the ball?) the referee isn't sent to the monitor because there's absolutely nothing to interpret. In the Garnacho offside goal there's no decision for Taylor to make, it's a matter of objective fact (based on how the lines are drawn, and the offside rules) that Garnacho is considered offside.

However, in cases where there's judgement involved in an offside (e.g. was an offside player interfering with play?) the official would be sent to the monitor to confirm. An example of this could have been the Ake goal against Fulham where Akanji was in an offside position. The objective part of the review is "was Akanji in an offside position?" The answer to that is trivially yes, don't even need lines for that. The subjective part of the call is "Did Ajanji interfere in play while in an offside position?" VAR determined at the time it wasn't a clear and obvious error to say he didn't, although PGMOL now admits that was wrong (as does virtually everyone who has seen it). However in the case they had determined he was interfering with play, because that is a subjective decision, they would have sent the referee to the monitor to make the actual call. They'd show him the angles that most support Akanji interfering with the keeper (line of sight) they have but ultimately let him make the decision.

 

[KJS14]

I don’t see the issue? VAR thought it was the wrong call, pulled up the best angle of the foul for the ref and made his decision. That’s exactly how VAR should be used.

The goal is to have the final decision in all matters that are judgement calls still sit with the on field ref, therefore he's sent to the monitor to make the call.

In matters that don't involve subjective judgement (e.g. was the player in an offside position prior to playing the ball?) the referee isn't sent to the monitor because there's absolutely nothing to interpret. In the Garnacho offside goal there's no decision for Taylor to make, it's a matter of objective fact (based on how the lines are drawn, and the offside rules) that Garnacho is considered offside.

However, in cases where there's judgement involved in an offside (e.g. was an offside player interfering with play?) the official would be sent to the monitor to confirm. An example of this could have been the Ake goal against Fulham where Akanji was in an offside position. The objective part of the review is "was Akanji in an offside position?" The answer to that is trivially yes, don't even need lines for that. The subjective part of the call is "Did Ajanji interfere in play while in an offside position?" VAR determined at the time it wasn't a clear and obvious error to say he didn't, although PGMOL now admits that was wrong (as does virtually everyone who has seen it). However in the case they had determined he was interfering with play, because that is a subjective decision, they would have sent the referee to the monitor to make the actual call. They'd show him the angles that most support Akanji interfering with the keeper (line of sight) they have but ultimately let him make the decision.

To be clear - I don't have an issue with the call that was made to overturn the penalty decision. I was more just caught off guard that the on-field ref looked at the single replay very quickly.

I appreciate the extra color on the VAR standards. It seems like they are trying to strike some balance between sending the on-field ref to the monitor for these judgement calls to get the call right, but also not having him spend too much time relitigating the call from tons of replays and stopping play for longer. My personal preference would be that the on-field ref spends more time at the monitor to ensure they get the call right, so the brevity of this one surprised me even though I don't disagree with the call.