[Albion] The injustice against Liverpool

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

I agree. Many are writing Liverpool's complaint off as scousers always moaning but then why hasn't PBOBE made more fuss?
Why didn't he put in an official complaint after our 5 (FIVE) written letters of apology last season?

Grin and bear it? That's football? Ok, then nothing changes and the incompetent officials carry on getting paid money for old rope.

Monday morning PGMOL meeting

Howard: "Morning all"
Class: "Goooodd moooorning Mr Webb"
H: "So. How did the weekend go? All good?"
C: (In unison) " yeah. Yeah good"
H:"Great. So onto this week's fixt..."
C: "Boss. I have something to raise. You know that little mistake we made in the spurs game?"
H: "Yes. Human error. I see no reason why we need to discuss it or even consider changing protocol. No one noticed or cares and we are all delighted with how it went"
C: "Well....ummm...I don't know how to say this.....Liverpool have said they are not happy about it in a statement"
H: "My god."

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Because he's a professional and there's official channels to make those kind of complaints

Which do nothing. Liverpool asking for the audio is a start.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

In related news, Liverpool have now appealed Curtis Jones' red card from Saturday's game. It's a little unfortunate, because there wasn't huge intent, and his foot did slide over the ball - but unlucky mate - its is the dictionary definition of 'endangering an opponent' and is a clear red card all day long.

I guess they think an appeal might be successful, if the authorities feel like throwing them a bone, to appease them over the offside debacle.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

Which do nothing. Liverpool asking for the audio is a start.

"is a start" of what? fixing the times officials say "check complete" not realising the original decision was wrong?

The mistake which happened to Liverpool is the first one we have seen of that type. If this was the 2nd or 3rd time of the same type of error then Liverpool's intervention could be described as a different tactic to fix a problem....but it's not. It's the first time.

Liverpool asking for the audio probably won't fix handball decisions and red card decisions which is where all the previous VAR aggrievances come from.

There is literally a programme on TV now where Howard Webb reviews the audio of VAR decisions (including the one they get wrong) and says what they need to do differently.

Please don't respond with "Well It's changed nothing has it"

 

[Seagull58]

But what does "deliberate corruption" mean? Do you seriously think all those VAR guys sitting in that room are conspiring together with… with who? Daniel Levy? Conte? A shady betting syndicate? How much will all those officials have to be paid to compensate them for the risk of being detected, having their careers ending in disgrace and probably ending up in prison? It’s preposterous. The explanation is incompetence. Anyone who suspects corruption has to offer a theory on how it all works.

Shady betting syndicate is my guess, as has happened in cricket on a number of occasions, as well as in other football leagues. It's more effective to buy corrupt officials than to buy corrupt players. It happened in Italy and is alleged to have been happening for 20 years in Spain.

 

[Official Old Man]

In related news, Liverpool have now appealed Curtis Jones' red card from Saturday's game. It's a little unfortunate, because there wasn't huge intent, and his foot did slide over the ball - but unlucky mate - its is the dictionary definition of 'endangering an opponent' and is a clear red card all day long.

I guess they think an appeal might be successful, if the authorities feel like throwing them a bone, to appease them over the offside debacle.

If this wasn't football and it went to court, the defending lawyers would have a field day saying how VAR 'left the image of a bent ankle' up on the screen as the ref walked towards it. This alone probably changed his mind.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

"is a start" of what? fixing the times officials say "check complete" not realising the original decision was wrong?

The mistake which happened to Liverpool is the first one we have seen of that type. If this was the 2nd or 3rd time of the same type of error then Liverpool's intervention could be described as a different tactic to fix a problem....but it's not. It's the first time.

Liverpool asking for the audio probably won't fix handball decisions and red card decisions which is where all the previous VAR aggrievances come from.

There is literally a programme on TV now where Howard Webb reviews the audio of VAR decisions (including the one they get wrong) and says what they need to do differently.

Please don't respond with "Well It's changed nothing has it"

Asking for the audio is to ascertain that the two sets of officials were talking at crossed purposes. It's called proof.

 

[Seagull58]

@Iggle Piggle
I’m not going to defend the Saudis but tell me how trying to bribe a ref is possible under VAR? And of course if the ref reported the attempted bribe (as I’m certain they would), that would be the end of the Saudis' foray into football ownership, and would have serious repercussions for their sportswashing policy in general. Why would they do it? Why not just spend their money on good players and coaches?

In pre-VAR days, I can understand how a corrupt ref could make one-off 'bad decisions' because he was totally unaccountable once the moment had passed. If you’re going to be corrupt you need to operate alone. VAR no longer allows you to do that. Once you start trying to build a network of corruption you're signing your own arrest warrant. I don’t believe it happens.

But it's already happened in Italy and Spain. Starlizard has an integrity division that works with La Liga and some other leagues to identify dodgy match betting patterns that could indicate match fixing. Barcelona are currently accused of bribing officials for 20 years.

 

[Seagull58]

I disagree that our experiences at Spurs were 'nothing like as bad'. This Liverpool one CAN ultimately be put down to a terrible failing in communications - something that a tightening of their procedures / script ought to prevent from happening again (and I have no issue with them asking for the audio to be released).

Our experience on the other hand, as I described in an earlier reply to you - with the two subjective handball calls - was definitely more difficult to accept than a simple bad mistake. The VAR that day actively chose how and when they applied their supposed procedures - one in complete contrast to the other -and both to the detriment to the same side.

The Spurs match, even more than the offside error in the Palace match, was the point where I began to think this may well be corruption rather than incompetence. 4 (or 5) incorrect decisions all in favour of 1 team in 1 match requires a very special level of incompetence.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

If this wasn't football and it went to court, the defending lawyers would have a field day saying how VAR 'left the image of a bent ankle' up on the screen as the ref walked towards it. This alone probably changed his mind.

I've seen this 'still image' thing repeatedly, and I don't understand that argument at all. It is a picture of Bissouma's ankle bent double, with Jones' studs flying into the side of it, a foot off the ground.

That still image EXISTS because Jones' studs DID in fact fly into Bissouma's ankle, a foot off the ground.

The image might (in the eyes of Liverpool fans) lack context, but it is not misleading. That IS the result of Jones' challenge - and it very clearly 'endangered' his opponent.

 

[jamie-oh]

If this wasn't football and it went to court, the defending lawyers would have a field day saying how VAR 'left the image of a bent ankle' up on the screen as the ref walked towards it. This alone probably changed his mind.

It was an image of the foul, though.
I really don't entirely compute the whole 'they slowed it down and made it look worse!' argument - Jones's foot isn't controlled, it goes over the ball, and into the middle of Biss' shin and if his foot was planted he'd be proper knacked. Reckless. Play it at full speed, play it slowed down, take individual screen images, they all show a red card decision.

edit: yeah, i've just said exactly what him above has said

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

Asking for the audio is to ascertain that the two sets of officials were talking at crossed purposes. It's called proof.

riiiiigghhhhht.

But we all know that's what happened already and the audio is obviously going to be reviewed by the PGMOL as part of their process to improve.

Liverpool asking for it is doing what?

"AH HA!!!! WE KNEW IT!!!! YOU MADE A MISTAKE!!! WE HAVE THE PROOF!!!!"
"Yeah, We know. It's what we said"
"well.....you need to fix it!
"We know. It's what we said"
"well....do it then"
"Ok. thanks Liverpool"

 

[Official Old Man]

It was an image of the foul, though.
I really don't entirely compute the whole 'they slowed it down and made it look worse!' argument - Jones's foot isn't controlled, it goes over the ball, and into the middle of Biss' shin and if his foot was planted he'd be proper knacked. Reckless. Play it at full speed, play it slowed down, take individual screen images, they all show a red card decision.

edit: yeah, i've just said exactly what him above has said

Someone standing with a knife in their hand and a body on the floor, guilty or not? That's the argument. The fact that the screen showed the bent ankle must have been an influence on the ref as he walked up to the screen. Had the screen been blank and just shown the foul, either normal or slow, the ref would have a blank mind to start with. Yes, I expect he would have changed it to red but that isn't the point. VAR was, purposefully or not, influencing the ref.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Someone standing with a knife in their hand and a body on the floor, guilty or not? That's the argument. The fact that the screen showed the bent ankle must have been an influence on the ref as he walked up to the screen. Had the screen been blank and just shown the foul, either normal or slow, the ref would have a blank mind to start with. Yes, I expect he would have changed it to red but that isn't the point. VAR was, purposefully or not, influencing the ref.

But this still image isn't of a 'man with a knife in their hand, next to a body on the floor'. It is a 'man with a knife pictured plunging it into the chest of the other man'.

The other part is a weird take too. By very definition they are looking to 'influence the ref'. If they were NOT trying to influence the ref to consider changing his mind, they wouldn't have intervened at all

 

[Colonel Mustard]

Shady betting syndicate is my guess, as has happened in cricket on a number of occasions, as well as in other football leagues. It's more effective to buy corrupt officials than to buy corrupt players. It happened in Italy and is alleged to have been happening for 20 years in Spain.

But it's already happened in Italy and Spain. Starlizard has an integrity division that works with La Liga and some other leagues to identify dodgy match betting patterns that could indicate match fixing. Barcelona are currently accused of bribing officials for 20 years.

Match fixing involving UK footballers has been alleged on more than one occasion over the decades, and there was a scandal in the early 1960s in which some players were actually imprisoned and banned. Hence the strict rules about players betting on matches. Barcelona have been charged with working with a corrupt referee over a number of years, yes. Pre-VAR of course. If he's working on his own, he has a chance of getting away with it. But with VAR? No, IMO.

Let's stick with the subject in hand -- EPL and VAR.

Just talk me through how a conspiracy might work with a group of several people. Remember, any bribery conspiracy would have to include the on-field referee and officials (because they are all wired up), the 3 VAR officials and the team of TV techs who supply the pictures. So a minimum of around 10 people. I'm not asking for evidence here because we both know there is none. So let's be hypothetical. Just give me a scenario where this team of officials and backroom staff are in cahoots with a betting syndicate. How would that work when the personnel involved change every week? In your opinion, how much will each get paid to put at risk not just all their careers, but also leave them open to prosecution and very likely prison? Not only that, but the EPL itself would be destroyed so factor that in too. How much? £5m per person? £10m? Who would pay sums like this to stop the officials and VAR team to prevent Mitoma being given a penalty? If they're already paying millions in bribes, how much would the syndicate actually have to wager on that penalty not being given? Do you think this might arouse suspicions in the automated betting industry monitoring that goes on? In fact, what sort of bet might be made? That Brighton don't get a penalty in the game? Are bets like that offered? And how could the syndicate and officials be certain that a real 100% stonewall penalty for a handball on the goal line wouldn't occur? Or a terrible red card offence in the box? How could the conspirators fail to give that penalty without giving themselves away?

I'm not trying to trick you. I'm just genuinely interested in seeing some sort of plausible scenario that would enable a VAR conspiracy to take place at enormous risk to all those involved.

I'm just putting out another possibility that seems more likely to me: that instead of a big conspiracy, the VAR systems, technology and procedures are imperfect, and that the people operating and managing VAR are also imperfect. In fact, probably the wrong people, full stop, as has been discussed.

Over to you.

 

[Official Old Man]

But this still image isn't of a 'man with a knife in their hand, next to a body on the floor'. It is a 'man with a knife pictured plunging it into the chest of the other man'.

The other part is a weird take too. By very definition they are looking to 'influence the ref'. If they were NOT trying to influence the ref to consider changing his mind, they wouldn't have intervened at all

Agree with first part.
And you're right, the fact that they told him to take a second look already means the ref has gone from guilty of a foul to maybe 75% guilty of a red card without looking at the screen.

 

[pasty]

 

[Mellotron]

So we already have a situation where there is no point in celebrating a goal until play resumes and now it is being suggested that we wait a further 30 seconds after play has restarted.

Not quite the same. This is only for situations like the Diaz goal where it is plainly obvious to everyone in the stadium that the error has occurred.

This would happen once or twice a season across the whole league you’d think.

 

[m20gull]

Not quite the same. This is only for situations like the Diaz goal where it is plainly obvious to everyone in the stadium that the error has occurred.

This would happen once or twice a season across the whole league you’d think.

One would hope so but that doubt would always be there. All that's needed is a tighter protocol about what is being checked. Something like the ref saying "decision: offside. Please check."

 

[dazzer6666]

One would hope so but that doubt would always be there. All that's needed is a tighter protocol about what is being checked. Something like the ref saying "decision: offside. Please check."

Exactly this - and exactly what rugby does. Precise language has to be used to avoid any doubt about what is being reviewed and why.