[Football] VAR gives Grimsby a red card

[Kalimantan Gull]

But from what happened yesterday you've come to the conclusion that they are operating the system differently to the world cup. The ref has accepted what the VAR has advised him and changed his decision based on that.

Well obviously, because it was obviously being used different to the world cup. Sorry I didn't think this was a debatable point? In the World Cup the on-field ref checked 100% of VAR calls. Yesterday the on-field ref checked 0% of VAR calls

 

[drew]

Well obviously, because it was obviously being used different to the world cup. Sorry I didn't think this was a debatable point? In the World Cup the on-field ref checked 100% of VAR calls. Yesterday the on-field ref checked 0% of VAR calls

You're wrong, not all decisions in the world cup were reviewed by the referee on a monitor, that's just your perception. In the group stages there were 17 reviews of which 14 were reviewed by the ref on a monitor and therefore 3 weren't. At that time more might have been reviewed as weren't refs used to the system and possible not so much faith in the decisions of the VARs.

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/new...idents-in-world-cup-group-stage-fifa-10484566

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

You're wrong, not all decisions in the world cup were reviewed by the referee on a monitor, that's just your perception. In the group stages there were 17 reviews of which 14 were reviewed by the ref on a monitor and therefore 3 weren't. At that time more might have been reviewed as weren't refs used to the system and possible not so much faith in the decisions of the VARs.

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/new...idents-in-world-cup-group-stage-fifa-10484566

OK, thanks. 80% were checked then, 0% were checked yesterday. Regardless, the idea that VAR is just a recommendation to the ref to review the footage, which is what I was originally answering to, was clearly not how it was working yesterday.

 

[drew]

OK, thanks. 80% were checked then, 0% were checked yesterday. Regardless, the idea that VAR is just a recommendation to the ref to review the footage, which is what I was originally answering to, was clearly not how it was working yesterday.

No worries. Understand why you said what you said but I think it's now a case that the ref's are trusting the VAR more.

One of the things I think is being looked at is how the VARs cope with multiple games at the same time, ie the VARs are at a central location. In the world cup there was only ever a maximum of two games kicking off at the same time. On a PL saturday, they could have as many as 10. I would guess the answer will be to have more VARs reviewing the games.

 

[Triggaaar]

Not sure I like VAR making judgement calls.

No, this is a worry. I don't like the handing of control to some people out of sight, I prefer the way they used it in the WC, when the ref still ultimately had the final say.

 

[Triggaaar]

Is that not the whole point of VAR to rectify refs possible mistakes or misses. I believe that the VAR should be the final decision.

Not really as there will be very few VAR decisions reversed unless the ref is useless like The Complete And Utter Shyster. VAR has a better view of an incident from different angles and with no players in their line of sight.

But in the World Cup that view from different angles was then handed to the referee on field (via a TV near the 4th official), and the referee used it to make the decision.

It seems odd that the decision is now being taken by other people.

 

[Triggaaar]

That happened in the world cup too maybe you have a short memory for that, but the ultimate ending decision is with the referee.

I think I remember VAR in the WC well, but I don't ever remember a decision being changed following VAR where the ref didn't see the footage himself.

EDIT - just caught up with other posts, and see that they reviewed 14 out of 17 decisions.

 

[Triggaaar]

No worries. Understand why you said what you said but I think it's now a case that the ref's are trusting the VAR more.

Do we know the on-field refs at yesterday's games were all able to check the footage if they wished, or is that a guess?

 

[Saunders]

In the World Cup, every single time the VAR ref suggested a decision should be changed, the referee went to the screen at the side of the pitch, reviewed the footage and made his own decision. Even when it was a three-yard offside or blatant handball.

Yesterday, every single time the VAR ref intervened he made the decision while the on-field ref waited for it to be made. At United the ref waited on the pitch for 2 or 3 minutes, reviewing no footage before the VAR ref told him it was a pen. At Palace the VAR ref told the on-field ref to upgrade the yellow card to a red, which he did without question. At Burnley the ref stopped the penalty-taker in his run-up when the call came in.

Definitely different situations at play.

Its still the referees choice he can review it himself or not. There is a screen there for him to do so. Not every decision was at the world cup and I can understand that these referees all know each other (the VAR team and on pitch) and they are more likely to trust each others decisions compared to the world cup when they were different nationalies and the first time most had used it.

 

[drew]

Do we know the on-field refs at yesterday's games were all able to check the footage if they wished, or is that a guess?

I don't know for sure but I'm guessing that at the 9 games selected for VAR there had to be access to a monitor otherwise the system cannot work. Whether that was pitch side or just down the tunnel is irrelevant. It might not be as obvious as the ones in the world cup.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

Its still the referees choice he can review it himself or not. There is a screen there for him to do so. Not every decision was at the world cup and I can understand that these referees all know each other (the VAR team and on pitch) and they are more likely to trust each others decisions compared to the world cup when they were different nationalies and the first time most had used it.

I don't know for sure but I'm guessing that at the 9 games selected for VAR there had to be access to a monitor otherwise the system cannot work. Whether that was pitch side or just down the tunnel is irrelevant. It might not be as obvious as the ones in the world cup.

If they're not going to check the footage for the Grimsby red card or the Man Utd penalty, I don't think they're ever going to check it.

Its a fair point that they know the other refs so likely to trust them

 

[drew]

If they're not going to check the footage for the Grimsby red card or the Man Utd penalty, I don't think they're ever going to check it.

Its a fair point that they know the other refs so likely to trust them

Wouldn't necessarily disagree about the ref reviewing them, particularly the Man Utd one where there was a suggestion that Lukaku was offside and impeding the defender before the trip on Mata but I guess that is down to the communication between the two?

 

[father_and_son]

As a Grimsby fan I was at Selhurst yesterday and was intrigued how VAR would play out ‘in the flesh’. The whole thing was quite odd; the ref gave a yellow which at first glance looked about the right decision before 20 seconds later doing that little box signal with his hands and produced a red card. No review on the TV monitor as I was expecting as per the World Cup - it was all very sudden and unexpected.

By all accounts it seems to have been the correct decision; it was a bad challenge. However what I don’t like about VAR is that it is a very black and white system and discounts context and takes discretion away from the referee. The offence happened 90 seconds into the game and you’ve got a League Two team playing away at a Premier League side - with 6,000 Town fans sat watching proudly in the Arthur Wait stand. There are going to be nerves and adrenalin flowing.

Should any of that matter? Should a bad challenge be a red card regardless of how and when it occurs? Maybe it should, and maybe I’d feel differently if the decision was the other way round, but yesterday it spoiled an already tricky tie by turning it into the Alamo.

For what it’s worth, Palace were poor. Yes, if you look at the stats they had 30 odd shots and about 80% possession but what looked like a fairly strong line up failed to ooze the class you normally see from a top flight side when you have the rare opportunity to see one in person. I was quite looking forward to seeing Zaha play but my goodness he was gash - completely outdone by a central midfielder playing at right back (following Fox’s sending off, we didn’t have a single player in our back three or four playing in his natural position due to injuries / suspension).

A foul is always a foul no matter when or who.

Not giving a penalty because one has already been given... Wrong. Not giving a penalty because 2nd minute... Wrong. Not giving penalty because it's a big club... Wrong.

Fairness means treating every incident equally and impartially.

Wanted the scum to lose, but better when there is no one to blame but themselves!

 

[Quinney]

Not sure how Fulham got a penalty via VAR for that.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Arkwright]

I like VAR, in general it is fair but still down to human interpretation of the rules.

With reference to the FA Cup I think it's wrong to only have VAR at selected games (I think it was only nine games)this has given an unfair advantage / disadvantage to a few clubs. The yellow card at Palace turned into a red, while the final decision was correct if played at Grimsby would have remained with the original yellow card.

To me it's got to be all of nothing with all games played under the same conditions.

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

Not sure how Fulham got a penalty via VAR for that.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

That is just incredible. All officials need some serious training especially the VAR officials, think they must have been watching some other channel.

 

[drew]

I like VAR, in general it is fair but still down to human interpretation of the rules.

With reference to the FA Cup I think it's wrong to only have VAR at selected games (I think it was only nine games)this has given an unfair advantage / disadvantage to a few clubs. The yellow card at Palace turned into a red, while the final decision was correct if played at Grimsby would have remained with the original yellow card.

To me it's got to be all of nothing with all games played under the same conditions.

Trouble is that will never work with a competition like the FA Cup because in the 3rd round there are 32 matches and and there would need to be numerous camera positions at each match (in fact they would need the same amount of cameras at each match to make it the level playing field you suggest). Great in an ideal world but we don't live in an ideal world!

There's lots of things in football that aren't the same for everyone ranging from pitch conditions, quality of floodlights etc etc. I have for a long time been against VAR (although always supported introduction of GLT) but the World Cup changed my mind. As I see it, as long as the conditions are the same for the two teams on that pitch then that's fine.

 

[rippleman]

It is inconsistent, which doesn't seem right. If the game had been at Grimsby, it would have been a yellow as there is no VAR there. All games or no games, surely?

This is a major bugbear of mine. Either use VAR in ALL games...or in none.

The FA Cup is hardly the best competition to trial VAR given that so many lower league sides are involved which don't have the facilities or the money to install VAR.

 

[SAC]

Trouble is that will never work with a competition like the FA Cup because in the 3rd round there are 32 matches and and there would need to be numerous camera positions at each match (in fact they would need the same amount of cameras at each match to make it the level playing field you suggest). Great in an ideal world but we don't live in an ideal world!

There's lots of things in football that aren't the same for everyone ranging from pitch conditions, quality of floodlights etc etc. I have for a long time been against VAR (although always supported introduction of GLT) but the World Cup changed my mind. As I see it, as long as the conditions are the same for the two teams on that pitch then that's fine.

This is my view too. I don't get the fair/unfair argument as it is exactly the same for both teams. The Grimsby fan is upset with the ref and or VAR but should be upset with the player going in with a studs up challenge.

Even with VAR there will be people disagreeing with the decision, that it just the nature of the game. If it ends managers stating that "he's not that kind of player" (as if they would ever admit that they were) then it gets my vote, if I were to be given one.

 

[SAC]

This is a major bugbear of mine. Either use VAR in ALL games...or in none.

The FA Cup is hardly the best competition to trial VAR given that so many lower league sides are involved which don't have the facilities or the money to install VAR.

I think goal line technology is only used in the PL as it is too expensive for other divisions. Do you think it should be turned off (It may be, for all I know) for the FA Cup so that it is the same for all matches?