[Albion] VAR officials ruling out goals awarded on the field

[Bozza]

I'm happy to hold my hands up and confess that how I thought VAR interventions worked was wrong, so I'm hoping someone can clarify for me.

Before yesterday, my understanding was that VAR would only be able to rule out an awarded goal if there was an offside involved.

Before yesterday, my understanding was that if VAR saw any possible non-offside offence in the review of an awarded goal, they would send the on-field ref to the VAR monitor to review that possible offence themselves in order to determine whether the goal should still stand or not.

So, with the Mac Allister "goal", I'm surprised that if the goal was awarded on the field, the VAR official was able to rule out the goal without the on-field referee reviewing the (questionable) handball himself to come to the final decision.

So, I guess the question is: can VAR officials rule out any goal for any reason without the on-field referee being involved?

 

[Bodian]

I'm happy to hold my hands up and confess that how I thought VAR interventions worked was wrong, so I'm hoping someone can clarify for me.

Before yesterday, my understanding was that VAR would only be able to rule out an awarded goal if there was an offside involved.

Before yesterday, my understanding was that if VAR saw any possible non-offside offence in the review of an awarded goal, they would send the on-field ref to the VAR monitor to review that possible offence themselves in order to determine whether the goal should still stand or not.

So, with the Mac Allister "goal", I'm surprised that if the goal was awarded on the field, the VAR official was able to rule out the goal without the on-field referee reviewing the (questionable) handball himself to come to the final decision.

So, I guess the question is: can VAR officials rule out any goal for any reason without the on-field referee being involved?

My interpretation is that VAR can't directly overrule the on-field ref - it is the ref's decision that is final. But he can reach that decision with advice from the VAR ref.

So - if VAR yesterday said 'clearly hit MacAllisters hand' - then the ref would take that advice and change his decision.

The referring to the monitor thing is discretionary I guess.

And actually - since you've raised it on a different thread, I'm not now convinced that he actually awarded the goal - all the highlights show him putting his whistle to his mouth, but then he's out of shot immediately, so you can't see if he points to the centre of the pitch or not. So, I'm now actually wondering whether he asked VAR 'did it hit MacAllister's arm on the way through?' - and if they simply said 'yes' - he wouldn't have to look at it on the monitor.

 

[Springal]

The problem with the monitor is people say it slows the game down to much, to have VAR look at it, then send the ref to look at it.

 

[LamieRobertson]

The fact that this is up for debate says it all…..get shot and keep it simple

 

[brightn'ove]

It works like this:

1. Was the goal scored against a big 6 team?
2. Review every possible incident before the ball crosses the line that could be used to disallow the goal.
3. Disallow the goal.

 

[beorhthelm]

according to Premier League:

How does it work?​

For subjective decisions, either the referee informs the VAR that a decision should be reviewed or the VAR identifies a “clear and obvious error” in one of the four match-changing situations and communicates this to the referee.
...
If the VAR’s view does not agree with what the referee believes they have seen then they can recommend an overturn.

simple, VAR monitors for clear and obvious errors, the decision remains with the referee.

trouble with VAR is being used to find errors, then not being called upon by the ref to check when they should. as spectators we get the worst of both worlds, and thats before the "objective" use for forensic offside checks. its not that the tech is not fit for purpose, they consistently dont follow their own guidance.

 

[ac gull]

If only we had someone on the staff who can send them a 35,000 word private analysis of what's wrong with and why

 

[Stato]

The rules are interpreted to mean that whatever PGMOL did was right. They make the interpretation up to fit the situation. Yesterday proves this. Mitoma' s goal was ruled out by the referee. VAR checked, couldn't be clear that was wrong, so stuck with that. Welbeck's goal, given by the ref, checked by VAR, no picture confirms definitely that it hit Ali Mac's arm, not hip, so couldn't be certain that was wrong, but did the opposite and ruled it out. Both can't be right, but they'll say they are.

 

[jcdenton08]

Of course the whole elephant in the room is why is it all so secretive. In other sports we hear the discussion. Why can’t football do this?

The only possible reason I can come up with is because of swearing. In which case broadcast the audio with a standard few seconds delay like everyone else does.

 

[Acker79]

I'm happy to hold my hands up and confess that how I thought VAR interventions worked was wrong, so I'm hoping someone can clarify for me.

Before yesterday, my understanding was that VAR would only be able to rule out an awarded goal if there was an offside involved.

Before yesterday, my understanding was that if VAR saw any possible non-offside offence in the review of an awarded goal, they would send the on-field ref to the VAR monitor to review that possible offence themselves in order to determine whether the goal should still stand or not.

So, with the Mac Allister "goal", I'm surprised that if the goal was awarded on the field, the VAR official was able to rule out the goal without the on-field referee reviewing the (questionable) handball himself to come to the final decision.

So, I guess the question is: can VAR officials rule out any goal for any reason without the on-field referee being involved?

VAR can only make the call on objective decisions, where there is no interpretation needed, like whether someone is onside or offside, if the foul is inside the box or outside. If a law says 'in the opinion of the referee' then the referee has to view the footage.

For goalscorers, the handball law doesn't have any subjectivity to it. The law is that any contact between the ball and the arm by the goalscorer means the goal cannot stand, so no need to look at the screen.

If a handball is by a teammate in the build up to the goal, the ref would need to go to the screen because he needs to judge intent, natural arm position, etc. But none of that matters when the goalscorer's arm/hand makes contact with the ball.

 

[AmexRuislip]

The fact that this is up for debate says it all…..get shot and keep it simple

Sorry you lost me after you said the.......
I was too mesmerised, watching Kane go down, like he'd been kneecapped para military style.

Mmmmmmmmmmmm......

 

[Bold Seagull]

VAR can only make the call on objective decisions, where there is no interpretation needed, like whether someone is onside or offside, if the foul is inside the box or outside. If a law says 'in the opinion of the referee' then the referee has to view the footage.

For goalscorers, the handball law doesn't have any subjectivity to it. The law is that any contact between the ball and the arm by the goalscorer means the goal cannot stand, so no need to look at the screen.

If a handball is by a teammate in the build up to the goal, the ref would need to go to the screen because he needs to judge intent, natural arm position, etc. But none of that matters when the goalscorer's arm/hand makes contact with the ball.

This is how I understood it - handball for the attacking team leading to a goal is goal disallowed without needing the ref to review it - hence Welbeck’s gaol was disallowed while being given on field.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Sorry you lost me after you said the.......
I was too mesmerised, watching Kane go down, like he'd been kneecapped para military style.

Mmmmmmmmmmmm......

King Cheat - his only major trophy.

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

This is how I understood it - handball for the attacking team leading to a goal is goal disallowed without needing the ref to review it - hence Welbeck’s gaol was disallowed while being given on field.

Indeed yet there is not one angle that confirmed it did

 

[Bodian]

This is how I understood it - handball for the attacking team leading to a goal is goal disallowed without needing the ref to review it - hence Welbeck’s gaol was disallowed while being given on field.

And presumably we'll have to refer to it as MacAllister's 'goal' - because if it was credited to Welbeck - then MacAllister wasn't the scorer and so it wasn't handball by the scorer. Which is the only reason to overturn it!

 

[KZNSeagull]

This is how I understood it - handball for the attacking team leading to a goal is goal disallowed without needing the ref to review it - hence Welbeck’s gaol was disallowed while being given on field.

Which is fine except we have yet to see the ball conclusively hitting Ali Mac's hand. If they can show us that then we can accept it.

 

[Bozza]

VAR can only make the call on objective decisions, where there is no interpretation needed, like whether someone is onside or offside, if the foul is inside the box or outside. If a law says 'in the opinion of the referee' then the referee has to view the footage.

For goalscorers, the handball law doesn't have any subjectivity to it. The law is that any contact between the ball and the arm by the goalscorer means the goal cannot stand, so no need to look at the screen.

If a handball is by a teammate in the build up to the goal, the ref would need to go to the screen because he needs to judge intent, natural arm position, etc. But none of that matters when the goalscorer's arm/hand makes contact with the ball.

Thanks - every day is a school day.

So I guess we come back to there being nothing I've seen that definitively illustrates the ball hitting Mac Allister's arm.

 

[beorhthelm]

And presumably we'll have to refer to it as MacAllister's 'goal' - because if it was credited to Welbeck - then MacAllister wasn't the scorer and so it wasn't handball by the scorer. Which is the only reason to overturn it!

exactly.

 

[sparkie]

I think VAR should only be used to correct absolute howlers by the ref.

It really should hardly ever be used.