I despair

[KernowCanary 214]

VAR always favours the big teams and I for one am sick of it. In Rugby it feels part of the game, but with football it’s a pain in the ar$e and a distraction.

[nutty nigel 7,513]

VAR is great for the TV audience. Adds to the drama.

[wcorkcanary 4,329]

29 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

VAR is great for the TV audience. Adds to the drama.

I disagree.  For me it spoils a game whether  I'm there or watching it on tv.  If match officials  are gonna make a mistake  I'd rather they did it in real time rather than take minutes  to do it.

[nutty nigel 7,513]

42 minutes ago, wcorkcanary said:

I disagree.  For me it spoils a game whether  I'm there or watching it on tv.  If match officials  are gonna make a mistake  I'd rather they did it in real time rather than take minutes  to do it.

Yes, good on you Corkio. But with TV football VAR seems to be the biggest talking point for analysis. But it's absolutely useless in the stadium.

[dylanisabaddog 4,876]

1 hour ago, wcorkcanary said:

I disagree.  For me it spoils a game whether  I'm there or watching it on tv.  If match officials  are gonna make a mistake  I'd rather they did it in real time rather than take minutes  to do it.

Quite agree. And in the long run it affects the quality of refereeing because they are using it as a safety blanket and not using it evenly. 

For example, they checked for a penalty for an incident involving Mane on Saturday. On watching from a different angle it was a quite blatant dive. So no penalty was given but why on earth not book Mane? They're probably following the guidance but the guidance is nonsense. 

My other issue is why on earth don't they put an ex player in with the TV ref? Someone like Huckerby or Holt would explain to them what was actually going on. 

[TheGunnShow 5,933]

The real problem with VAR is that it renders reform of the Laws of Football, and indeed as a result, grassroots refereeing, a different sport to what is played by the professionals. Trying to apply the current offside law as it now stands when referees are often without club assistants is pretty much a lottery, or the referee is considerably faster than the players under his/her control.

I really do think the latest round of changes to the offside rule were made thinking "oh, VAR will sort out the most minor cases", without realising that borderline offsides in Sunday league football can often cause quite a bit of irritation!

[dylanisabaddog 4,876]

1 hour ago, TheGunnShow said:

The real problem with VAR is that it renders reform of the Laws of Football, and indeed as a result, grassroots refereeing, a different sport to what is played by the professionals. Trying to apply the current offside law as it now stands when referees are often without club assistants is pretty much a lottery, or the referee is considerably faster than the players under his/her control.

I really do think the latest round of changes to the offside rule were made thinking "oh, VAR will sort out the most minor cases", without realising that borderline offsides in Sunday league football can often cause quite a bit of irritation!

At the end of a recent Mulbarton game I asked a ref politely why he hadn't sent an opposition player off for a last man rugby tackle. He replied that he had spoken to the linesman and both of them knew it was a red but they didn't know which player it was. Credit to the Mulbarton officials who just said "fair enough" and thanked him for being honest. 

I hate to say it but perhaps football should take a look at how things work in Rugby. The players are referred to by numbers not names and have to call the referee 'Sir'. There is a wonderful video on YouTube of a Welsh ref telling a player that his mum will be watching and will be very embarrassed. 

This may seem old school to some of you but I watched Man Utd players at Leeds yesterday and their behaviour was disgusting. Surrounding the ref and screaming at him led by their **** captain. It's a problem that is very easily solved. 

Rant over 

[TheGunnShow 5,933]

2 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

At the end of a recent Mulbarton game I asked a ref politely why he hadn't sent an opposition player off for a last man rugby tackle. He replied that he had spoken to the linesman and both of them knew it was a red but they didn't know which player it was. Credit to the Mulbarton officials who just said "fair enough" and thanked him for being honest. 

I hate to say it but perhaps football should take a look at how things work in Rugby. The players are referred to by numbers not names and have to call the referee 'Sir'. There is a wonderful video on YouTube of a Welsh ref telling a player that his mum will be watching and will be very embarrassed. 

This may seem old school to some of you but I watched Man Utd players at Leeds yesterday and their behaviour was disgusting. Surrounding the ref and screaming at him led by their **** captain. It's a problem that is very easily solved. 

Rant over 

I agree with some of this and fully agree with the last paragraph. However, as a matter of a very strong personal preference, I cannot disagree more with the bit in bold. That said, I mainly refereed juniors and always aimed to pick as many names or nicknames out as I could early on. Granted, it wasn't always possible, so if I had to call by number I'd always ask a first name before gentle explanation/admonishment/correction.

To some extent this is an element of refereeing how I liked to be refereed. Call me "number two", and I find it a bit depersonalising. Depersonalise me, and I'm more likely to act out. From my experience, few things are more calming when things get a little bit fraught than hearing your own name. Not saying it's a panacea by any means, but it should speak volumes that the likes of Pierluigi Collina always took pride in getting the names memorised.

Referees need far greater support when it comes to making the dissent calls. The last paragraph would be easier if refereeing authorities supported refs more who decided to go hard on the yellow card for dissent.

[canarybubbles 1,915]

IMO, refereeing can only get worse with VAR because it removes the responsibility from the man on the pitch. Yes, I know every referee would deny that and say that knowing a key decision might get taken out of their hands doesn't affect their attitude or performance, but I don't see how it cannot.

[dylanisabaddog 4,876]

1 hour ago, TheGunnShow said:

I agree with some of this and fully agree with the last paragraph. However, as a matter of a very strong personal preference, I cannot disagree more with the bit in bold. That said, I mainly refereed juniors and always aimed to pick as many names or nicknames out as I could early on. Granted, it wasn't always possible, so if I had to call by number I'd always ask a first name before gentle explanation/admonishment. 

During our first game back in the Premier League our players were shocked that the ref called the Liverpool players by their first names and our players by their numbers

[TheGunnShow 5,933]

28 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

During our first game back in the Premier League our players were shocked that the ref called the Liverpool players by their first names and our players by their numbers

That's precisely why you try to do it for both teams. And I'll reckon that's a key reason why Pierluigi Collina got the respect he did.

[dylanisabaddog 4,876]

10 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

That's precisely why you try to do it for both teams. And I'll reckon that's a key reason why Pierluigi Collina got the respect he did.

That's the reason you don't do it

[Jambomo 215]

28 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

That's precisely why you try to do it for both teams. And I'll reckon that's a key reason why Pierluigi Collina got the respect he did.

 

17 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

That's the reason you don't do it

I don’t think whether you call them by their name or not matters as much as choosing one option and doing it consistently across the games in the season.

Otherwise refs give the impression of being friendlier towards one team than the other, leading to being considered biased. They need to be talking to both sides in an equal manner.

 

Edited February 21, 2022 by Jambomo

[Mackrel829 21]

11 hours ago, Petriix said:

While this is all true, it doesn't make it any less stupid. VAR *should* be giving correct decisions on situations like this. While you wouldn't really want play being brought back for trivial things, in this situation the ball was out of play and waiting for VAR to restart. In such instances, it's really simple to change from a throw in to a freekick.

That's certainly something worth debating and a conversation that should probably take place over the summer. Until then, we can't be surprised when free kicks aren't awarded.

Even the guys on Canary Call (Chris Goreham or Rob Butler - I can never remember which one hosts and which one commentates) were asking why VAR didn't give a free kick and a yellow card. Has the league just done an awful job of explaining what VAR can and cannot be used for?

Edited February 21, 2022 by Mackrel829

[TheGunnShow 5,933]

2 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said:

That's the reason you don't do it

Disagree - with the caveat that if you use that approach, it's for both teams or not at all. Equality/fairness is the name of the game here. Using different communications for the two teams will shock the team getting the less familiar treatment and encourage the perception that the official is not impartial.

Collina's preparations were absolutely infamous. He'd famously even go as far as to find out if players were left or right-footed, or to see what tactics a manager and his team would do if they went a goal down. And it included picking up their names.