Extra Time on Extra Time Hating Bastards v Exhibition Building Loving, Shandy Drinking Fannies

[OTF 7214]

Great ball Isak and a good shot from Willock

[wykikitoon 19807]

Quote

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.

At the next stoppage of the match, the referee will hold up the restart of play until a decision has been reached.

The referee explains their decision to the VAR, and what they have seen from the pitch.

The VAR reviews the broadcast footage, using as many angles as possible. Real-time replays will be used initially to check for intensity. Slow-motion replays will be used to identify the point of contact.

If the VAR’s view does not agree with what the referee believes they have seen then they can recommend an overturn.

https://www.premierleague.com/news/1293321#:~:text=The VAR reviews the broadcast,they can recommend an overturn.

 

 

[Howay 12496]

The review is correct and fine, but when he sends it to the ref to watch on the sideline he’s implying the referees decision is probably incorrect so is advising the ref to take another look. I really can’t remember many times (if any) where the ref watched the sideline monitor and didn’t change his decision. 

[Ayatollah Hermione 13762]

2 minutes ago, Craig said:

 

 

Clear that many of you don't understand how VAR works. Goal scored whilst GK is taken out = automatic review. Good day to you all

 I’m still not sure you’re getting the argument 

[wykikitoon 19807]

So by that, ref has said no goal and mason EVEN with technology agrees with him. Ergo BOTH have fucked us.

[Craig 6670]

Just now, Howay said:

The review is correct and fine, but when he sends it to the ref to watch on the sideline he’s implying the referees decision is probably incorrect so is advising the ref to take another look. I really can’t remember many times (if any) where the ref watched the sideline monitor and didn’t change his decision. 

 

Since the first season of VAR when it was an absolute joke, the decision overturn a goal has always been at the behest of the on-field referee. 

[ewerk 30167]

1 minute ago, Craig said:

 

Since the first season of VAR when it was an absolute joke, the decision overturn a goal has always been at the behest of the on-field referee. 

You said good day, sir.

[sammynb 3342]

8 minutes ago, Craig said:

 

Actually Sammy, it's you who is completely wrong and clearly don't understand how VAR operates. Goals scored with any element of doubt over its validity is, under current guidelines,  always passed to the on-field referee for final review. Same happened at Wolves where their goal was chalked off. 

 

 

Mate, happy to be wrong but please show us where you got your interpretation from because from the PL website is states.

Quote

When will VAR be used in Premier League matches? 

The VAR is constantly monitoring the match.

VAR is used only for "clear and obvious errors" or "serious missed incidents" in four match-changing situations: goals; penalty decisions; direct red-card incidents; and mistaken identity.

But factual decisions such as offsides, and the issue of whether a player is inside or outside the penalty area, are not subject to the "clear and obvious" test. 

If the VAR sees an error has been made in such a situation they will intervene, regardless of how marginal the decision is.

There is a high bar for the VARs to intervene on subjective decisions, to maintain the pace and intensity of matches.

https://www.premierleague.com/news/1293321

 

Nothing was missed, Lee Mason called him over to review, when he had the power to say, nothing to see here.

There is nothing in the above about the on-field referee being required to review a decision. He'd blown for a goal, decision had been made.

Edited September 3, 2022 by sammynb

[Craig 6670]

Just now, wykikitoon said:

So by that, ref has said no goal and mason EVEN with technology agrees with him. Ergo BOTH have fucked us.

 

FFS Wykiki .... Mason doesn't make the decision. He's operating within guidelines, he has no jurisdiction to award or deny the goal, all he can do is suggest the on-field official reviews the monitor. The goalkeeper was taken out so the monitor review is a slam-dunk. It's the bloke watching the monitor that's fucked up. Mason has done what he's instructed to do.

[Craig 6670]

1 minute ago, ewerk said:

You said good day, sir.

 

Yep, and you let kept on coming....

[ewerk 30167]

2 minutes ago, Craig said:

 

Since the first season of VAR when it was an absolute joke, the decision overturn a goal has always been at the behest of the on-field referee. 

WHO SHOWS HIM THE ANGLES CRAIG?!??

[Howay 12496]

Just now, Craig said:

 

Since the first season of VAR when it was an absolute joke, the decision overturn a goal has always been at the behest of the on-field referee. 

That’s not what anyone is arguing though is it? The initial decision was correct, it was reviewed by VAR which is fine but then the VAR official wrongly decided the on pitch decision was wrong and advised the ref to take another look - that’s the bit people are complaining about the VAR official shouldn’t have interjected there and advised another look he should have accepted the initial decision. Of course the on field ref makes a decision but at the same time I’ve never seen a ref go to the monitor and not overturn his initia decision.  

[wykikitoon 19807]

Waht's Mason doing then?  Isn't he the VAr therfefore should be watching the monitor? 

[Craig 6670]

Personally lads, I just want to watch the rest of the match.

[Craig 6670]

Just now, wykikitoon said:

Waht's Mason doing then?  Isn't he the VAr therfefore should be watching the monitor? 

 

FFS, proof indeed you cannot educate pork.

[wykikitoon 19807]

Oh it went to the monitor?  I didn't see that  

[wykikitoon 19807]

Just now, Craig said:

 

FFS, proof indeed you cannot educate pork.

My masters says otherwise 

[Howay 12496]

Mason hasn’t done what he’s meant to do. He only should advise the ref to take another look if there was a clear and obvious error. The initial VAR review is perfectly fine, people are taking issue with the fact he told the on field ref to review his initial decision

[Craig 6670]

Just now, Howay said:

Mason hasn’t done what he’s meant to do. He only should advise the ref to take another look if there was a clear and obvious error. The initial VAR review is perfectly fine, people are taking issue with the fact he told the on field ref to review his initial decision

 

Mason has done precisely what he is meant to do

[OTF 7214]

It's a fascinating argument deciding precisely how we've been fucked over, like it makes any difference. Whether the ref asked for it to be reviewed or whether the VAR suggested that the ref got it wrong and should have another look it doesn't matter. The VAR was in the best position to see that Willock was shoved and therefore had not fouled the keeper of his own volition so should have said nothing/informed the ref that the goal should stand.

[Howay 12496]

Poor by Willock 

[ewerk 30167]

Just now, Howay said:

Mason hasn’t done what he’s meant to do. He only should advise the ref to take another look if there was a clear and obvious error. The initial VAR review is perfectly fine, people are taking issue with the fact he told the on field ref to review his initial decision

It’s really not difficult to understand. Still, apparently you can’t educate pork…

[sammynb 3342]

Forgetting VAR, we're going to lose this. Palace shit me.

[Craig 6670]

Just now, OTF said:

It's a fascinating argument deciding precisely how we've been fucked over, like it makes any difference. 

Amen. I was just correcting one response and you lot decided to ambush. Been quite amusing

[ewerk 30167]

Tripps time!