VAR?

[The Master]

2 hours ago, Busta Nut said:

 

Aren't they told to let the play run? it's not that they are shirking out of it, it's more they can let the game flow and then checks go on when needed. They won't be marked down for it either as this is how it is to be used. 

They can let the play run then make a decision.

So, say they think there was a foul during an attacking phase of play. They can let it run to its conclusion, then pull things back. In principle, it should be the same as delaying an offside flag.

Mind you, it's not something I've seen very often either in Scotland or other leagues with VAR. It tends to only happen in and around the penalty area, with the referee blowing for a free kick only if the ball ends up in the net.

2 hours ago, Radford said:

Does being marked down have any discernible impact though? Especially if it lets VAR make a *correct* decision?

I think in theory a poor assessor's report should see the referee bumped down to the lower leagues for a game or two. In practice, though, we're so chronically short of top category 1 referees (another consequence of VAR) that it's unlikely you'll see the likes of Callum and Beaton any lower than the Championship when there's a full league fixture card. 

[54_and_counting]

7 hours ago, houston_bud said:

One thing that I will agree with Rodgers on from his tantrum yesterday is about moments in the game being refereed off the pitch. 

I think Yang's red card is the right decision ultimately. Robertson maybe was slightly unsighted but the linesman is looking right at it. What has Roberston seen in the replay that wasn't seen in real time by himself and or the linesman? Likewise with the handball, Robertson is in a brilliant position to see it.

In the St Mirren v St Johnstone game last week, Kwon's goal gets chalked off after VAR intervened. We can argue whether or not it was a foul, but there was nothing in the replay that showed anything we didn't see in real time. Everyone in the ground saw that Kwon nudged the defender.

I think there's too many cases where you've just got one referee who disagrees with the onfield decision, rather than highlighting things the officials have missed.

Too many refs now don't give penalties right away even after looking right at them, our two away to st johnstone the prime example, so the question is, are they scared of giving penalties now knowing VAR will check their decision, or are they just that incompetent that VAR has saved a lot of fucking awful decisions deciding games this season

[54_and_counting]

3 hours ago, DG.Roma said:

One of the things that annoys me is that if there's something to check, the ref will pause the game and the VAR will take a minute or two checking it, and then send the ref over who may take another minute to review it. Why not just bring the ref to the screen right away? Or maybe not right away, but if it's obvious it's going to take a while.

In the Napoli v Juventus game last night Osimhen went down under a challenge in the box and play was waved on, a few seconds later the ball was out of play. At first glance, it was hard to tell what had happened so it was worth a second look. The ref went over to the screen right away and the decision to award a penalty was made very quickly.

No momentum was lost, players weren't getting cold and seizing up, fans weren't getting bored or impatient. Much better.

Most probably because if play continues, and then the ref has to stop it mid play, and then sticks with his original decision, the attacking team could feel aggrieved etc

When the play has stopped gor a throw in etc, and the ref is told that VAR are looking at something, its pointless restarting play only to need to stop it a minute later again 

Unless you mean the refs are actively stopping play while its going on because of a VAR check, which i canny mind if ive ever seen

[The Master]

2 minutes ago, 54_and_counting said:

Too many refs now don't give penalties right away even after looking right at them, our two away to st johnstone the prime example, so the question is, are they scared of giving penalties now knowing VAR will check their decision, or are they just that incompetent that VAR has saved a lot of fucking awful decisions deciding games this season

A decision is always made on the pitch ("penalty" or "no penalty"), which is then checked by VAR - so it's a gamble for the referees either way.

It would be interesting to look at the stats around penalties, red cards etc. and see how things compare between pre-VAR and now, but only in terms of original on-field decisions and not any changed by VAR.

[The Master]

2 minutes ago, 54_and_counting said:

Unless you mean the refs are actively stopping play while its going on because of a VAR check, which i canny mind if ive ever seen

That will happen if a VAR check goes on for (I think) 2 minutes without the ball going out of play. 

[RandomGuy.]

The new batch of referees look even worse than what we had.

[DG.Roma]

5 minutes ago, 54_and_counting said:

Most probably because if play continues, and then the ref has to stop it mid play, and then sticks with his original decision, the attacking team could feel aggrieved etc

When the play has stopped gor a throw in etc, and the ref is told that VAR are looking at something, its pointless restarting play only to need to stop it a minute later again 

Unless you mean the refs are actively stopping play while its going on because of a VAR check, which i canny mind if ive ever seen

No I meant after play has stopped.

So for example, possible foul in the box, ref gives nothing, ball gets cleared out for a throw-in.

Now, in Scotland, the ref tells the players to pause then waits ages for the VAR to advise either play on, or check the screen.

In last night's Napoli game, pretty much as soon as the ball was out (a few seconds after the incident) the ref was told to go and look at the screen, and it looked like he and the VAR reviewed it at the same time, therefore the overall stoppage in play was very short compared to what we've become used to.

 

[DiegoDiego]

I mistakenly thought when VAR was first implemented here that with time decisions would be made quicker and my this point it would be relatively seamless. Needless to say, it's actually been the opposite.

I think I'm correct in saying that VAR worked really quite well at the World Cup. Relatively seamless integration and no real controversy. What exactly is stopping it working the same way in Scotland? Sheer incompetence?

[The Master]

6 minutes ago, DiegoDiego said:

I mistakenly thought when VAR was first implemented here that with time decisions would be made quicker and my this point it would be relatively seamless. Needless to say, it's actually been the opposite.

I think I'm correct in saying that VAR worked really quite well at the World Cup. Relatively seamless integration and no real controversy. What exactly is stopping it working the same way in Scotland? Sheer incompetence?

Possibly more camera angles to work with. If you have 30+ cameras, it's highly likely you'll have a clear view of an incident. 

That's another stat that would be interesting. Is the referee called to the monitor (or the check declared complete) quicker for games live on Sky (with 10+ cameras), vs. non-live games (with only 6 cameras)? 

[DiegoDiego]

Surely more camera angles would mean more to look at? If there's only one and you can't really tell then it's not a "clear and obvious error", get on with the game.

[2426255]

1 hour ago, DiegoDiego said:

I mistakenly thought when VAR was first implemented here that with time decisions would be made quicker and my this point it would be relatively seamless. Needless to say, it's actually been the opposite.

I think I'm correct in saying that VAR worked really quite well at the World Cup. Relatively seamless integration and no real controversy. What exactly is stopping it working the same way in Scotland? Sheer incompetence?

In my opinion, Scottish VAR teams are preferring to adopt the "don't mind waiting as long as we reach the correct decision" approach. I also believe that there is a focus on decisions being technically correct even if they don't really make sense, so more granularity and slower decision making.

Why? to protect themselves basically as fans, media and pundits (read: the whole of Scottish football) like to shit on referees, so their only form of defending themselves is attempting to work to rule. Sort of similar to how the legal system is nothing to do with what's right and wrong, it's about what's legal.

I don't really have much sympathy with fans over VAR for this reason as they are partly driving this outcome along with clubs, managers and so on. 

Edited March 4 by 2426255

[The Master]

1 hour ago, DiegoDiego said:

Surely more camera angles would mean more to look at? If there's only one and you can't really tell then it's not a "clear and obvious error", get on with the game.

It could be that more camera angles gives a clearer view, so there's no need to (e.g.) slow things down and digitally zoom in to try and see if something happened.

[craigkillie]

3 hours ago, The Master said:

That will happen if a VAR check goes on for (I think) 2 minutes without the ball going out of play. 

I'm not sure there's a time limit on it, it's just about finding a suitable time to stop and balancing that against how certain they are that the ref is going to overturn the original decision. When we played County on the final day of last season, a County player went down in the box while we were 2-0 up, but nothing was given and we raced up the other end on a counter-attack. When we were at the point of crossing it into the box, and had a really good chance of scoring, the referee stopped the game to go and check for a County penalty, which was ultimately given.

Presumably the VAR team decided that it was a pretty much nailed on penalty (which it was), and that therefore it was better to stop the game instead of waiting for us to potentially go 3-0 up only to then have to rule out that goal to go all the way back for a penalty at the other end. Something like that happened in the African Nations Cup knockout stages last month.

[AJF]

10 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

I'm not sure there's a time limit on it, it's just about finding a suitable time to stop and balancing that against how certain they are that the ref is going to overturn the original decision. When we played County on the final day of last season, a County player went down in the box while we were 2-0 up, but nothing was given and we raced up the other end on a counter-attack. When we were at the point of crossing it into the box, and had a really good chance of scoring, the referee stopped the game to go and check for a County penalty, which was ultimately given.

Presumably the VAR team decided that it was a pretty much nailed on penalty (which it was), and that therefore it was better to stop the game instead of waiting for us to potentially go 3-0 up only to then have to rule out that goal to go all the way back for a penalty at the other end. Something like that happened in the African Nations Cup knockout stages last month.

Yeah, similar happened when we played St Johnstone last month.

The ball struck their defenders arm and was cleared. The ball stayed in play and we were knocking it about at the back, if I recall correctly, when the ref halted play to then go to the monitor.

[DiegoDiego]

2 hours ago, The Master said:

It could be that more camera angles gives a clearer view, so there's no need to (e.g.) slow things down and digitally zoom in to try and see if something happened.

I mean, that's obviously how it's being used, but if you need to digitally zoom in then it's not a "clear and obvious" error, which is how clubs were told it would be used when voted on.

Basically, what we've got isn't what we were promised, and somebody needs to come up with a very good reason as to why. I'm quite close to doing a @VincentGuerinand writing to my club.

[Durnford]

4 hours ago, DiegoDiego said:

I mistakenly thought when VAR was first implemented here that with time decisions would be made quicker and my this point it would be relatively seamless. Needless to say, it's actually been the opposite.

I think I'm correct in saying that VAR worked really quite well at the World Cup. Relatively seamless integration and no real controversy. What exactly is stopping it working the same way in Scotland? Sheer incompetence?

As far as I recall they had a whole team of professionals working in the VAR centre therefore there were obviously many eyes looking at the multiple screens but , more particularly, in Scotland as far as I am aware, there's only one qualified referee and an assistant working in the VAR room so, if the qualified referee is reviewing an incident then he cant be watching the live game.

In the world cup a review could be carried out by one team whilst another watched the ongoing game.

That being said, for the amount we're paying, I would have hoped for a team of referee's working on each game although my next question might be are there really that amount top qualified referees in Scotland?

[East Calder Lion]

 

[54_and_counting]

33 minutes ago, Durnford said:

As far as I recall they had a whole team of professionals working in the VAR centre therefore there were obviously many eyes looking at the multiple screens but , more particularly, in Scotland as far as I am aware, there's only one qualified referee and an assistant working in the VAR room so, if the qualified referee is reviewing an incident then he cant be watching the live game.

In the world cup a review could be carried out by one team whilst another watched the ongoing game.

That being said, for the amount we're paying, I would have hoped for a team of referee's working on each game although my next question might be are there really that amount top qualified referees in Scotland?

If VAR is an issue (the lines, time taken for looks etc) would fans and teams prefer trying put extra officials in the game, having a ref in each half (easier to keep up with quick attacks, like the hearts vs county dive that was a penalty) and stick 4 linesmen in each game and two officials behind each goal (one either side of the goal) to call fouls, offsides etc that the main ref might miss from an angle

It would then be up to the main ref to take the advice of the extra official or stick with his initial reaction to an incident

Fans/teams etc moaned for years and years about incidents being missed, wether refs needed help or refs needing shown up for being in favour of one or another team, now that a lot of missed things are being corrected (not flawless, but arguably VAR has corrected more mistakes than made) does everyone wanna just bin it and expect one guy to catch everything? 

[MacDonald Jardine]

6 hours ago, DG.Roma said:

No I meant after play has stopped.

So for example, possible foul in the box, ref gives nothing, ball gets cleared out for a throw-in.

Now, in Scotland, the ref tells the players to pause then waits ages for the VAR to advise either play on, or check the screen.

In last night's Napoli game, pretty much as soon as the ball was out (a few seconds after the incident) the ref was told to go and look at the screen, and it looked like he and the VAR reviewed it at the same time, therefore the overall stoppage in play was very short compared to what we've become used to.

 

There was similar in the Manchester Derby. A possible handball cleared up in a matter of seconds.

I thought yesterday if he can't tell if it's a handball after what seemed like 5 minutes at the screen it isn't a penalty.

Then again he did the same for the sending off which was blatant.

[Thistle_do_nicely]

On 03/03/2024 at 12:20, AJF said:

Another prime example yesterday as to how VAR is ruining our sport.

A ridiculously long delay to award a penalty at Ibrox at a time when the atmosphere was building, the game was competitive and tempers were boiling over - everything that we love to see. The stoppage killed that for a prolonged period of time and I felt it sapped a lot of the energy that was going around the place.

As an aside, it also highlights again how referees are potentially shirking out of decisions. I know we won’t be alone in this, but I believe that’s our last 4 penalties we’ve been given that haven’t been awarded by the on-field referee at the time.

I still don’t believe that the St Johnstone handball decision should’ve been retrospectively penalised, but there’s a pattern developing where referees just aren’t making calls it seems.

Think theres something to this, yeah - i may have imagined it or missed him whistling, but i think the ref delayed about 3/4 seconds before calling a foul against Ross Docherty. There were some afters, a few of our players were angry, ref waiting for it to calm down a bit. Eventually he gave Docherty a yellow (may have booked one of our players too for some shoving)

Id need to fully see it again start to finish, but in real time what it looked like was that he saw the incident, it registered in his head, he went "oh f**k, no VAR, if im going to call this i have to do it now" and then just played it safe with a yellow card for the initial foul.

Ill caveat that ive not seen it back, but even at the time it looked pretty poor, kind of a high challenge that planted on a knee iirc.

I reckon VAR might be breeding indecisiveness, but idk. Could vary from ref to ref and all.

Edited March 4 by Thistle_do_nicely