Referees/VAR in the Premier League

[RandoEFC+]

The technology is very good and necessary in the long run. The implementation is not so good.

Across various competitions VAR has been a very mixed bag but the Premier League iteration of it has been ridiculous.

I've posted at length about the fact that silly rules and the Premier League trying to be too clever with VAR are the major issues and I can't be bothered repeating myself. It's getting so bad though that they should genuinely shelf it for the rest of the season and come back with a competent version of it in August. They won't though because of this hypersensitive culture that exists around referees and officials ever admitting mistakes in English football. They will just stubbornly continue with it telling us that it's working fine and we'll get used to it instead of actually reacting to the feedback they're getting on it and using constructive criticism to make it better.

I wish I was surprised that the Premier League has made such a bad hash of things when they've invested the most money and time of anyone into launching their version of VAR but it's actually the most Premier League thing ever that it's been a disaster.

[Cicero]

Remove Dean 

[Guest]

56 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

The technology is very good and necessary in the long run. The implementation is not so good.

Across various competitions VAR has been a very mixed bag but the Premier League iteration of it has been ridiculous.

I've posted at length about the fact that silly rules and the Premier League trying to be too clever with VAR are the major issues and I can't be bothered repeating myself. It's getting so bad though that they should genuinely shelf it for the rest of the season and come back with a competent version of it in August. They won't though because of this hypersensitive culture that exists around referees and officials ever admitting mistakes in English football. They will just stubbornly continue with it telling us that it's working fine and we'll get used to it instead of actually reacting to the feedback they're getting on it and using constructive criticism to make it better.

I wish I was surprised that the Premier League has made such a bad hash of things when they've invested the most money and time of anyone into launching their version of VAR but it's actually the most Premier League thing ever that it's been a disaster.

I'm pretty certain the referees. association has admited there are issues. They are reviewing it all the time to see how they can improve it. There is no hypersensitivity about referees making mistakes they review the games every week and always have. The sensitivity comes from  SOME people having ridiculously high expectations of referees. Notice I said some. Not saying you are one of them.

I would point out to you mate that you said teachers get a lot of unfair stick from people who don't know better I think you are doing the same thing with referees.

[RandoEFC+]

15 minutes ago, Gunnersauraus said:

I'm pretty certain the referees. association has admited there are issues. They are reviewing it all the time to see how they can improve it. There is no hypersensitivity about referees making mistakes they review the games every week and always have. The sensitivity comes from  SOME people having ridiculously high expectations of referees. Notice I said some. Not saying you are one of them.

I would point out to you mate that you said teachers get a lot of unfair stick from people who don't know better I think you are doing the same thing with referees.

I'm not saying that referees should get everything right all the time and I never have but I don't see how you can defend what we've seen from VAR this season. I've defended it from very early on against waves of criticism and I do believe the technology has a place in the game, and been adamant that they'll improve it, and that it will get smoother, but at the moment, if they are making changes, they aren't making the right ones because it's causing more and more issues every week. There has always been a lack of communication between the officials and the fans which causes issues, and again in this case, if they're making tweaks to VAR they should make that information accessible to those who are interested. It would create an awful lot more public sympathy if they communicated more. They are starting to clarify after matches why some decisions have been made which is a start, but about that...

Today's excuse for not giving a penalty on the Alli handball is that both players were under pressure because they were challenging for an aerial ball so it doesn't count as a deliberate handball. If that's the rule then fine, but it just feels like they make it up as they go along. Is that a rule you've heard before because I haven't? If that was given then they'd use another rule to back up the referee, "his arm was in an unnatural position" would have been the line. If those are both actually in the rulebook then which one takes precedence? I honestly have no idea, but it seems like the referees don't either.

Aside from the consistency of decisions, it took over three minutes for them to decide whether it's a penalty or not. How does it take 3 minutes? Again, they said that it wasn't given because he was challenging for an aerial ball and the ball hit his hand. I don't think you need 3 minutes and 15 replays to spot that the ball hit his hand and he was challenging for it in the air, I could have spotted that for you in 5 seconds. I get that a couple of extra angles is useful for them in case another angle shows he's looking at the ball so it was intentional or something but 15 replays is ridiculous, there's a football match going on, get on with it. The easy solution is the one that many people have already noted and it's the obvious one, if it takes that long to decide, then it isn't clear and obvious is it.

As for the teacher comparison, I could get very wound up about this but suffice to say I strongly disagree. You won't find me telling a referee how to do their job for one thing, here I'm only suggesting issues with VAR. Teachers get criticised by people who don't actually have any idea what they do at work whereas what referees do we can all see. Most people respect that they will make human mistakes like any person in any job. The fact that decisions are more inconsistent and sporadic than ever with the benefit of endless replays that should mostly eliminate that human error is a different thing to complain about.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

I'm not saying that referees should get everything right all the time and I never have but I don't see how you can defend what we've seen from VAR this season. I've defended it from very early on against waves of criticism and I do believe the technology has a place in the game, and been adamant that they'll improve it, and that it will get smoother, but at the moment, if they are making changes, they aren't making the right ones because it's causing more and more issues every week. There has always been a lack of communication between the officials and the fans which causes issues, and again in this case, if they're making tweaks to VAR they should make that information accessible to those who are interested. It would create an awful lot more public sympathy if they communicated more. They are starting to clarify after matches why some decisions have been made which is a start, but about that...

Today's excuse for not giving a penalty on the Alli handball is that both players were under pressure because they were challenging for an aerial ball so it doesn't count as a deliberate handball. If that's the rule then fine, but it just feels like they make it up as they go along. Is that a rule you've heard before because I haven't? If that was given then they'd use another rule to back up the referee, "his arm was in an unnatural position" would have been the line. If those are both actually in the rulebook then which one takes precedence? I honestly have no idea, but it seems like the referees don't either.

Aside from the consistency of decisions, it took over three minutes for them to decide whether it's a penalty or not. How does it take 3 minutes? Again, they said that it wasn't given because he was challenging for an aerial ball and the ball hit his hand. I don't think you need 3 minutes and 15 replays to spot that the ball hit his hand and he was challenging for it in the air, I could have spotted that for you in 5 seconds. I get that a couple of extra angles is useful for them in case another angle shows he's looking at the ball so it was intentional or something but 15 replays is ridiculous, there's a football match going on, get on with it. The easy solution is the one that many people have already noted and it's the obvious one, if it takes that long to decide, then it isn't clear and obvious is it.

As for the teacher comparison, I could get very wound up about this but suffice to say I strongly disagree. You won't find me telling a referee how to do their job for one thing, here I'm only suggesting issues with VAR. Teachers get criticised by people who don't actually have any idea what they do at work whereas what referees do we can all see. Most people respect that they will make human mistakes like any person in any job. The fact that decisions are more inconsistent and sporadic than ever with the benefit of endless replays that should mostly eliminate that human error is a different thing to complain about.

Hello mate I'll reply tomorrow need to go to bed now. One quick thing is I did day you never said referees should get everything right. But some fans do expect them to never make mistakes 

Edited November 3, 2019 by Guest

[Guest]

@Mel81x carrying on our discussion from the other thread.

I agree with you perhaps the decisions should be presented to the public. Part of the issue for me is that i think the average fan is the untrained eye. I don't think the average fan knows enough about the rules and interpretation of the rules. I've said it before I regard a referees opinion more. For me when ever I see pundits put up against referees the pundits get owned most of the time. So I do agree with you that making the explanations more public could be a good thing. However I still think it could cause problems because of missunderstanding so I have reservations. 

To your other point. On my general life experience it's very easy to accuse big professional organisations of just being stubborn, not caring etc. However I think it is normally a lot more complicated than that. I may be wrong and the premier League may be the exception and may just be being stubborn. However I think it is more likely that there is more to it than that due to my personal life experience. Like I said there a potential grey area with arm pit being the end of the arm and so can be offside.

 

Edited November 6, 2019 by Guest

[Mel81x+]

16 minutes ago, Gunnersauraus said:

@Mel81x carrying on our discussion from the other thread.

I agree with you perhaps the decisions should be presented to the public. Part of the issue for me is that i think the average fan is the untrained eye. I don't think the average fan knows enough about the rules and interpretation of the rules. I've said it before I regard a referees opinion more. For me when ever I see pundits put up against referees the pundits get owned most of the time. So I do agree with you that making the explanations more public could be a good thing. However I still think it could cause problems because of missunderstanding so I have reservations. 

To your other point. On my general life experience it's very easy to accuse big professional organisations of just being stubborn, not caring etc. However I think it is normally a lot more complicated than that. I may be wrong and the premier League may be the exception and may just be being stubborn. However I think it is more likely that there is more to it than that due to my personal life experience. Like I said there a potential grey area with arm pit being the end of the arm and so can be offside.

 

I don't think they are being stubborn I think they are being cautious in not just saying "oh he got it wrong". Imagine the implications not just for the domestic league but from the UEFA perspective as well. If they said they weren't using it right they could be banned from refereeing other European matches until they're fit and ready as well and then you could bleed that upwards to FIFA ala World Cup. However, where the problem really does exist here is that its not like they did something which wasn't backed up with verification (VAR) and that is where this starts to get a bit harder to justify. Like I said before, I am pro-tech to make everyone's lives a lot easier. Is the tech there yet? I don't think its there and to think otherwise on my part would be foolish. Will it get there? Yes it will. There's too much invested in this to solve an issue that the only way it disappears is if it has sustained issues which I don't think any of this is yet. 

Match fans saying the experience is watered down is zero justification to short-change this tech but continued decision failure and resistance from teams in the league could eventually bring it there. Football as a whole hasn't cared about fans for a while and to expect them to change their stance now is never going to happen. 

P.S. I also agree about the untrained eye part. Its not that its hard to not see what went wrong but then to take the laws of the game and apply them and then take into account what else needs to be done as a result isn't something easy. most of us have the luxury of looking online and we expect someone to do it fast in real-time (its their job I get it but I doubt they can remember everything) and then bring a result out in a matter of seconds. It's going to take time and these are growing pains, it will get better once they start finding better ways to enforce the rules and use the tech. 

Edited November 6, 2019 by Mel81x

[LFCMadLad]

31 minutes ago, Gunnersauraus said:

@Mel81x carrying on our discussion from the other thread.

I agree with you perhaps the decisions should be presented to the public. Part of the issue for me is that i think the average fan is the untrained eye. I don't think the average fan knows enough about the rules and interpretation of the rules. I've said it before I regard a referees opinion more. For me when ever I see pundits put up against referees the pundits get owned most of the time. So I do agree with you that making the explanations more public could be a good thing. However I still think it could cause problems because of missunderstanding so I have reservations. 

To your other point. On my general life experience it's very easy to accuse big professional organisations of just being stubborn, not caring etc. However I think it is normally a lot more complicated than that. I may be wrong and the premier League may be the exception and may just be being stubborn. However I think it is more likely that there is more to it than that due to my personal life experience. Like I said there a potential grey area with arm pit being the end of the arm and so can be offside.

 

They got it wrong mate, even by their own rules of 'only offside if it's a part of the body that can score'. 

Firmono's armpit (which they claim), still wasnt offside).

They fucked up yet use any kind of bent technology to deny it. 

It's a shambles mate, an absolute shambles. Everyone can see it bar you.

Edited November 6, 2019 by LFCMadLad

[Guest]

26 minutes ago, Mel81x said:

I don't think they are being stubborn I think they are being cautious in not just saying "oh he got it wrong". Imagine the implications not just for the domestic league but from the UEFA perspective as well. If they said they weren't using it right they could be banned from refereeing other European matches until they're fit and ready as well and then you could bleed that upwards to FIFA ala World Cup. However, where the problem really does exist here is that its not like they did something which wasn't backed up with verification (VAR) and that is where this starts to get a bit harder to justify. Like I said before, I am pro-tech to make everyone's lives a lot easier. Is the tech there yet? I don't think its there and to think otherwise on my part would be foolish. Will it get there? Yes it will. There's too much invested in this to solve an issue that the only way it disappears is if it has sustained issues which I don't think any of this is yet. 

Match fans saying the experience is watered down is zero justification to short-change this tech but continued decision failure and resistance from teams in the league could eventually bring it there. Football as a whole hasn't cared about fans for a while and to expect them to change their stance now is never going to happen. 

P.S. I also agree about the untrained eye part. Its not that its hard to not see what went wrong but then to take the laws of the game and apply them and then take into account what else needs to be done as a result isn't something easy. most of us have the luxury of looking online and we expect someone to do it fast in real-time (its their job I get it but I doubt they can remember everything) and then bring a result out in a matter of seconds. It's going to take time and these are growing pains, it will get better once they start finding better ways to enforce the rules and use the tech. 

You've actually made a brilliant point there. I'm in a hurry so I'll reply to the rest later. Most people on here are just accusing them of just being stubborn. Where as you said it's not just a case of being stubborn they don't want to look bad on the world stage because suddenly they can't have referees in the champions league etc. The only thing is though wouldn't uefa know it was used wrong?

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, LFCMadLad said:

They got it wrong mate, even by their own rules of 'only offside if it's a part of the body that can score'. 

Firmono's armpit (which they claim), still wasnt offside).

They fucked up yet use any kind of bent technology to deny it. 

It's a shambles mate, an absolute shambles. Everyone can see it bar you.

Mate you are completely missing all the points I'm making. Maybe just don't reply to me on this point and I won't reply to you. I like you mate I'm not saying never reply to eachother on everything I'm just think on this point you are missunderstanding what I'm saying and I'm sure I'm missunderstanding you as well.

 

 

[Mel81x+]

28 minutes ago, Gunnersauraus said:

You've actually made a brilliant point there. I'm in a hurry so I'll reply to the rest later. Most people on here are just accusing them of just being stubborn. Where as you said it's not just a case of being stubborn they don't want to look bad on the world stage because suddenly they can't have referees in the champions league etc. The only thing is though wouldn't uefa know it was used wrong?

Well UEFA is probably still in the phase where they are being lenient and not caring because they figure everyone is trying to learn right now. It's hard enough for refs to work with VAR and implement their own domestic rules then go over to the European stage and do the same but it will get more stringent the longer it goes on. This all really boils down to frequency. If you're good for 8 games and bad for 2 its not so bad as long as there is improvement. If you're bad for 9 out of 10 and its consistent then there's a problem which can be remedied by taking you out of the equation completely. UEFA shouldn't care about what the rest of the FAs do as long as it doesn't impact their implementation of VAR (my other problem with the way this is adopted with zero standardization). The day it starts to affect them they'll pull the plug on anyone because like I said in the earlier post, there is video evidence and evidence that a poor decision was made after providing data. Where can you really run? 

Note: keep it mind that its a highly political landscape as well so for all we know they let everyone make mistakes for eternity as well. 

Edited November 6, 2019 by Mel81x

[LFCMadLad]

1 hour ago, Gunnersauraus said:

Mate you are completely missing all the points I'm making. Maybe just don't reply to me on this point and I won't reply to you. I like you mate I'm not saying never reply to eachother on everything I'm just think on this point you are missunderstanding what I'm saying and I'm sure I'm missunderstanding you as well.

 

 

It's very simple to understand my viewpoint mate... VAR is shit. It's been way over-complicated, the referees carry on fucking up (whether that's on-field or behind a screen) and now they cant even get offside decisions right, they dont even know the rules (only offside with part of the body you can score with).

As I said, the whole thing is a farce. Football was much better (mistakes as they were) without this shambles. We have become a laughing stock. 

Fuck it off and let everyone enjoy the game we all fell in love with because all this shit has gone beyond a joke.

[Cicero]

I vote for AI officials 

Or import the Serie A officials 

Edited November 6, 2019 by Cicero

[LFCMadLad]

Wont be entirely accurate but sort of shows the difference VAR has made....

 

Here's the full Premier League table if we were living in a world without VAR (with the points difference from the real world in brackets):

1. Liverpool - 31pts (-)

2. Manchester City - 27pts (+2)

3. Chelsea - 24pts (+1)

4. Leicester City - 20pts (-3)

5. Arsenal - 18pts (+1)

6. Wolves - 17pts (+4)

7. Sheffield United - 17pts (+1)

8. Bournemouth - 15pts (-1)

9. Brighton - 15pts (-)

10. West Ham - 15pts (+2)

11. Manchester United - 14pts (+1)

12. Aston Villa - 13pts (+2)

13. Crystal Palace - 12pts (-3)

14. Tottenham Hotspur - 12pts (-1)

15. Burnley - 12pts (-)

16. Everton - 12pts (-1)

17. Newcastle - 12pts (-)

18. Norwich City - 7pts (-)

19. Watford - 5pts (-)

20. Southampton - 5pts (-3)

Read more at https://www.fourfourtwo.com/features/premier-league-table-var-alternative-liverpool-leicester-chelsea-man-city#VIg3BFqZeqOQkuiO.99

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Cicero said:

I vote for AI officials 

Or import the Serie A officials 

Where are we at with ai? Could AI make decisions?

[nudge+]

14 minutes ago, Gunnersauraus said:

Where are we at with ai? Could AI make decisions?

You might find this interesting: https://www.broadcastnow.co.uk/tech-innovation/evs-to-enhance-var-through-ai/5138338.article

[Dr. Gonzo]

9 hours ago, Cicero said:

I vote for AI officials 

That’s 2 of us for AI officials!

Our numbers are growing!

[Mel81x+]

As long as the refs aren't doing the coding AI might actually work haha.

[RandoEFC+]

19 hours ago, LFCMadLad said:

Wont be entirely accurate but sort of shows the difference VAR has made....

 

Here's the full Premier League table if we were living in a world without VAR (with the points difference from the real world in brackets):

1. Liverpool - 31pts (-)

2. Manchester City - 27pts (+2)

3. Chelsea - 24pts (+1)

4. Leicester City - 20pts (-3)

5. Arsenal - 18pts (+1)

6. Wolves - 17pts (+4)

7. Sheffield United - 17pts (+1)

8. Bournemouth - 15pts (-1)

9. Brighton - 15pts (-)

10. West Ham - 15pts (+2)

11. Manchester United - 14pts (+1)

12. Aston Villa - 13pts (+2)

13. Crystal Palace - 12pts (-3)

14. Tottenham Hotspur - 12pts (-1)

15. Burnley - 12pts (-)

16. Everton - 12pts (-1)

17. Newcastle - 12pts (-)

18. Norwich City - 7pts (-)

19. Watford - 5pts (-)

20. Southampton - 5pts (-3)

Read more at https://www.fourfourtwo.com/features/premier-league-table-var-alternative-liverpool-leicester-chelsea-man-city#VIg3BFqZeqOQkuiO.99

I don't see how that can be entirely accurate at all because the only VAR in our games this season (that I can remember anyway) have been Brighton being awarded a bullshit penalty which turned the game against us when we were leading, and the Spurs game at the weekend where we were denied two penalties that would usually be given these days in a match we drew. I'm assuming the -1 is them guessing that Spurs getting Son sent off somehow earned us the draw but that decision wasn't made by VAR anyway, so sorry, not having this table at all, at least from our perspective.

[Mel81x+]

1 hour ago, RandoEFC said:

I don't see how that can be entirely accurate at all because the only VAR in our games this season (that I can remember anyway) have been Brighton being awarded a bullshit penalty which turned the game against us when we were leading, and the Spurs game at the weekend where we were denied two penalties that would usually be given these days in a match we drew. I'm assuming the -1 is them guessing that Spurs getting Son sent off somehow earned us the draw but that decision wasn't made by VAR anyway, so sorry, not having this table at all, at least from our perspective.

Pardon my naive question here but wouldn't that be -2 not -1? A draw effectively means 2 points lost not 1 or is there something in the final calculation I am missing?

[RandoEFC+]

4 minutes ago, Mel81x said:

Pardon my naive question here but wouldn't that be -2 not -1? A draw effectively means 2 points lost not 1 or is there something in the final calculation I am missing?

I believe they're saying that with VAR, we have 12 points, without VAR we would have 11 points, one less (-1).

[Mel81x+]

14 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

I believe they're saying that with VAR, we have 12 points, without VAR we would have 11 points, one less (-1).

Interesting. I think you're right its a bit skewed to meet the requirement for the article and its odd that FourFourTwo put this out as they generally have very reliable data as they use OPTA.

[Guest]

I have been watching the U17 World Cup and I have to say I'm pleasantly surprised with VAR's usage in this so far.

We are in the quarter final stage and so far there have been few goals ruled out, and it's not been overused. Best I've seen it since Russia 2018 to be honest. There is still the odd wrong decision which sucks with the raise stakes on the referee to get it right, but as long as the flow of the game isn't killed like it isn't here, I can live with it. I don't give a shit about the sport being "too tainted' (which isn't true to begin with) as perfect results will just result in a terrible sport and consistent checking.

VAR should be used at most 2 or 3 times a game. I'm not suggesting a challenge system, but rather to not overuse it. That is the balance point in all of this. While the sport was still better without VAR, it needs to be regulated and used effectively. 

[RandoEFC+]

Proper helpful now lads but we shouldn't overlook what a momentous day this is, PGMOL admitting a mistake! Maybe there's hope for them after all (there isn't).

[Stan]

Quote

 

The Premier League will lead a consultation on how well the video assistant referee system is working but it is still "alive and kicking", says West Ham co-chairman David Gold.

At a meeting of Premier League clubs on Thursday, referees' chief Mike Riley gave a full appraisal of VAR, which has caused frustration and controversy since its implementation at the start of the season.

"There is not going to be any significant change this season," said Gold.

Aston Villa chief executive Christian Purslow said the clubs had "grave concerns" and VAR had to be a "whole lot better".

Riley spoke for just under two hours at what was described as a fractious four-and-a-half-hour meeting before it was decided no substantive changes would be made this season for fear it would affect the integrity of the competition.

"There was a lot of debate but this is a brand new system, so we just have to be a bit more patient," added Gold.

"What I can say is that VAR is alive and kicking."

In a statement, the Premier League said: "Research will now take place with fans, and other relevant stakeholders, to understand their views on how the application of VAR could be best improved."

Purslow added: "Clubs have got grave concerns but so has everybody in the room. We've had a very robust discussion.

"The message has got through to the league and to the referees' association that fans are unhappy, and many stakeholders in the game think we have to do a whole lot better.

"I expect to see real improvements in the speed of decisions, consistency of which is what everybody craves, and I think above all else for those of us in the stadia we want much better communication about what's going on before, during and after.

"I think if we get those three ingredients then things will look a whole lot better in a few months' time."

The league has brought in VAR this season to decide on goals, penalties, red cards and offside decisions.

But a number of high-profile incidents have been criticised, with inconsistencies in decision-making and the length of time it takes to give a verdict.

Speaking earlier this week, the Premier League referees' lead on VAR Neil Swarbrick told BBC Sport he would rate the introduction of the technology as a seven out of 10 so far.

The Premier League said Professional Game Match Officials Limited (PGMOL) managing director Riley has accepted that "improvement is required".

"The Premier League and PGMOL are committed to improving the consistency of decisions, speeding up processes and increasing communication to fans," the league said in a statement.

Criticism of VAR have included the lack of communication with fans and referees not using pitchside monitors.

In response the Premier League has said there will be increased information made available to fans at the stadium and the TV audience to explain in more detail what is being checked.

It also reemphasised that pitchside monitors would be "reserved for unseen incidents or when information from the VAR is outside the expectation range of the referee".

"Ensuring the pace and tempo of Premier League football remains an important focus for clubs," the league added

 

Actually agree that it shouldn't be changed midway through a season. 

Staying as it is but will be interesting to see how their fan research goes...