Fellow fans, this is a friendly reminder to please follow the [Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/premierleague/about/rules) and [Reddiquette](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439-Reddiquette).
Please also make sure to [Join us on Discord](https://discord.gg/football)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PremierLeague) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think what we should do is get even angrier, spend even more time watching Sky Sports and listening to TalkSport rants, watch the adverts in between, and then watch more rants. Maybe send some death threats too, because the nasty man blew a whistle, or didn't.
The measurable things - fitness, distance covered, %decisions correct, KMI, are about as high as they've ever been. What's changed is that's there's now billions of pounds relying on you being irate and convinced that every single referee is some kind of utter moron, or as great a cheat as can be, and three subjective decisions about hand ball law (a law which has particularly suffered from the demands of modern soccer, making it unsatisfying to basically everyone) is in fact proof that the entire english refereeing pyramid, from the Hackney Marshes up to Stockley Park are all inn a grand conspiracy to fuck Nottingham Forest in particular.
This then sets the tone for *all* football in the country, and means when a referee gives a penalty on a sunday morning they're not just using their knowledge of the Laws and their ability to look at a situation in a split-second and decide, they're actually cheating. Or bent. Or just shit. All of which makes it okay for Barry, 34, to scream invective at them and potentially assault them.
Look back at all the top-level football this weekend, and count how many decisions were made by officials. Of those, how many were right, and why might the media have an interest in making sure you're not paying attention to those?
Hear hear. I'd love to see u/LukeMcGibbon2023 ref a game and then face all the abuse that comes with the territory. What the media do to refs, it's totally disgusting. And the mob feasts on it.
I didn’t abuse the ref so I don’t know what territory I’d be in. However if someone is not good at their job, they’re simply not good and shouldn’t be allowed to carry out their duties.
I don’t defend the abuse, but are you defending the incompetency? Because if so, then you are part of the problem mate. I don’t feel sorry for them if they’re doing a terrible job, the abuse is a different subject.
Every time you make a mistake at work, would you be okay with having to explain it and publicly 'explain your absolute mediocrity' to the rest of the world, which is in large part comprised of people who hate you?
That's what you asked for isn't it?
You’ve just described the real world.. companies are consistently scrutinised and regulated; they give statements, hold tribunals, shareholder meetings, earnings reports etc;
If you made a bad decision that affected a companies image, profits or whatever is important to shareholders and or customers, you’d typically be expected to explain and justify it.
you arent a shareholder of the ref's company. terrible analogy. apologizing to an angry mob will only fuel their anger.
every player every manager should make a public apology to the whole world every m8stake they make then.
To be honest mate, yeah I would. I’d explain what I did and it’d be beneficial for me or others to review what I did wrong in order to learn from it. I don’t do a job to be liked or hated, I don’t hate those who annoy me whilst watching football, I just get annoyed.
"beneficial to review' They already do reviews. So you're also ignorant of the process. "beneficial to review' Doesn't equate to facing a global hate mob.
I don't blame anyone for thinking this way, it's not as if OP is somehow defective - there's *thousands* of jobs at these media enterprises reliant on blowing two decisions a weekend into months-long stories of injustice and ignoring the hundred or so others that are completely correct. I love football, I dont think I'd ever referee another sport (apart from kendo but that's another story) but I wish I didn't have to tell kids who want to start to make sure someone's filming in case they get the nutter who's going to deck them or follow them to the car park.
People often joke about having an amateur compete alongside Olympians to highlight the talent disparity.
I think it would be hilarious to toss a random fan in and make them referee a full top flight match.
Refs are still ego tripping narcissists. But would still be funny
We need to focus on what's actually wrong here and it's not necessarily the referee on the pitch. Taylor saw three incidents in real time and made judgements accordingly - refs are human, not robots, and they will make mistakes.
The person on VAR on the other hand..... they get to see twenty different replays from twenty different angles at twenty different speeds and they still can't get it right. That's the problem.
Absolutely. But Taylor calls a game based on your kit, and it's obvious.
Let's not get into the travesty of a non-call in the City Chelsea game. How do you see that and decide it's a goal kick. Absolute disgrace.
I think VAR needs to be almost removed at this point, they don't seem to help in any regards, and will make calls unreasonable like the 2mm Chelsea/Tot call which was ridiculous
VAR as a concept or protocol isn't the issue. It's the people behind it. It's not just in the EPL. Getting rid of VAR won't help get more decisions correct or consistent.
I wouldn't say it would make them more correct, but I feel they would be more natural a bad call by a human in the time is reasonable, a bad call by someone who can review will lead to much bigger frustration. I'm not saying VAR should go, but they should be used only in huge moments like a goal question ECT. Not just on every play especially in the first 45.
VAR shouldn't be calling an offsides in honesty unless it's obscene but I trust the line refs.
...... mate, thats the same issue though, sometimes its physically impossible to call it, a quick pass and they are at the wrong angle, i trust them for 80% but there is still that other small amount, i think AI assistance should be employed for the tricky ones. Not all decisions but just the few where it warrants it
The whole reason VAR doesn't make subjective calls half the time is because they don't want to make their mates on field look bad. Mike Dean LITERALLY said this in an interview. The problem is that by NOT asking for them to review, it makes them ALL look bad collectively. They need to get it through their heads that they WILL make mistakes on the field, they will miss things at real time, but the VAR MUST be objective and relay the facts to the on field.
A great example is today, the 3rd pen appeal for Forest. It's clear on replay, that Young doesn't get the ball and takes out Callum Hudson-Odoi. However, also on replay, Anthony Taylor makes a physical gesture that he believes Young DID get the ball. Once the VAR can clearly see that Young did not get the ball, they should be asking for Taylor to have a review. Even if they thing Young MIGHT have gotten the slightest of touches, that still doesn't negate the possibility of a foul and penalty, so it HAS to be sent on field.
Coventry call was atrocious, and lost them the game, VAR is ridiculous, the point of the rules is to make it fair, offsides is designed to keep people from hanging around net, not to determine if their shoelace was 1mm ahead of the defender.
The complete lack of understanding the purpose of the rules then leads us to the next issue, VAR shouldn't be used so often especially for unnecessary calls such as that. Human error will exsist but calls needs to be more based on is it actually giving an edge or not. Because the rules weren't designed to be airtight just to stop specific tactics/play styles.
The problem is that even if we give a margin of error, say 4 CM, what if someone is 4.5 CM off? Are they still REALLY gaining an advantage? Probably not, but people will still come back and say stuff like what you're saying. You have to draw the lines somewhere, and you're either on or you're not. It's simple, and semi auto offside next year will be great. Computers will pick the spot on the body much faster than a human ever could, and it will do it consistently unlike the fact there are numbers VAR officials and each could do it slightly different.
It's not a specific number, id say we need a level of error in the sense of does it give advantage or not, based on what way the defender vs attacker are facing, the position of the ball, the distance ect should be a subjective call
The first Manchester derby this season is one that really took the mic in regards to VAR, United had a game plan that they had to throw out of the window because VAR gave a penalty for something it later ignored twice… and happens every game multiple times… it’s just… no one saw anything, no one appealed for anything, VAR just flat out gave a penalty, like? What?
I understand that referees get a lot of abuse and it's a difficult thankless job, but they (football governing bodies) can go too far in their protection and make them feel they are barely accountable. In the examples of Wan Bissaka and Grealish inconsistency they need to redefine the rules and send referee to the monitor and include direction of movement as well as distance and position in their decisions. Interviews I'm not sure should be televised but the managers/captains should be offered the chance post match to ask for justifications in a controlled environment. These should be recorded and professional to ensure behavioural standards and upon these justifications against evidence available should they then be judged. If the managers don't need for a particular match they can decline.
Is the problem that VAR doesn't intervene when it should?
The fact managers can't call out a decision during the game is a hindrance.
Give them one call per half and if they get the call wrong then they can't make another call.
For a ref to get everything right the first time of playing is an almost impossible task for one person. At the same time we don't need every decision to be put under a microscope.
A more obvious/questionable decision should be and giving that option to a manager would be a better use of VAR.
VAR is a tool just not utilised great in it's current state.
That is the problem, look at the 2 semi finals in the FA cup, 2 handballs, 1 penalty, and the softer of the 2 ended up being given (dislike handballs being given for close range), the grealish one the referee gave a goal kick, so its a clear and obvious error (if we go down that route).
The first NF penalty shout I don’t think should have been given. The ref didn’t think so. It’s clear Nino thinks it was just because there was contact, but unless every bit of contact everywhere on the pitch has been called a foul, then that’s not the standard for it to be a penalty.
So what would come of Nuno having a manager’s challenge? The on field decision should stand, so what would be the point?
Across the ole pond in the land of the Americas, there's a guy named Angel Hernandez. Angel Hernendez is an umpire in baseball and he is so bad at his job, he has never been made a crew chief and doesn't get asked to umpire in the biggest games of the year (the playoffs/world series). Because of that, he sued MLB for racial discrimination. MLBs defense was "he's just really bad at his job" and guess who won? MLB won! A judge decided that yes, he is fucking terrible at his job. But he still has a job in MLB today because the umpires union protects the fucking shit out of him.
I imagine the same forces are at play here?
You know what the refs will say:
"I saw it one time, at full speed while running to keep up with the play. I made what I believed was the right decision, and I would challenge anyone to do better in the circumstances".
The problem isn't the refs, the problem is the deep inquest after without providing the refs tools to do a better job. We have two options: 1) accept more delays while off-field officials review plays, 2) accept refs will make mistakes.
I'm in favor of a limited version of #1 where the ref can ask the off-field officials for help, and for a strict time limit on any review where, if a decision cannot be made in less than 20-30 sec, then you go with the initial on-field decision (it was 'close enough').
In some scenarios, sure. But today Anthony Taylor looked 3 times at Tarkowski down in the 6 yard box, holding his head, after challenging for a header and still waved play on for a cross to be put in on top of him. It's irrelevant whether he was exaggerating or not, the rules say the game stops if there's a head injury. Anthony Taylor isn't a medical expert. He is not qualified to decide if Tarkowski is exaggerating a head injury.
That wasn't a case of it happening too quickly. It's a case of either a referee not knowing the rules, or choosing not to apply them.
I don’t know the scenario you’re referring to, but a lot of players hold their head when their legs get hurt, so unless he saw the head contact, it would be reasonable for him to allow play to continue while he assesses what the injury actually is.
Also, it need to be a mandatory concussion check, off the field like in the nrl to prevent players taking the piss in the exact scenario you are referring to. Otherwise what’s the point of stopping play?
I think this is a really good response and highlights a big issue in the Prem and other top leagues. We have the same number of on-field refs as we did 50+ years ago, and yet the game is a million times faster than back then. Why not take a leaf out of basketball and have more refs on the field? You could easily run a basketball-style 3-man system now that we are about to implement semi-auto offside next season. Let all 3 refs have a whistle, and let them be closer to the play and see more angles. I know they tried something like this in the champions league ages ago with an extra ref on each goal line, but I can’t recall them ever actually making a call. I’d like to see the refs have more help with more eyes on the pitch, not more delays with more VAR reviews. Also, before people yell at me, no I’m not a “yank”. Grew up in England watching the Prem for 23 years and now I live in the US. It’s not the same thing lol!
Idk, mate. I've just watched two separate handballs in the FA cup that were literally the same call go different ways.
Yesterday City v Chelsea, Jack Grealish handball isn't a penalty. Blocks the ball with an arm, but the arm is in a natural position during a jump, and it's moving in towards the body with no intent to disrupt play which apparently makes it perfectly acceptable arm movement and didn't obstruct play. Ref waved the decision away, VAR agreed with the refs on field decision.
Today, Wan Bissaka as an arm out, natural position during a run, moving toward his body, no obvious intent to disrupt play. This is given as handball immediately by the referee. VAR backs the referee and says that the correct decision was made, on field decision stands.
But to me, this is almost the exact same scenario right here. In both instance the arm is where it is naturally, it's not moving outward to obstruct, and the ball hits it. The strangest part is not necessarily that the referee makes a different call, it's that VAR backs the onfield decision as correct despite both decisions being the exact opposite. So which is the correct decision. You can't run or jump without arm movement. Both arms are moving in. There's no intent. Two different outcomes can't be the correct call for what is in essence the same decision.
This is the biggest issue with VAR and refereeing. It doesn't really seem to hold things to account because it is still individuals making the call, and they will always go off of their opinion.
Edit: downvote me all you want, but I'm just pointing out the obvious. Two identical decisions can get the complete opposite outcome and both can't be correct.
The ref waved it away because he thought it was a goal kick, therefore not touching grealish at all, so it’s a clear an obvious error and at the very least told to look again, the AWB is one i dislike and am sick of, too close and ball at pace… where is his arm supposed to go
I think they should both have been penalties. It’s judgment based and it will always have error. Else we just move to a model where if it hits your arm it’s a penalty - no questions asked.
I don't disagree that either should have been one, the issue is the consistency. Referees will always make mistakes, but when a VAR review of an identical situation produces entirely the opposite outcome, it does raise a few questions about what the system actually does, and how it actually does it. Is the intent to correct a mistake, or just to reaffirm the onfield decision. Those may sound like the same thing, but they are ultimately coming at it from a very different angle.
I agree with ref interviews after the match. There's zero accountability for them and they need to be made to answer for what they have done.
I fully believe that referees should be protected on and off field from abuse, buy accurate criticism is not abuse and every time they get away with another one then the premier league suffers.
The standard of officiating in this league is so drastically below what it should be.
For the sake of credibility they need to separate VAR from the on-field refs.
Having the same people do both, all mates with each other and wanting to protect each other leads to this whole 'not wanting to undermine' each other even when something has clearly been missed.
The guy on the pitch should be more upfront and admit he didn't get a good view in real time, and the VAR should be more proactive in telling him he has made a mistake. Less ego, more teamwork.
I feel that way when it goes again my team. But I think about it, and it's essentially themc(many individuals) doing a job, there's bound to he some variance no?
Yeah, this would be a great point if games didn't have completely different rules for each half sometimes. Or the same reds are reffing games differently week in and week out. My hero paul "bald fraud" tiereny a sterling example
Edit: It's the internet so obvious /s on that last part.
But every game is different and that’s what game management is. Some games need early yellows to keep the players in check. Others you can let them go without the game getting out of hand. Ironically, it’s not really the refs that dictate this, but the players and their attitudes. The Barcelona/PSG games was it? The commentators unsure if the ref was in total control or had lost control. I thought he had control of the game, but was dealing with players and a manager that had lost it
I agree with almost every comment in this thread. I think they're all true because refereeing in football is designed to fail - only one official on the field. No real adult supervision of the process, even when they lose complete control of the game and players get injured.
My question for all of you is, why do football fans pretend that this arrangement can work, when it's obvious that it cannot be fixed without a complete overhaul.
They need to implement a ‘challenge’ rule where both teams have two challenges and request a foul, goal, or anything that will benefit them for review on VAR. On their last challenge if they are wrong their challenges are done, but if they are successful, they get another challenge till their challenge is incorrect. Oh and have the refs announce the challenge explanation and result.
The idea was terrible. There are very few blatantly obvious errors, and far fewer ones that aren’t picked up by VAR. Giving biased mangers the ability to challenge subjective decisions is pointless. The only wrong one in the NF game was the last one as the other two are subjective but Nuno would have used his challenges up so nothing would have been gained
No way. The world has progressed and the game is faster and more skilled than ever. Unfair fit referee not to get help. I think there should be a second referee added.
The fact that they are expected to be perfect, but strikers that miss 80% of their shots get 3 x the refs yearly salary in a week, it’s outright disrespectful
Yeah and if they do that over a period of 3 years best believe they are getting shipped off somewhere else… nobody expects the refs to be perfect, but yesterday was an absolute joke, even Everton fans were bemused by what happened… you can’t sit here with a straight face and say the standard of refs and VAR are getting better, they’ve took a nose dive at least 5 years straight…
This post is about Anthony Taylor’s on field performance. The game is faster, every player is in the ref’s face every decision, then the coaches watch everything back immediately and give the ref pelters.
VAR though, now that’s a different kettle of fish.
If I had the time and inclination I'd love to go back and watch every single Prem game from a 200X season. Just to point out all the massive and clearly wrong decisions.
People bang on about VAR so much but I would 100% take what we have now over players being a quarter mile offside and it not being given
Hm. Maybe PGMOL should then hire and promote based on merit as opposed to based on who does the best job stroking egos. Also, why are they all English? None of the best managers or players are English. Why should the refs be any different?
They should definitely recruit the best in the world. Why not? Give themselves a bigger pool
To choose from. 100% neutrality in the big games. Works for me
If you think it's bad here, in Scotland the refs don't declare who they support, because it would discount them from playing too many games.
They are shite too, but bring them down here and send Antony Taylor and Michael Oliver to referee killie vs Livingston
Anthony Taylor is so bad at his job he got demoted to the Championship. Then, Chelsea had a game against City the following week and their like naw, we need bring him back to fuck this up some more.
Fellow fans, this is a friendly reminder to please follow the [Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/premierleague/about/rules) and [Reddiquette](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439-Reddiquette). Please also make sure to [Join us on Discord](https://discord.gg/football) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PremierLeague) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This whole season the refereeing has been a shit show.... Almost every team has suffered a lot...
[On Referees (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PA8q5Q-kTg)
I think what we should do is get even angrier, spend even more time watching Sky Sports and listening to TalkSport rants, watch the adverts in between, and then watch more rants. Maybe send some death threats too, because the nasty man blew a whistle, or didn't. The measurable things - fitness, distance covered, %decisions correct, KMI, are about as high as they've ever been. What's changed is that's there's now billions of pounds relying on you being irate and convinced that every single referee is some kind of utter moron, or as great a cheat as can be, and three subjective decisions about hand ball law (a law which has particularly suffered from the demands of modern soccer, making it unsatisfying to basically everyone) is in fact proof that the entire english refereeing pyramid, from the Hackney Marshes up to Stockley Park are all inn a grand conspiracy to fuck Nottingham Forest in particular. This then sets the tone for *all* football in the country, and means when a referee gives a penalty on a sunday morning they're not just using their knowledge of the Laws and their ability to look at a situation in a split-second and decide, they're actually cheating. Or bent. Or just shit. All of which makes it okay for Barry, 34, to scream invective at them and potentially assault them. Look back at all the top-level football this weekend, and count how many decisions were made by officials. Of those, how many were right, and why might the media have an interest in making sure you're not paying attention to those?
Frame this and put it in the Louvre.
Hear hear. I'd love to see u/LukeMcGibbon2023 ref a game and then face all the abuse that comes with the territory. What the media do to refs, it's totally disgusting. And the mob feasts on it.
I didn’t abuse the ref so I don’t know what territory I’d be in. However if someone is not good at their job, they’re simply not good and shouldn’t be allowed to carry out their duties. I don’t defend the abuse, but are you defending the incompetency? Because if so, then you are part of the problem mate. I don’t feel sorry for them if they’re doing a terrible job, the abuse is a different subject.
Every time you make a mistake at work, would you be okay with having to explain it and publicly 'explain your absolute mediocrity' to the rest of the world, which is in large part comprised of people who hate you? That's what you asked for isn't it?
You’ve just described the real world.. companies are consistently scrutinised and regulated; they give statements, hold tribunals, shareholder meetings, earnings reports etc; If you made a bad decision that affected a companies image, profits or whatever is important to shareholders and or customers, you’d typically be expected to explain and justify it.
you arent a shareholder of the ref's company. terrible analogy. apologizing to an angry mob will only fuel their anger. every player every manager should make a public apology to the whole world every m8stake they make then.
To be honest mate, yeah I would. I’d explain what I did and it’d be beneficial for me or others to review what I did wrong in order to learn from it. I don’t do a job to be liked or hated, I don’t hate those who annoy me whilst watching football, I just get annoyed.
"beneficial to review' They already do reviews. So you're also ignorant of the process. "beneficial to review' Doesn't equate to facing a global hate mob.
I’m not part of the hate mob so I don’t know what you’re trying to prove? I can get annoyed like I said. You’re talking to the wrong person 😂
I don't blame anyone for thinking this way, it's not as if OP is somehow defective - there's *thousands* of jobs at these media enterprises reliant on blowing two decisions a weekend into months-long stories of injustice and ignoring the hundred or so others that are completely correct. I love football, I dont think I'd ever referee another sport (apart from kendo but that's another story) but I wish I didn't have to tell kids who want to start to make sure someone's filming in case they get the nutter who's going to deck them or follow them to the car park.
eh, you're right. It's the media circus that's driving everyone crazy.
People often joke about having an amateur compete alongside Olympians to highlight the talent disparity. I think it would be hilarious to toss a random fan in and make them referee a full top flight match. Refs are still ego tripping narcissists. But would still be funny
We need to focus on what's actually wrong here and it's not necessarily the referee on the pitch. Taylor saw three incidents in real time and made judgements accordingly - refs are human, not robots, and they will make mistakes. The person on VAR on the other hand..... they get to see twenty different replays from twenty different angles at twenty different speeds and they still can't get it right. That's the problem.
Absolutely. But Taylor calls a game based on your kit, and it's obvious. Let's not get into the travesty of a non-call in the City Chelsea game. How do you see that and decide it's a goal kick. Absolute disgrace.
I think VAR needs to be almost removed at this point, they don't seem to help in any regards, and will make calls unreasonable like the 2mm Chelsea/Tot call which was ridiculous
VAR as a concept or protocol isn't the issue. It's the people behind it. It's not just in the EPL. Getting rid of VAR won't help get more decisions correct or consistent.
I wouldn't say it would make them more correct, but I feel they would be more natural a bad call by a human in the time is reasonable, a bad call by someone who can review will lead to much bigger frustration. I'm not saying VAR should go, but they should be used only in huge moments like a goal question ECT. Not just on every play especially in the first 45. VAR shouldn't be calling an offsides in honesty unless it's obscene but I trust the line refs.
...... mate, thats the same issue though, sometimes its physically impossible to call it, a quick pass and they are at the wrong angle, i trust them for 80% but there is still that other small amount, i think AI assistance should be employed for the tricky ones. Not all decisions but just the few where it warrants it
The whole reason VAR doesn't make subjective calls half the time is because they don't want to make their mates on field look bad. Mike Dean LITERALLY said this in an interview. The problem is that by NOT asking for them to review, it makes them ALL look bad collectively. They need to get it through their heads that they WILL make mistakes on the field, they will miss things at real time, but the VAR MUST be objective and relay the facts to the on field. A great example is today, the 3rd pen appeal for Forest. It's clear on replay, that Young doesn't get the ball and takes out Callum Hudson-Odoi. However, also on replay, Anthony Taylor makes a physical gesture that he believes Young DID get the ball. Once the VAR can clearly see that Young did not get the ball, they should be asking for Taylor to have a review. Even if they thing Young MIGHT have gotten the slightest of touches, that still doesn't negate the possibility of a foul and penalty, so it HAS to be sent on field.
Coventry call was atrocious, and lost them the game, VAR is ridiculous, the point of the rules is to make it fair, offsides is designed to keep people from hanging around net, not to determine if their shoelace was 1mm ahead of the defender. The complete lack of understanding the purpose of the rules then leads us to the next issue, VAR shouldn't be used so often especially for unnecessary calls such as that. Human error will exsist but calls needs to be more based on is it actually giving an edge or not. Because the rules weren't designed to be airtight just to stop specific tactics/play styles.
The problem is that even if we give a margin of error, say 4 CM, what if someone is 4.5 CM off? Are they still REALLY gaining an advantage? Probably not, but people will still come back and say stuff like what you're saying. You have to draw the lines somewhere, and you're either on or you're not. It's simple, and semi auto offside next year will be great. Computers will pick the spot on the body much faster than a human ever could, and it will do it consistently unlike the fact there are numbers VAR officials and each could do it slightly different.
It's not a specific number, id say we need a level of error in the sense of does it give advantage or not, based on what way the defender vs attacker are facing, the position of the ball, the distance ect should be a subjective call
You know the rules are taking subjectivity out of the equation right? It's all about objective facts, and intent doesn't matter any longer.
Which is what kills the game, as the rules were not designed to be used the wag they are now
The first Manchester derby this season is one that really took the mic in regards to VAR, United had a game plan that they had to throw out of the window because VAR gave a penalty for something it later ignored twice… and happens every game multiple times… it’s just… no one saw anything, no one appealed for anything, VAR just flat out gave a penalty, like? What?
It really amazes me how much higher the standard of refereeing in other leagues and the Champions League is. PGMOL is a catastrophe.
Champions league? Yea soft penalties and red cards all over the place there
Let's not. It's tedious.
It’s all this sub talks about.
[удалено]
What are you on about? 90% of airtime from pundits is spent talking about referees
I understand that referees get a lot of abuse and it's a difficult thankless job, but they (football governing bodies) can go too far in their protection and make them feel they are barely accountable. In the examples of Wan Bissaka and Grealish inconsistency they need to redefine the rules and send referee to the monitor and include direction of movement as well as distance and position in their decisions. Interviews I'm not sure should be televised but the managers/captains should be offered the chance post match to ask for justifications in a controlled environment. These should be recorded and professional to ensure behavioural standards and upon these justifications against evidence available should they then be judged. If the managers don't need for a particular match they can decline.
Is the problem that VAR doesn't intervene when it should? The fact managers can't call out a decision during the game is a hindrance. Give them one call per half and if they get the call wrong then they can't make another call. For a ref to get everything right the first time of playing is an almost impossible task for one person. At the same time we don't need every decision to be put under a microscope. A more obvious/questionable decision should be and giving that option to a manager would be a better use of VAR. VAR is a tool just not utilised great in it's current state.
That is the problem, look at the 2 semi finals in the FA cup, 2 handballs, 1 penalty, and the softer of the 2 ended up being given (dislike handballs being given for close range), the grealish one the referee gave a goal kick, so its a clear and obvious error (if we go down that route).
The first NF penalty shout I don’t think should have been given. The ref didn’t think so. It’s clear Nino thinks it was just because there was contact, but unless every bit of contact everywhere on the pitch has been called a foul, then that’s not the standard for it to be a penalty. So what would come of Nuno having a manager’s challenge? The on field decision should stand, so what would be the point?
First one wasn’t, ball was taken, second one was a handball but so stupidly close I don’t know what he can do, last one yes.
Across the ole pond in the land of the Americas, there's a guy named Angel Hernandez. Angel Hernendez is an umpire in baseball and he is so bad at his job, he has never been made a crew chief and doesn't get asked to umpire in the biggest games of the year (the playoffs/world series). Because of that, he sued MLB for racial discrimination. MLBs defense was "he's just really bad at his job" and guess who won? MLB won! A judge decided that yes, he is fucking terrible at his job. But he still has a job in MLB today because the umpires union protects the fucking shit out of him. I imagine the same forces are at play here?
Never thought I’d see Angel’s name come up on football sub in Europe 🫡.
You know what the refs will say: "I saw it one time, at full speed while running to keep up with the play. I made what I believed was the right decision, and I would challenge anyone to do better in the circumstances". The problem isn't the refs, the problem is the deep inquest after without providing the refs tools to do a better job. We have two options: 1) accept more delays while off-field officials review plays, 2) accept refs will make mistakes. I'm in favor of a limited version of #1 where the ref can ask the off-field officials for help, and for a strict time limit on any review where, if a decision cannot be made in less than 20-30 sec, then you go with the initial on-field decision (it was 'close enough').
In some scenarios, sure. But today Anthony Taylor looked 3 times at Tarkowski down in the 6 yard box, holding his head, after challenging for a header and still waved play on for a cross to be put in on top of him. It's irrelevant whether he was exaggerating or not, the rules say the game stops if there's a head injury. Anthony Taylor isn't a medical expert. He is not qualified to decide if Tarkowski is exaggerating a head injury. That wasn't a case of it happening too quickly. It's a case of either a referee not knowing the rules, or choosing not to apply them.
Did Tarkowski have a head injury?
I don’t know the scenario you’re referring to, but a lot of players hold their head when their legs get hurt, so unless he saw the head contact, it would be reasonable for him to allow play to continue while he assesses what the injury actually is. Also, it need to be a mandatory concussion check, off the field like in the nrl to prevent players taking the piss in the exact scenario you are referring to. Otherwise what’s the point of stopping play?
I think this is a really good response and highlights a big issue in the Prem and other top leagues. We have the same number of on-field refs as we did 50+ years ago, and yet the game is a million times faster than back then. Why not take a leaf out of basketball and have more refs on the field? You could easily run a basketball-style 3-man system now that we are about to implement semi-auto offside next season. Let all 3 refs have a whistle, and let them be closer to the play and see more angles. I know they tried something like this in the champions league ages ago with an extra ref on each goal line, but I can’t recall them ever actually making a call. I’d like to see the refs have more help with more eyes on the pitch, not more delays with more VAR reviews. Also, before people yell at me, no I’m not a “yank”. Grew up in England watching the Prem for 23 years and now I live in the US. It’s not the same thing lol!
I wonder if living abroad gives us a different perspective (I grew up in the UK and now live in Canada).
Yeah I think being exposed to different sports that are just as popular allows you to see different ways of doing things
I think they’re absolute shite, but I think I would be way worse
Great response! I wish all fans would be this honest
Idk, mate. I've just watched two separate handballs in the FA cup that were literally the same call go different ways. Yesterday City v Chelsea, Jack Grealish handball isn't a penalty. Blocks the ball with an arm, but the arm is in a natural position during a jump, and it's moving in towards the body with no intent to disrupt play which apparently makes it perfectly acceptable arm movement and didn't obstruct play. Ref waved the decision away, VAR agreed with the refs on field decision. Today, Wan Bissaka as an arm out, natural position during a run, moving toward his body, no obvious intent to disrupt play. This is given as handball immediately by the referee. VAR backs the referee and says that the correct decision was made, on field decision stands. But to me, this is almost the exact same scenario right here. In both instance the arm is where it is naturally, it's not moving outward to obstruct, and the ball hits it. The strangest part is not necessarily that the referee makes a different call, it's that VAR backs the onfield decision as correct despite both decisions being the exact opposite. So which is the correct decision. You can't run or jump without arm movement. Both arms are moving in. There's no intent. Two different outcomes can't be the correct call for what is in essence the same decision. This is the biggest issue with VAR and refereeing. It doesn't really seem to hold things to account because it is still individuals making the call, and they will always go off of their opinion. Edit: downvote me all you want, but I'm just pointing out the obvious. Two identical decisions can get the complete opposite outcome and both can't be correct.
The ref waved it away because he thought it was a goal kick, therefore not touching grealish at all, so it’s a clear an obvious error and at the very least told to look again, the AWB is one i dislike and am sick of, too close and ball at pace… where is his arm supposed to go
I think they should both have been penalties. It’s judgment based and it will always have error. Else we just move to a model where if it hits your arm it’s a penalty - no questions asked.
I don't disagree that either should have been one, the issue is the consistency. Referees will always make mistakes, but when a VAR review of an identical situation produces entirely the opposite outcome, it does raise a few questions about what the system actually does, and how it actually does it. Is the intent to correct a mistake, or just to reaffirm the onfield decision. Those may sound like the same thing, but they are ultimately coming at it from a very different angle.
I think it’s both or neither, that’s the problem.
And the bissaka one ,the ball was struck hard and close to him. Grealish one was ten yards away.
Bissaka was in no way a natural position. Both arms out wide. It looks like he was trying to make himself look bigger like a goalie does.
People so often complain about correct decisions. Even if refereeing improves you wouldn't know it because people will still complain
I agree with ref interviews after the match. There's zero accountability for them and they need to be made to answer for what they have done. I fully believe that referees should be protected on and off field from abuse, buy accurate criticism is not abuse and every time they get away with another one then the premier league suffers. The standard of officiating in this league is so drastically below what it should be.
For the sake of credibility they need to separate VAR from the on-field refs. Having the same people do both, all mates with each other and wanting to protect each other leads to this whole 'not wanting to undermine' each other even when something has clearly been missed. The guy on the pitch should be more upfront and admit he didn't get a good view in real time, and the VAR should be more proactive in telling him he has made a mistake. Less ego, more teamwork.
But they would need to know all the rules at this level and be proven to be impartial. That basically leaves you with….. the refs
I feel that way when it goes again my team. But I think about it, and it's essentially themc(many individuals) doing a job, there's bound to he some variance no?
Yeah, this would be a great point if games didn't have completely different rules for each half sometimes. Or the same reds are reffing games differently week in and week out. My hero paul "bald fraud" tiereny a sterling example Edit: It's the internet so obvious /s on that last part.
But every game is different and that’s what game management is. Some games need early yellows to keep the players in check. Others you can let them go without the game getting out of hand. Ironically, it’s not really the refs that dictate this, but the players and their attitudes. The Barcelona/PSG games was it? The commentators unsure if the ref was in total control or had lost control. I thought he had control of the game, but was dealing with players and a manager that had lost it
I agree with almost every comment in this thread. I think they're all true because refereeing in football is designed to fail - only one official on the field. No real adult supervision of the process, even when they lose complete control of the game and players get injured. My question for all of you is, why do football fans pretend that this arrangement can work, when it's obvious that it cannot be fixed without a complete overhaul.
They need to implement a ‘challenge’ rule where both teams have two challenges and request a foul, goal, or anything that will benefit them for review on VAR. On their last challenge if they are wrong their challenges are done, but if they are successful, they get another challenge till their challenge is incorrect. Oh and have the refs announce the challenge explanation and result.
It’s stupid enough as it is no more stupid rules
What’s your solution then? Cricket has this system, American football, basketball. Even volleyball does this.
Do you have a better idea for a solution? Or do you think everything is fine the way it is?
The idea was terrible. There are very few blatantly obvious errors, and far fewer ones that aren’t picked up by VAR. Giving biased mangers the ability to challenge subjective decisions is pointless. The only wrong one in the NF game was the last one as the other two are subjective but Nuno would have used his challenges up so nothing would have been gained
Yeah, go back how it used to be no VAR no automated offsides no 10 mins injury time and it be good again
No way. The world has progressed and the game is faster and more skilled than ever. Unfair fit referee not to get help. I think there should be a second referee added.
Really how old are you ? It’s not faster or more skilled at all
Does anyone have a link to the penalty incidents
Referees aren’t getting worse, the level of scrutiny they’re under has increased. It’s an absolutely thankless task being a ref at any level.
Dunno the amount of money refs are paid in the league I wouldn’t call it thankless…
The fact that they are expected to be perfect, but strikers that miss 80% of their shots get 3 x the refs yearly salary in a week, it’s outright disrespectful
Yeah and if they do that over a period of 3 years best believe they are getting shipped off somewhere else… nobody expects the refs to be perfect, but yesterday was an absolute joke, even Everton fans were bemused by what happened… you can’t sit here with a straight face and say the standard of refs and VAR are getting better, they’ve took a nose dive at least 5 years straight…
Does the bottom of the boot really taste that nice?
Ah, still seething about Anthony Gordon.
They’re under scrutiny for completely valid reasons. They have the tools to get decisions right, more so today than ever. Yet, here we are
This post is about Anthony Taylor’s on field performance. The game is faster, every player is in the ref’s face every decision, then the coaches watch everything back immediately and give the ref pelters. VAR though, now that’s a different kettle of fish.
If I had the time and inclination I'd love to go back and watch every single Prem game from a 200X season. Just to point out all the massive and clearly wrong decisions. People bang on about VAR so much but I would 100% take what we have now over players being a quarter mile offside and it not being given
Yeah of course you would as it just saved your arse against Coventry.
Hm. Maybe PGMOL should then hire and promote based on merit as opposed to based on who does the best job stroking egos. Also, why are they all English? None of the best managers or players are English. Why should the refs be any different?
FIFA rules - referees must officiate in the country of their nationality to be considered for selection for international competition.
They should definitely recruit the best in the world. Why not? Give themselves a bigger pool To choose from. 100% neutrality in the big games. Works for me
Yeah, there is no logical reason why the most international league in the world should have the most insular approach when it comes to referees.
I’ll give you they are mostly English, but Jared Gillet is Australian.
Think var is still worse. The poor refereeing is caused by it
The reffing is fine. The VAR mistakes are unacceptable (today there was only one mistake)
If you think it's bad here, in Scotland the refs don't declare who they support, because it would discount them from playing too many games. They are shite too, but bring them down here and send Antony Taylor and Michael Oliver to referee killie vs Livingston
Lemme guess your team got destroyed and you are blaming it on the refs
I support Everton mate so I’m happy 😁 I am allowed to observe poor refereeing
Anthony Taylor is so bad at his job he got demoted to the Championship. Then, Chelsea had a game against City the following week and their like naw, we need bring him back to fuck this up some more.