DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 42721--------------------------------------------------
Re: M OLIVER - Man U v Aston Villa
DIR By: ARF
Date: January 11, 2022, 6:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: ajb95 link ---
>
> The question of the length of the review is still unanswered
as the only part worth looking at was the Ramsey/cavani
incident.
--- End Quote ---
VAR would have to check the factual decisions first though
(whether Watkins touched it, meaning that Ings would have been
offside, and also whether it touched Ings' hand) before they can
then look at Ramsey-Cavani and say to MO "Ramsey's in an offside
position, we're going to recommend an OFR as we believe he's
interfered with an opponent". Obviously that's all going to take
time.
#Post#: 42727--------------------------------------------------
Re: M OLIVER - Man U v Aston Villa
DIR By: bruntyboy
Date: January 11, 2022, 7:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
A lot of this goes back to changes to offside over recent years
and now "phases" where a phase can be less than a second in
time.
As a certain Mr B Clough of Nottingham used to say "If he isn't
interfering with play, what's he doing on the pitch?"
When the free kick is played there are 2 Villa players standing
in the middle of the 18 yard box but not deemed to be
"interfering with play" and can receive a 5-10 yards headstart
on any defenders coming back into the box. However if a
defending player is lying injured on the floor or even off the
pitch behind the goal-line during play then they are always
deemed to be active.
Also why was Konsa allowed to return to his defensive position
on the pitch before the goal kick was taken (after having
received treatment for his bloody nose) whereas Dalot had to go
off the pitch before a corner was taken (after receiving
treatment for his bloody foot)?
#Post#: 42731--------------------------------------------------
Re: M OLIVER - Man U v Aston Villa
DIR By: rustyref
Date: January 11, 2022, 7:45 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: ajb95 link ---
>
> Having watched the highlights and the incident again in more
detail I agree with the poster that it is quite clearly offside,
and quite rightly given. The question of the length of the
review is still unanswered as the only part worth looking at was
the Ramsey/cavani incident.
> Not sure why our top referee and assistant (Stuart burt?)
couldn’t have come to the decision themselves as Ramsey is
clearly offside when the ball comes in.
>
> Not sure why anyone is listening to pundits like shearer and
Richards who clearly don’t know the laws, even waffling on to a
totally different issue during an answer despite lineker reading
out the wording of the law.
>
--- End Quote ---
He's clearly offside yes, but at the point he becomes active in
blocking Cavani Stuart Burt is looking through a mass of bodies
and there is no way he could have seen Ramsey block off Cavani.
Perhaps Michael Oliver could have seen it, but he would have
only known Ramsay was offside if Burt had told him, and he
appears to be looking at the main body of players and might not
have seen it.
The problem is if they just checked this incident and Oliver
said he didn't think it was interfering they would have then had
to go back and check the possible touch by Watkins and offside
by Ings, and the possible handling by Ings, and that would have
been even more messy.
#Post#: 42734--------------------------------------------------
Re: M OLIVER - Man U v Aston Villa
DIR By: OwdReds
Date: January 11, 2022, 8:45 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I remember my staepfather saying a few years before his death in
1993 that he felt privileged to have been part of the generation
who could watch football as a game and saying that I wouldn't
have that. He had seen that money would lead to matches being
played at different times to suit the whim of broadcasters and
money playing an increasingly important role in the game. What
he would have made of VAR i dread to think but ultimately I
beleve that comes down to money first and foremost. Many of us
grew up in an era when most games didn't have a camera at them
and those that did had three cameras at the most. Controversial
decisions couldn't often be cleared up by camera usage and we
just had to acceot the decision of the officials whether we
thought it was right or wrong. Now there are so many cameras at
Premier League games that I get dizzy wondering which angle I'm
looking at sometimes. Every decision can be scrutinised to the
nth degree, including by VAR, because we have to arrive at the
correct outcome for financial reasons even thoiugh some of those
decisions must inevitably be subjective. We're never going to be
able to turn the clock back but I'm glad that when I attend
matches they're well below Premier League level and I can go
along with the honest endeavours of the officials whether I
believe them to be correct or not.
#Post#: 42735--------------------------------------------------
Re: M OLIVER - Man U v Aston Villa
DIR By: Readingfan
Date: January 11, 2022, 8:54 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: rustyref link ---
>
> [quote author=Claretman link=topic=3270.msg42698#msg42698
date=1641855312]
> [quote author=rustyref link=topic=3270.msg42696#msg42696
date=1641854699]
> [quote author=Claretman link=topic=3270.msg42694#msg42694
date=1641854117]
> With regard to the first disallowed goal it could be argued
that Cavani ran into Ramsey, it could be argued that Cavani Was
never going to get the ball. However the men that matter didnt
see it in those ways, albeit Oliver didnt see the incident
initially and neither did th ar flag.
> Three and a half minutes to come to a decision is a long time.
>
--- End Quote ---
It was given for offside by Ramsey as Oliver raised his arm
after giving it, it wasn't for any potential foul. Therefore
Oliver couldn't give it real time as he isn't looking for
offsides, and it is a long way from the AR for him to determine
the contact.
As I said in the earlier post, I am far from sure it should have
been disallowed, but I can just about see why it was.
[/quote]
But unless Ramsey committed a foul and prevented Cavani getting
to the ball because of the foul, which is debatable, He could
not be given offside as he didnt play the ball and wasnt
interfering with play.
Whether watkins touched the ball is another matter but the ball
didnt seem to move in its trajectory as us cricket fans would
say.
I cant make up my mind whether ramsay stopped cavani playing the
ball or if watkins touched it also rustyref but perhaps oliver
gave an indirect free kick for obstruction rather than offside.
[/quote]
They will have said he was interfering with an opponent ...
[I] interfering with an opponent by:
• challenging an opponent for the ball or
• making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability
of an opponent to play the ball [/i]
There is no doubt whatsoever he was in an offside position. I
don't think he challenged Cavani for the ball, but there is an
argument that he was in an offside position and prevented Cavani
any opportunity to play the ball by blocking him off.
First time I've ever seen an on-field review used for offside
though.
[/quote]
I can recall a few on-field reviews for offside previously.
Wasn't the first OFFR in a Champions League game for an
interfering offside? I think it involved Skomina/Marciniak if I
recall correctly - might have been an Ajax game?
#Post#: 42737--------------------------------------------------
Re: M OLIVER - Man U v Aston Villa
DIR By: Readingfan
Date: January 11, 2022, 9:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Whistleblower link ---
>
> This is what I don't understand. The on-field referee Oliver
awarded the Villa goal, he did not rule it out for an
infringement. I thought VAR was to be used to correct a clear
and obvious error. VAR then took over three and a half minutes
to come to a conclusion and instruct Oliver to go to a monitor.
I submit, even accepting that VAR was looking at multiple
issues, that if it takes three and a half minutes it cannot have
been an error that was 'clear and obvious'
>
> There is a general drift here of refereeing matches by VAR,
the immediate decisions of the on-field referee counting for
less and less. It is completely changing the dynamic of match
officiating and I deplore it.
>
> I note there has been much discussion on RTR about VAR only
being used in some matches in the 3rd Round of the FA Cup. I
don't always agree with Alan Shearer on matters but his comments
last night saying that it should be at all or none I heartily
endorse. Equality under the law is a foundational principle of
justice. Having VAR at some matches and not others means that
they are being adjudicated in quite different ways. it is
unjust.
>
--- End Quote ---
I disagree with Shearer's view. It is equal for both teams
participating in that particular match and, unlike a league, one
FA Cup game doesn't have a significant impact on another (and
for those who argue it should only be introduced once every game
in a particular round can use VAR, I would argue that two fifth
round ties don't really have any more of an impact on each other
than a fifth and fourth round tie.)
Each club has the opportunity to be drawn away at a Premier
League ground, and therefore have VAR.
In many walks of life, there are beneficial systems in place
that might not be 100% perfect and might not be 100% available
but these will still often be used where possible, rather than
aiming to implement a 'worse' system 100% of the time. I think
an approach of trying to get as many correct decisions in as
many games as possible outweighs the possibility that some
decisions might not be corrected or attempting to aim for a
system where fewer correct decisions are made.
As for the time element, it does not seem that the 3 and a half
minutes were spent just considering one aspect of the decision,
which might suggest considerable doubt on the VAR's part. Where
there are multiple dimensions to a decision then it's always
likely to take a bit longer. In many cases, the officials will
presumably be implementing training/guidance they have been
given on specific situations, so whilst something might be
subjective, it would fall into a category where most SG1
officials would have a similar interpretation, and therefore
would be regarded as clear and obvious to the group.
#Post#: 42738--------------------------------------------------
Re: M OLIVER - Man U v Aston Villa
DIR By: Whistleblower
Date: January 11, 2022, 10:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Readingfan link ---
>
> [quote author=Whistleblower link=topic=3270.msg42707#msg42707
date=1641894679]
> This is what I don't understand. The on-field referee Oliver
awarded the Villa goal, he did not rule it out for an
infringement. I thought VAR was to be used to correct a clear
and obvious error. VAR then took over three and a half minutes
to come to a conclusion and instruct Oliver to go to a monitor.
I submit, even accepting that VAR was looking at multiple
issues, that if it takes three and a half minutes it cannot have
been an error that was 'clear and obvious'
>
> There is a general drift here of refereeing matches by VAR,
the immediate decisions of the on-field referee counting for
less and less. It is completely changing the dynamic of match
officiating and I deplore it.
>
> I note there has been much discussion on RTR about VAR only
being used in some matches in the 3rd Round of the FA Cup. I
don't always agree with Alan Shearer on matters but his comments
last night saying that it should be at all or none I heartily
endorse. Equality under the law is a foundational principle of
justice. Having VAR at some matches and not others means that
they are being adjudicated in quite different ways. it is
unjust.
>
--- End Quote ---
I disagree with Shearer's view. It is equal for both teams
participating in that particular match and, unlike a league, one
FA Cup game doesn't have a significant impact on another (and
for those who argue it should only be introduced once every game
in a particular round can use VAR, I would argue that two fifth
round ties don't really have any more of an impact on each other
than a fifth and fourth round tie.)
Each club has the opportunity to be drawn away at a Premier
League ground, and therefore have VAR.
In many walks of life, there are beneficial systems in place
that might not be 100% perfect and might not be 100% available
but these will still often be used where possible, rather than
aiming to implement a 'worse' system 100% of the time. I think
an approach of trying to get as many correct decisions in as
many games as possible outweighs the possibility that some
decisions might not be corrected or attempting to aim for a
system where fewer correct decisions are made.
As for the time element, it does not seem that the 3 and a half
minutes were spent just considering one aspect of the decision,
which might suggest considerable doubt on the VAR's part. Where
there are multiple dimensions to a decision then it's always
likely to take a bit longer. In many cases, the officials will
presumably be implementing training/guidance they have been
given on specific situations, so whilst something might be
subjective, it would fall into a category where most SG1
officials would have a similar interpretation, and therefore
would be regarded as clear and obvious to the group.
[/quote]
I can see the merit of the 100% argument but I don't accept it
because for me, treating everyone the same carries more weight
than supposed better accuracy. Indeed, if I were to buy the
accuracy argument ( and the history of VAR so far makes that a
very moot point ) it highlights even more the discrimination
against those clubs operating in matches where there is no
recall to 'greater' accuracy. You might advance the argument
against me that I am making the perfect the enemy of the good
and were VAR to be shown to be infallible then I might give it
more credence. However, it seems to me that VAR can be as
capricious as on-field officiating and I cannot be persuaded
that matches in the same round of the same competition should be
adjudicated differently.
It all comes down to preference in the end. I like football
because it has a pace and a dynamic to it; it is restless and on
the move. If you want a game where you believe greater accuracy
justifies VAR stoppages then fair enough but ( as Sam Goldwyn
once memorably said 'include me out' ) I watch most of my live
football at a level lower than the Premiership and so, for a
while, I can enjoy matches free of VAR interruptions. However,
in time it will come; I am quite resigned to that.
#Post#: 42739--------------------------------------------------
Re: M OLIVER - Man U v Aston Villa
DIR By: Whistleblower
Date: January 11, 2022, 10:31 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Re-reading my post above I can see that some might say that I
was conflating two arguments, the inequity of different
adjudication and a dislike of VAR. This might be so. I do not
like VAR and would happily see it scrapped but it is here to
stay and so should be used in a way which is equal and fair to
all participants in the same stage of the same competition. When
that can happen then my argument about inequity falls, I do
accept that and I am just left with a dislike of the system.
#Post#: 42741--------------------------------------------------
Re: M OLIVER - Man U v Aston Villa
DIR By: Claretman
Date: January 11, 2022, 10:54 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I have packed my sleeping bag ready for the tea time kick off on
sat as i look forward to the var forensically checking every
single corner and free kick to ensure blocking off an opponent
or manhandling an opponent is penalised correctly to the letter
of the law.
I appreciate the var can only intervene in the case of
disallowing a goal, offside, violent conduct, serious foul play
or the awarding of a penalty kick. However as the bar has now
been set by pgmol, consistency is required and if the referees
Allow the correct time for these reviews it wont be long before
we get at least 15 minutes added to each half.
Ps i do have a sense of humour.
I also agree with steve gerrard that if var give a decision you
have to accept it and move on. His team need to be more
proficient in front of goal and similarly in defensive areas.
#Post#: 42742--------------------------------------------------
Re: M OLIVER - Man U v Aston Villa
DIR By: Ref Watcher
Date: January 11, 2022, 11:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Claretman link ---
>
> I also agree with steve gerrard that if var give a decision
you habe to accept it and move on. His team need to be more
proficient in front of goal and similarly in defensive areas.
>
--- End Quote ---
One of the more sensible reactions from a manager. He has gone
up in my estimation.
*****************************************************
Page 4 of 5
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page