DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 52438--------------------------------------------------
Re: Michael Salisbury - Newcastle v Palace
DIR By: TVOS
Date: September 5, 2022, 12:41 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: rustyref link ---
>
> [quote author=TVOS link=topic=3947.msg52382#msg52382
date=1662371034]
> [quote author=Bluekipper link=topic=3947.msg52288#msg52288
date=1662282578]
> I had a lot of sympathy for Michael Salisbury who I thought
got the decision right only to be thrown under a bus by Lee
Mason.
>
> To make matters worse we had Mr Sensible Alan Shearer and
Danny Murphy suggesting that ex-pros should be in charge of VAR
because "they know the game". It would help their cause if they
had even a smattering of knowledge of the LOTG.
>
--- End Quote ---
They didn't say ex-players should be in charge of VAR; they
suggested getting them involved which, in my opinion, shouldn't
be dismissed outright.
Those who do know the LotG will always have the ultimate say,
but would it be such a bad thing to get some input from other
suitable, knowledgeable parties?
The majority of Match Delegates, for example, are articulate,
intelligent ex-players (Peter Vincenti from my club and Richard
Jobson also performed that role - both players are graduates, I
believe), so I don't think investigating whether they could get
some to help out with VAR should be completely dismissed out of
hand.
And let's face it, those currently running it aren't giving such
a shining example, are they?
[/quote]
Unfortunately, in the very same program Danny Murphy suggested
that an offside shouldn't have been given because the ball was
played backwards, so his credibility is shot to pieces just as
much as the match officials was last weekend.
No problem in ex-pros being involved in focus groups to make VAR
better, but they can't be anywhere near the match day process.
Decisions would take at least a minute longer as the actual
qualified VAR officials would have to educate them on the laws.
"Yes Danny, he was the last man but that isn't the law". "No
Alan, it can't be a penalty as the corner hadn't been taken when
the player was wrestled to the ground". And so on, pretty much
every weekend a pundit or studio guest says something that isn't
correct in law.
[/quote]
I think you're being a bit disrespectful to the type of
ex-players I mentioned and who I would envisage being involved.
The likes of the TV pundits clearly shouldn't be involved, but
there are surely many more capable ex-players (from all levels)
who could work with the VARs on the proviso they proved
themselves competent in the LotG before they went any further.
It's unlikely to be something top level players would be
interested in, but you don’t have to be a top level player to
'know the game'.
Surely it has to be worth a try, at least? Or do we want it to
remain a closed shop?
#Post#: 52442--------------------------------------------------
Re: Michael Salisbury - Newcastle v Palace
DIR By: rustyref
Date: September 5, 2022, 1:37 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: TVOS link ---
>
> [quote author=rustyref link=topic=3947.msg52426#msg52426
date=1662396939]
> [quote author=TVOS link=topic=3947.msg52382#msg52382
date=1662371034]
> [quote author=Bluekipper link=topic=3947.msg52288#msg52288
date=1662282578]
> I had a lot of sympathy for Michael Salisbury who I thought
got the decision right only to be thrown under a bus by Lee
Mason.
>
> To make matters worse we had Mr Sensible Alan Shearer and
Danny Murphy suggesting that ex-pros should be in charge of VAR
because "they know the game". It would help their cause if they
had even a smattering of knowledge of the LOTG.
>
--- End Quote ---
They didn't say ex-players should be in charge of VAR; they
suggested getting them involved which, in my opinion, shouldn't
be dismissed outright.
Those who do know the LotG will always have the ultimate say,
but would it be such a bad thing to get some input from other
suitable, knowledgeable parties?
The majority of Match Delegates, for example, are articulate,
intelligent ex-players (Peter Vincenti from my club and Richard
Jobson also performed that role - both players are graduates, I
believe), so I don't think investigating whether they could get
some to help out with VAR should be completely dismissed out of
hand.
And let's face it, those currently running it aren't giving such
a shining example, are they?
[/quote]
Unfortunately, in the very same program Danny Murphy suggested
that an offside shouldn't have been given because the ball was
played backwards, so his credibility is shot to pieces just as
much as the match officials was last weekend.
No problem in ex-pros being involved in focus groups to make VAR
better, but they can't be anywhere near the match day process.
Decisions would take at least a minute longer as the actual
qualified VAR officials would have to educate them on the laws.
"Yes Danny, he was the last man but that isn't the law". "No
Alan, it can't be a penalty as the corner hadn't been taken when
the player was wrestled to the ground". And so on, pretty much
every weekend a pundit or studio guest says something that isn't
correct in law.
[/quote]
I think you're being a bit disrespectful to the type of
ex-players I mentioned and who I would envisage being involved.
The likes of the TV pundits clearly shouldn't be involved, but
there are surely many more capable ex-players (from all levels)
who could work with the VARs on the proviso they proved
themselves competent in the LotG before they went any further.
It's unlikely to be something top level players would be
interested in, but you don’t have to be a top level player to
'know the game'.
Surely it has to be worth a try, at least? Or do we want it to
remain a closed shop?
[/quote]
It isn't a "closed shop". Anyone can train to become a referee,
even ex-players, and everyone that is currently an SG1 referee,
whether on the pitch as referee or or in the control room as
VAR, started out as a level 7 referee. Why should someone who
hasn't refereed a game in their life suddenly become qualified
to advise on VAR, which are refereeing, decisions? It is a very
common scenario that ex-players who become referees really
struggle, certainly initially, as they referee the game as they
would have wanted to be refereed themselves rather than how the
laws require them to.
As I said, in a consultancy role might be a good idea, perhaps
even provide feedback after games, but they can't and won't be
in the control room.
Also, the oft thrown around comment that referees "don't
understand the game" is unfair at best, and simply incorrect in
most cases. Almost everyone who gets involved in refereeing
loves football and as well as refereeing will watch football
regularly, arguably more than pro footballers. Yes, they
haven't played at the top level but that isn't the be all and
end all.
#Post#: 52446--------------------------------------------------
Re: Michael Salisbury - Newcastle v Palace
DIR By: TVOS
Date: September 5, 2022, 2:08 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: rustyref link ---
>
> [quote author=TVOS link=topic=3947.msg52438#msg52438
date=1662399684]
> [quote author=rustyref link=topic=3947.msg52426#msg52426
date=1662396939]
> [quote author=TVOS link=topic=3947.msg52382#msg52382
date=1662371034]
> [quote author=Bluekipper link=topic=3947.msg52288#msg52288
date=1662282578]
> I had a lot of sympathy for Michael Salisbury who I thought
got the decision right only to be thrown under a bus by Lee
Mason.
>
> To make matters worse we had Mr Sensible Alan Shearer and
Danny Murphy suggesting that ex-pros should be in charge of VAR
because "they know the game". It would help their cause if they
had even a smattering of knowledge of the LOTG.
>
--- End Quote ---
They didn't say ex-players should be in charge of VAR; they
suggested getting them involved which, in my opinion, shouldn't
be dismissed outright.
Those who do know the LotG will always have the ultimate say,
but would it be such a bad thing to get some input from other
suitable, knowledgeable parties?
The majority of Match Delegates, for example, are articulate,
intelligent ex-players (Peter Vincenti from my club and Richard
Jobson also performed that role - both players are graduates, I
believe), so I don't think investigating whether they could get
some to help out with VAR should be completely dismissed out of
hand.
And let's face it, those currently running it aren't giving such
a shining example, are they?
[/quote]
Unfortunately, in the very same program Danny Murphy suggested
that an offside shouldn't have been given because the ball was
played backwards, so his credibility is shot to pieces just as
much as the match officials was last weekend.
No problem in ex-pros being involved in focus groups to make VAR
better, but they can't be anywhere near the match day process.
Decisions would take at least a minute longer as the actual
qualified VAR officials would have to educate them on the laws.
"Yes Danny, he was the last man but that isn't the law". "No
Alan, it can't be a penalty as the corner hadn't been taken when
the player was wrestled to the ground". And so on, pretty much
every weekend a pundit or studio guest says something that isn't
correct in law.
[/quote]
I think you're being a bit disrespectful to the type of
ex-players I mentioned and who I would envisage being involved.
The likes of the TV pundits clearly shouldn't be involved, but
there are surely many more capable ex-players (from all levels)
who could work with the VARs on the proviso they proved
themselves competent in the LotG before they went any further.
It's unlikely to be something top level players would be
interested in, but you don’t have to be a top level player to
'know the game'.
Surely it has to be worth a try, at least? Or do we want it to
remain a closed shop?
[/quote]
It isn't a "closed shop". Anyone can train to become a referee,
even ex-players, and everyone that is currently an SG1 referee,
whether on the pitch as referee or or in the control room as
VAR, started out as a level 7 referee. Why should someone who
hasn't refereed a game in their life suddenly become qualified
to advise on VAR, which are refereeing, decisions? It is a very
common scenario that ex-players who become referees really
struggle, certainly initially, as they referee the game as they
would have wanted to be refereed themselves rather than how the
laws require them to.
As I said, in a consultancy role might be a good idea, perhaps
even provide feedback after games, but they can't and won't be
in the control room.
Also, the oft thrown around comment that referees "don't
understand the game" is unfair at best, and simply incorrect in
most cases. Almost everyone who gets involved in refereeing
loves football and as well as refereeing will watch football
regularly, arguably more than pro footballers. Yes, they
haven't played at the top level but that isn't the be all and
end all.
[/quote]
A consultancy role is the sort of thing I mean. I never
suggested otherwise.
*****************************************************
Page 3 of 3
DIR Previous Page