DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 97493--------------------------------------------------
Re: C KAVANAGH - Man City v Liverpool
DIR By: magpie1892
Date: November 15, 2025, 5:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Affy_Moose link ---
>
> [quote author=Scally Bob link=topic=7396.msg97467#msg97467
date=1763133295]
> The whole situation is farcical.
>
>
HTML https://x.com/timessport/status/1989317668038381784?s=46
>
--- End Quote ---
I take every judgement that the KMI makes with an enormous pinch
of salt.
[/quote]
Considering the KMI panel is made up of generally ex players and
managers who are uneducated on the LOTG it take i with a huge
pinch of salt
Footballers arn't known for being intelligent anyway tbf ;D
#Post#: 97494--------------------------------------------------
Re: C KAVANAGH - Man City v Liverpool
DIR By: Ashington46
Date: November 15, 2025, 5:48 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: magpie1892 link ---
>
> [quote author=Affy_Moose link=topic=7396.msg97468#msg97468
date=1763134117]
> [quote author=Scally Bob link=topic=7396.msg97467#msg97467
date=1763133295]
> The whole situation is farcical.
>
>
HTML https://x.com/timessport/status/1989317668038381784?s=46
>
--- End Quote ---
I take every judgement that the KMI makes with an enormous pinch
of salt.
[/quote]
Considering the KMI panel is made up of generally ex players and
managers who are uneducated on the LOTG it take i with a huge
pinch of salt
Footballers arn't known for being intelligent anyway tbf ;D
[/quote]
IN other words, the committee says that it should have stood,
however, those actually dealing with it in real time decided
that it was against the Laws of the Game to allow it.
The circus continues apace. How long before they decide that
games should be replayed because, in the opinion of the
committee, officials have made a mistake? Where is Brain Rix
when you need him?
#Post#: 97545--------------------------------------------------
Re: C KAVANAGH - Man City v Liverpool
DIR By: TillysDad
Date: November 16, 2025, 8:00 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Sorry fat finger syndrome,meant to agree
#Post#: 97556--------------------------------------------------
Re: C KAVANAGH - Man City v Liverpool
DIR By: Maltese Falcon
Date: November 16, 2025, 10:41 am
---------------------------------------------------------
VAR was brought in to solve the absolute howler decisions. It
does that job well. As you would hope / expect, there’s
relatively few such objectively bad decisions. Therefore the
majority of VAR interventions / non interventions (and certainly
the majority of media/fan “noise”) focus on subjective referee
decisions that could legitimately be called either way. In that
context, it’s not so much was the decision right or wrong but
whether it was optimal or sub optimal.
We frequently see sub optimal decisions get “confirmed” by VAR
because they are not objectively wrong and we don’t wish for
frequent screen visits and re-refereeing. For me, this is an
inherent, fatal flaw in the system that makes the overdue and
welcome increase in media transparency doomed to failure. Until
or unless we completely change the narrative away from right /
wrong and towards greater understanding that in many cases
‘both’ decisions can be acceptable, we will always be pushing
water uphill.
The Robertson decision is a great example of this. IMO, the
level of outrage would have been equally high if the on field
decision had been goal and / or if VAR had intervened to reverse
any on field decision.
#Post#: 97564--------------------------------------------------
Re: C KAVANAGH - Man City v Liverpool
DIR By: Microscopist
Date: November 16, 2025, 3:30 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The preface to the laws of the game refer to decisions being
made “in the spirit of the game”. Unfortunately the laws
themselves do little to explain how the laws, as written, relate
to the spirit of the game. In this case I would think that the
spirit of the game would be something like “ a team should not
benefit from a player being in an offside position”. The laws
of the game then explain the factors to be taken into account in
deciding whether or not a player is giving his/her team an
advantage. In this case I would say that applying the laws as
written could be argued either way so looking purely at the laws
either decision can be justified. However, the composition of
the KMI Panel suggests that they will be less concerned with the
laws as written and more concerned with the spirit of the game.
In other words how much difference Robertson’s action made to
the outcome. My view is that the interference with Donnarumma
was pretty slight and I can well see that the KMI Panel would
decide that Robertson’s action was relatively insignificant.
*****************************************************
Page 5 of 5
DIR Previous Page