Artificial League

comment by פlǝuƃɥᴉs (U19365)
posted 4 hours, 26 minutes ago
comment by AlgarveWhite (U5640)
posted 1 day, 12 hours ago
Strange that the other Euro leagues don't have a problem with VAR. Maybe it's the standard of our Refs and the idiots at Stockley Park that are the problem.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I still think the only way it will work in the UK is to use foreign referees in the VAR suite. At least then we might see some of the more absurd decisions overturned and incidents like the Pickford one correctly punished.

It really does show how scared the PL referees are of upsetting their friends when it comes to overturning decisions or telling them they've missed a major incident. Maybe refs (including VAR) should be fined for every mistake they make during a game. There really is NO excuse for making the type of mistakes they are, VAR was supposed to cut down on them, NOT make even more.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly. How can they have VAR and still fack up so badly? It's not like they rush the decisions and get then wrong. They take 4 minutes to make the wrong call.

It's almost sabotage FFS. I see people saying VAR out but I don't see anyone questioning the actual machination, or thought process that leads to the blatantly stupid decisions.

We've protected refs and officiating in football for so long that they have failed to move with the game. They're like a small dictatorship that does what they want, question them and you get sent to solitary.

IMO, something basic like making refs explain their decisions would improve officiating to a level we can't even imagine right now.

comment by LeedsFanFor46Years - Prem4harj (U6871)
posted 9 hours, 44 minutes ago
It's the use of VAR for offsides that is making the majority of ridiculous decisions.

They need to make the VAR lines for offside 30cm wide (as measured on the pitch) and if there's any overlap, the decision is that the player was level.

That way, if there's a gap between lines, there is definitely more than 30cm (2x 15cm if each VAR line is centred on each player's body part) in the decision and so there can't be any arguments about marginal distances.

Just seems obvious to me. Don't know why they can't implement something like that immediately. They could use different margins, but it would be more sensible.

VAR for penalties just needs the humans making the decisions to not be from Merseyside or Manchester.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

All you are doing with this suggestion is moving the line and changing absolutely nothing in practice. People will still howl with outrage when someone is given offside for being 31 cm offside.

Also, what happens if someone is 10 cm offside but the linesman flags? Is it offside or a goal? If its offside then what happens if the other team score from 25 cm off and the linesman doesn't flag? You are essentially applying different rules to the two teams and giving one a hugely unfair advantage over the other.

IMO, something basic like making refs explain their decisions would improve officiating to a level we can't even imagine right now.

---

I'm not following your logic there. Surely once a referee has to think about explaining their decision later you introduce a load more variables like fan intimidation etc when they should only be worried about enforcing the laws of the game.

I just don't see how it would change their decisions on the pitch for the better, unless you assume that they're biased or corrupt somehow. That's certainly possible, but still, they're hardly going to say 'I gave United a penalty because the Premier League viewing figures go up when they win.'

comment by Bales (U22081)
posted 17 hours, 48 minutes ago
IMO, something basic like making refs explain their decisions would improve officiating to a level we can't even imagine right now.

---

I'm not following your logic there. Surely once a referee has to think about explaining their decision later you introduce a load more variables like fan intimidation etc when they should only be worried about enforcing the laws of the game.

I just don't see how it would change their decisions on the pitch for the better, unless you assume that they're biased or corrupt somehow. That's certainly possible, but still, they're hardly going to say 'I gave United a penalty because the Premier League viewing figures go up when they win.'
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It works pretty well in other sports, that's why they introduced it. We shouldn't or can't compromise officiating because officials might get stick and abuse IMO. I don't see why they can't keep worrying about the rules of the game.

Your second paragraph proves my point. I don't see why an official should be unable to explain any of his decisions. Otherwise how did they arrive at the decision?

If you remember a Liverpool game where the ref was caught saying he didn't see what happened. He said something like, "I didn't see...I'm giving the penalty", then pointed to the spot. That's a joke. Truth is this is is why officiating is so sheet. Officials are a joke. Perhaps officiating needs to be erased and built up again. Current regime is not fit for purpose.

Ask that ref to explain that. They'll make much better decisions if they have to explain their decisions. What we have is blanket protection. The lack of even a low level of accountability cannot be a good thing and we are paying for that IMO.

Officiating in football is an absolute thankless job, at all levels. They're not perfect by any means, but they don't get anything like the respect refs/umpires do in other sports. They get questioned, abused and lampooned by fans, media, pundits, managers, players.

Not saying it doesn't happen at all in other sports, but football refs cop it the most and by a long way in my view.

comment by VOF - Its all about believing .... (U17124)
posted 3 hours, 51 minutes ago
Officiating in football is an absolute thankless job, at all levels. They're not perfect by any means, but they don't get anything like the respect refs/umpires do in other sports. They get questioned, abused and lampooned by fans, media, pundits, managers, players.

Not saying it doesn't happen at all in other sports, but football refs cop it the most and by a long way in my view.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We cant stop the abuse but maybe there'd be less abuse and controversy if the decision making wasn't so insane. The current set up probably encourages and even justifies abuse in the minds of fans, like they're useless anyway so why not tell them how useless they are.

comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - Psychic spies from China try to steal your minds elation (U1282)
posted 1 hour, 9 minutes ago
comment by VOF - Its all about believing .... (U17124)
posted 3 hours, 51 minutes ago
Officiating in football is an absolute thankless job, at all levels. They're not perfect by any means, but they don't get anything like the respect refs/umpires do in other sports. They get questioned, abused and lampooned by fans, media, pundits, managers, players.

Not saying it doesn't happen at all in other sports, but football refs cop it the most and by a long way in my view.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We cant stop the abuse but maybe there'd be less abuse and controversy if the decision making wasn't so insane. The current set up probably encourages and even justifies abuse in the minds of fans, like they're useless anyway so why not tell them how useless they are.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My guess is if you replayed the majority of matches that at least 85-90% of decisions made are spot on. They make errors, sometimes baffling ones. As a fan, spectator, i roll my eyes, whinge occasionally - but abuse a ref, never have and never would. It's a tough job and without them the game stops.

The above said, i do like the audible decision making of refs in other sports - though not sure that works in footie, but it does offer something to Rugby - Nigel Owen often more entertaining than the match!

comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - Psychic spies from China ... (U1282)
posted 1 day, 2 hours ago
comment by Bales (U22081)
posted 17 hours, 48 minutes ago
IMO, something basic like making refs explain their decisions would improve officiating to a level we can't even imagine right now.

---

I'm not following your logic there. Surely once a referee has to think about explaining their decision later you introduce a load more variables like fan intimidation etc when they should only be worried about enforcing the laws of the game.

I just don't see how it would change their decisions on the pitch for the better, unless you assume that they're biased or corrupt somehow. That's certainly possible, but still, they're hardly going to say 'I gave United a penalty because the Premier League viewing figures go up when they win.'
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It works pretty well in other sports, that's why they introduced it. We shouldn't or can't compromise officiating because officials might get stick and abuse IMO. I don't see why they can't keep worrying about the rules of the game.

Your second paragraph proves my point. I don't see why an official should be unable to explain any of his decisions. Otherwise how did they arrive at the decision?

If you remember a Liverpool game where the ref was caught saying he didn't see what happened. He said something like, "I didn't see...I'm giving the penalty", then pointed to the spot. That's a joke. Truth is this is is why officiating is so sheet. Officials are a joke. Perhaps officiating needs to be erased and built up again. Current regime is not fit for purpose.

Ask that ref to explain that. They'll make much better decisions if they have to explain their decisions. What we have is blanket protection. The lack of even a low level of accountability cannot be a good thing and we are paying for that IMO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't see how I've proven your point at all?

You have repeated your belief that making them explain their decisions will make them better without any reasoning.

In which other sports does the ref explain their decision to the audience? It seems weird to me and counter intuitive. I get that it might be entertaining to watch them squirm, but I don't see how that'll change anything during the game. Unless your implication is that they'll be making decisions with the post match interview in mind, in which case they will be distracted from what they should be doing..

It all boils down to the fact English Football are just getting to grips with it!..

In leagues in Europe that have had it a bit longer it was thought it wouldn't work, fans wanted rid, clubs not happy, a lot of mistakes made!..

Like English football fans were ripping the Ref's, assistants and VAR apart, it wasn't fun especially when it went against you!..

They're getting better at it now and they will get it right sooner or later in the English game, problem is that no matter how good they get it some will always be unhappy, especially when it goes against their team!..

They still make some dumbass decisions but that has more to do with how often the people controlling it visit their Eye Doc!..

Or the hard to prove they're against you!..

comment by Bales (U22081)
posted 19 hours, 12 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - Psychic spies from China ... (U1282)
posted 1 day, 2 hours ago
comment by Bales (U22081)
posted 17 hours, 48 minutes ago
IMO, something basic like making refs explain their decisions would improve officiating to a level we can't even imagine right now.

---

I'm not following your logic there. Surely once a referee has to think about explaining their decision later you introduce a load more variables like fan intimidation etc when they should only be worried about enforcing the laws of the game.

I just don't see how it would change their decisions on the pitch for the better, unless you assume that they're biased or corrupt somehow. That's certainly possible, but still, they're hardly going to say 'I gave United a penalty because the Premier League viewing figures go up when they win.'
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It works pretty well in other sports, that's why they introduced it. We shouldn't or can't compromise officiating because officials might get stick and abuse IMO. I don't see why they can't keep worrying about the rules of the game.

Your second paragraph proves my point. I don't see why an official should be unable to explain any of his decisions. Otherwise how did they arrive at the decision?

If you remember a Liverpool game where the ref was caught saying he didn't see what happened. He said something like, "I didn't see...I'm giving the penalty", then pointed to the spot. That's a joke. Truth is this is is why officiating is so sheet. Officials are a joke. Perhaps officiating needs to be erased and built up again. Current regime is not fit for purpose.

Ask that ref to explain that. They'll make much better decisions if they have to explain their decisions. What we have is blanket protection. The lack of even a low level of accountability cannot be a good thing and we are paying for that IMO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't see how I've proven your point at all?

You have repeated your belief that making them explain their decisions will make them better without any reasoning.

In which other sports does the ref explain their decision to the audience? It seems weird to me and counter intuitive. I get that it might be entertaining to watch them squirm, but I don't see how that'll change anything during the game. Unless your implication is that they'll be making decisions with the post match interview in mind, in which case they will be distracted from what they should be doing..
----------------------------------------------------------------------

They do it in rugby. The referee will give a decision and explain to anyone listening what that decision was for. When a video review is taking place the ref and the TMO will discuss what they are seeing on the screen and agree what they think the best response is.

Having them explain their decisions won't make them better, but it will help the audience understand why the decision was given. This better informs in whether something was a wrong decision or an interpretation.