VAR The wolves pen vs Utd

Agree the wording 'clear and obvious' needs to go but I don't think it's what made them arrive at the wrong decision here. The VAR got it right initially but somehow changed his mind the more he watched it. It's great for many when they hear this audio as they can hear they simply made a mistake based on their view in the short time they had to watch it, it makes them human. This removes the idea that it's 'cheating' or 'bias' etc that some feel is the issue with the decision.

Rugby's League video ref is handled far better than VAR and they don't have anywhere near the budgets football have either.

I agree the ref being miked up now in the studio and on the pitch for these calls is needed. Takes away all the morons who cry conspiracy and agenda.

They do get them wrong in Super League tbf as well but at least you get to hear what they are saying

They did some others but only 2? There was far more than that

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/66724505

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QndBrhE9bJk

if you're interested.

VAR Harrington: "Checking the goal, checking the goal. He's [Akanji] definitely in an offside position. Has he made an obvious action to impact on the ability of the goalkeeper? He's moving out of the way of the ball."

Assistant VAR Adam Nunn: "In my opinion he makes a full-length save. For me it's subjective, there's potential impact on the keeper, but does it clearly impact the keeper? I think the keeper sees the ball the whole way."

VAR Harrington: "So the keeper sees it, there's no difference, we're happy. Check complete?"

AVAR Nunn: "Personally, I'm happy for check complete."

VAR Harrington: "OK, check complete, check complete."
_______________
This one was by far the worst of the bunch. How 2 so called professionals come to that conclusion just shows the standard of officiating in the prem.

Kind of stuff that makes you lose all faith in them. How 2 professionals agree with the probably 0.01% of the footballing world on that decision.

From that BBC article I think Webb has taken the correct position that the Onana and Akanji ones were incorrect and the VVD one was correct.

I do have a bit of sympathy in the Akanji case in that interfering with an opponent can be pretty hard to definitively say and it sounds like they talked themselves out of it on the idea of it being beyond the keepers dive regardless. Hopefully this will provide a bit of consistency in the future for any similar incidents.

I wish they had touched on some of the different handball that have had different outcomes.

What worries me is that the City and Utd decisions weren't difficult ones - the VAR team seem to be feeling too much pressure - just take a step back, engage your brain and make the right decision!!!!
Too much overthinking. And have a normal converstaion with the ref - just say, this is what I see, what do you see and come to the decision (similar to rugby union).
I don't get in both these instances what they were seeing that others weren't. It was a foul by our goalie v Wolves. And Akanji interfered with play. Simple and they shouldn't have been controversial wrong decisons

comment by kinsang (U3346)
posted 1 hour, 7 minutes ago
What worries me is that the City and Utd decisions weren't difficult ones - the VAR team seem to be feeling too much pressure - just take a step back, engage your brain and make the right decision!!!!
Too much overthinking. And have a normal converstaion with the ref - just say, this is what I see, what do you see and come to the decision (similar to rugby union).
I don't get in both these instances what they were seeing that others weren't. It was a foul by our goalie v Wolves. And Akanji interfered with play. Simple and they shouldn't have been controversial wrong decisons
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Your middle paragraph is interesting. One thing I noticed from the audio is how the ref is trying to listen to VAR whilst being hounded by players etc.

In rugby when the ref is talking to the TMO the players are told to go away and wait until the ref has come to a decision and then the ref is able to go through the conversation with the TMO pretty calmly.

In big rugby games they also show the replays on the big screens so the ref can watch at the same time as having the chat (without running off to a small tv) and they often talk through their decision making process.

So for a try you might hear the ref say.

"Can we check the grounding?

OK so what I am seeing is that the player is in control of the ball and definitely grounds it so that's fine. Can we go back and see if the player was offside?

Right so have you got any other angles?

When he kicks the ball the player is not clearly offside and so unless there is another angle I'm going to award the try. Is everyone happy with that?"

I do think rugby rules are a little bit more black and white so easier to officiate but the audio and visuals on these decisions just takes away so much of the controversy.

The audio on the Akanji one just highlights incompetence of the refs. YOu can see the full dive from the keeper, but he also has to hesitate momentarily before committing to that full dive as Akanji looks like he is going to make contact. I dont think the keepers vision is affected but his ability to react is.

The rules state, off side when:
"making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball"

As a keeper, "playing the ball" should be read as making a save and the keepers ability to react here was impacted.

comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 4 hours, 59 minutes ago
From that BBC article I think Webb has taken the correct position that the Onana and Akanji ones were incorrect and the VVD one was correct.

I do have a bit of sympathy in the Akanji case in that interfering with an opponent can be pretty hard to definitively say and it sounds like they talked themselves out of it on the idea of it being beyond the keepers dive regardless. Hopefully this will provide a bit of consistency in the future for any similar incidents.

I wish they had touched on some of the different handball that have had different outcomes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
i have the least sympathy on the city one thats hard to get wrong imo. The Utd one i felt similar but hearing the voice coms i can see why they confused themselves now atleast.

it was clear as day the keeper had to delay his dive until the ball passed the offside city player, who jumped out the way of it at the last minute. How they come out with this beggars belief it really does.

VAR Harrington: "So the keeper sees it, there's no difference, we're happy. Check complete?"

Again theyre focusing on one thing and not the issue. Like the Utd pen one they focused on the two colliding not winning the ball and just didnt check or question the refs view it was a coming together, it wasnt it was one player jumping into another.

The city one theyre focusing on if the keeper can see the ball, totally ignoring the fact a keeper often can't or wont dive until the offside player makes his move because he'd luck silly doing so and the player redirects it and scores and it turns out hes onside.