Premier League 2019-20 Assignments and Discussion [Rs]

Discussion in 'Referee' started by balu, Jul 20, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. balu

    balu Member+

    Oct 18, 2013
    The solution to all this inconsistency is simple: Just have Mike Dean as VAR for every game :D

    [​IMG]
     
  2. Sport Billy

    Sport Billy Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 25, 2006
    Are there no bias rules in the EPL?

    I’m certainly not saying anyone cheated today.

    However, it looks extremely bad to have two officials from the same city as one of the teams.
     
  3. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    To be fair to Taylor, has anyone been that good this year? I totally agree with your point (Bennett and Dowd are two who I think always got big games despite dips in form). But in this case, given everyone’s form has dipped, what do you do? Maybe Oliver and Dean have been largely unscathed and pretty consistent. But you can’t give them every match. In other words, an inconsistent Taylor still beats an inconsistent Moss or Friend.
     
  4. balu

    balu Member+

    Oct 18, 2013
    Our old pal Clattenburg chimes in:

    Harry Maguire should not have been on the pitch to score Manchester United’s second goal after his earlier kick-out at Michy Batshuayi.

    On first viewing, I wanted to support Maguire, thinking maybe he had caught the Chelsea striker in his follow through after challenging for the ball.

    But replays showed the United defender made a clear second movement towards Batshuayi which he could have avoided. He made a stamping motion into Batshuayi’s groin and should have seen red.

    VAR looked at this but did not deem it a clear error by referee Anthony Taylor, and this is where the inconsistencies lie.

    Let’s not forget Taylor was the man in the middle when Tottenham’s Son Heung-min made a similar foul on Chelsea’s Antonio Rudiger in December.

    Taylor missed the challenge by Maguire, but had he gone to his pitch-side monitor, I’m sure he would have sent him off. As for the booking for Willian, that was a blatant dive.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/f...uldnt-pitch-score-Manchester-United-goal.html
     
  5. AremRed

    AremRed Member+

    Sep 23, 2013
    I love Clattenburg but he has no room to talk about VC after not sending off any Tottenham players a few years ago.
     
  6. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Whether it’s from Clattenburg or someone here, I’ll never understand this alleged logic.

    The issue isn’t, by itself, the lack of OFRs. The issue is the training over what “clearly wrong” is. If Kavanagh is applying his training to say this isn’t “clearly wrong” then, if Taylor were to apply the same training he would also determine this wasn’t clearly wrong if he undertook an OFR. An OFR isn’t about re-refereeing despite what Clattenburg thinks and how he utilized VAR in Saudi Arabia. The clearly wrong standard still applies during OFRs and that’s the real problem in England.

    When poor decisions get upheld, it’s the standard not the mechanism that’s the problem.

    The mechanism is a problem for a host of other reasons: public perception, referee confidence, match management, etc. But this idea that referees would suddenly and automatically give red cards for things they didn’t give in the first place and things their colleagues already don’t think are clear errors is weird. The problem is the high standard for what a clear error is.
     
    Barciur and jasonakramer repped this.
  7. TheRealBilbo

    TheRealBilbo Member+

    Apr 5, 2016
    I've been chewing on this for a while and am not sure what to make of it. In the least, it's unsatisfying.

    Is there a preferred outcome give objective tools to evaluate something, such as FIFA Analysis of Match Situations? Are these tools used in the VAR process?

    Saying something is not a clear error leaves a wide gap between preferred outcome and 'I can accept that decision.' I look at the handball shout in the Southampton Burnley game this past weekend, and I could see both it being called and not calling it as not being a clear error. But, I'm not trained in the level of an EPL official, and I want to know what is preferred (right), not what isn't clearly wrong.

    Surely FIFA and the FA have a preference (hopefully the same preference, but we are talking about FIFA and the FA after all) and that preference should be what the match officials are trained to determine, and should be reflected in the final call. But you are saying that a call that isn't the preferred call isn't a clear error. Isnt that a problem?

    The FA put a tool in the hand of Match officials and sets a standard for its use that is emasculating.
     
  8. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Indeed it does. But from day one of the introduction of VAR, that's been advertised as a feature, not a bug. Right from the start, every publication and press conference and interview relative to VAR stressed that it would not be about re-refereeing every controversial incident and only address incidents that were clearly wrong (or "clear and obvious"). So, inherently, there would be a gap.

    That makes all of us. But I find it hard to believe that the Maguire kick-out wouldn't be taught as violent conduct in an EPL instructional setting. After all, it was given as such when Son did it earlier this year. So, for this particular type of incident, the question really is whether or not--in the FA's eyes--the VAR this weekend was too conservative with his threshold or the VAR in the Spurs incident was too liberal with his threshold. Because they both can't be right.

    I can disabuse you of your hope. There's no way it's the same preference. And UEFA has a different preference than FIFA.

    Back to the top... no. At least not in the eyes of those who developed VAR. Feature, not a bug. "Meh, that should probably be a penalty and I'd have given a penalty if I got to call it again" is different than "My word, how was that missed? That's definitely a penalty."

    Of course, as your whole post underlines, calibrating for that second standard when you are taught to referee by a different standard is, shall we say, difficult.

    Well, IFAB and FIFA did that. The FA has just decided to adhere to an extra high threshold. Some would argue that the FA is adhering to the threshold that was originally intended. I certainly think an argument can be made that if the FA had adopted VAR early, they could have shaped it to maintain such a high threshold.

    There are many problems with VAR in England, but perhaps the biggest of all is that they waited and the rest of the world passed them by. While there are still discrepancies among all the leagues out there and it can be the wild west in international competitions as it gets further introduced, there's a general expectation on what level of "mistake" necessitates a VAR intervention. That's because everyone else shaped VAR while England waited and the threshold was lowered from what was probably intended and advertised. England is trying to turn the clock back and it's not going well.
     
  9. Rufusabc

    Rufusabc Member+

    May 27, 2004
    I know we have discussed this in the past, but I feel there is a real dilemma playing out in English football. We have only a certain cadre of referees doing the matches of the so called “top 6” and the VAR room is being led by referees who wouldn’t get those matches on the field. There is no way the “lesser” ref is going to overrule the match ref on a non-technical issue. Like yesterday. I know there are far more problems with the English adjudication of the system, but i feel this is an additional layer heaped on to the pile. Kavanaugh is not going to one-up Taylor.
     
  10. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    But this just isn't true at all. How many times has Atkinson been overruled? Dean? Even Taylor (with Son)?

    I also think you underestimate the ego of a referee who is, apparently on the merits, the 6th or 8th or 11th best official in his country and the best league in the world. I don't think such a human being defers to the 1st or 3rd or 4th best as readily as you might think. These are confident (and competitive) people.

    Regardless, there's just no evidence that this is an actual issue. In every other league in the world, it's not an issue. There may be a general reluctance to intervene because VAR is still new and foreign and officials generally don't want to get told they are wrong without seeing an incident, but that's a different question.

    And maybe there's also an issue around incentive. In MLS and elsewhere, VARs are being assessed on their own merits and assignments and employment are on the line. I'm genuinely not certain how VAR assessment works in England. If you can't "screw up" as a VAR in England, that might be another pressure point that pushes VARs toward non-intervention. But for all I know, they are being assessed critically as well.
     
  11. RefIADad

    RefIADad Member+

    United States
    Aug 18, 2017
    Des Moines, IA
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    While I see this point, the issue is really why England can't just get with the rest of the world and use an OFR for a play like this. There is a significant difference between Kavanagh saying to Taylor, "Anthony, I am advising you to do a video review of this play, as a send-off of Maguire may be warranted" and "Anthony, I'm advising you that this is violent conduct and you need to send Maguire off".

    The first one allows Taylor to go over to the monitor, (hopefully) see that the Maguire kick-out is VC, and then issue the proper sanction. The second one does carry the perception of Kavanagh overruling Taylor. Personally, I thought an "overrule" (note the quotes - I know it's not a true overrule) was justified there. However, if Kavanagh advises Taylor that he should look for himself, Taylor can then see the situation again wtih his own eyes.

    The combination of VERY limited use of on-field reviews and a VERY high threshold of what "clearly wrong" is leading English refereeing to a disaster.
     
  12. Sport Billy

    Sport Billy Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 25, 2006
    But it's not happening that way.
    Look at the first goal canceled by VAR in the CHE:MAN U game.
    What was the clear error there?
    There wasn't one.
    In fact, VAR's action would be deemed clear error by any official that reviewing it.
    The CR's non-call was correct. It should have never been reviewed in the first place.

    Certainly, once it was reviewed, it should have resulted in an OFR rather than the VAR official simply substituting his opinion for that of the CR.

    It was the worst officiated game in a long time.

    BTW, no one has answered. Why are two referees from Manchester allowed to referee a game involving a Manchester Team?
     
  13. RefIADad

    RefIADad Member+

    United States
    Aug 18, 2017
    Des Moines, IA
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I'm probably way off on this, but I thought the key issue was to avoid conflicts related to the teams referees have said they support. Using Mike Dean as an example, since the team he supports is a League One side, he would be OK to referee teams from Liverpool in the EPL (i.e. Liverpool and Everton).

    I'm not saying that there could still be a perceived conflict of interest to have referees from Manchester officiate games involving Man City and Man United, but I believe that referees from those cities can work games involving teams as long as they do not support the team.

    Plus, when you are talking about the larger cities like London, Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham, etc., it may end up being really difficult to completely avoid refereeing teams from your city. There are only so many referees and so many cities represented in the EPL.
     
    MassachusettsRef repped this.
  14. code1390

    code1390 Moderator
    Staff Member

    Nov 25, 2007
    Club:
    Tottenham Hotspur FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    IMO a better question is why shouldn't they be allowed to?
     
    Thezzaruz and MassachusettsRef repped this.
  15. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    It's as though every time you read one of my posts, you choose to forget everything else I've ever written about VAR for four years now.

    Where is the suggestion that I thought things were going well in England, which would then warrant this sort of reply? Why do I have to defend the no-goal VAR decision in Chelsea v. Manchester United?

    I was responding to a genuine inquiry about VAR generally with an answer about how things are supposed to be--explaining the "gap" that was alluded to. I don't see what I said in that paragraph that is wrong or controversial (or has anything to do with the match you bring up).

    Now that we're here, no, there wasn't a clear error in the opinion of most neutral observers. VAR should have never intervened. This is yet another exhibition of English VARs being bad at what they do, period.

    Of course, saying that the VAR's action would be deemed a "clear error" by any official is probably hyperbole, given that the VAR is, you know, an official. If he was capable of making that call, it does suggest that others in the EPL are also capable of making that call. And again, that's a real problem. Suggesting that he is the only official in the world who would make that mistake misses the point and makes a systemic problem seem like a single mistake from one rogue outlier.

    Also, suggesting the play should have never been reviewed demonstrates that you don't fully grasp how VAR works. Every goal needs to be checked and since, in England, there's no functional difference between a check and a review on goals, then this absolute did need to be reviewed/checked.

    Will there be a point that you realize you're screaming into the void on this?

    You can wish-cast all you want about what should happen. What should happen is even what IFAB says needs to happen. It's still not going to suddenly start happening, nearly 2/3 of the way through the season. Hopefully there will be a reset for 2020-21 and the EPL will realize the error of its ways. But for now, you simply are never going to see an OFR on a goal or penalty this season in the EPL. So if you're genuinely hoping otherwise and believe things will change by May, you're going to be sorely disappointed. If you're simply just saying it "should" happen, then everyone agrees with you.

    For a high-profile EPL match, sure, probably. But if you mean generally--even in strictly limited to professional settings--it really wasn't that bad. And I say that as someone who thought it was very bad.

    I was going to let your post go ignored, but now you're choosing to double-down. So I'll start by saying I align myself with @code1390 here. Why shouldn't someone be allowed to do so?

    But moreover, you dropped a suggestion with no context about how referees might engage in cheating or how--more charitably--there might be the perception of cheating but tried to covered yourself by asserting that you are "certainly" not saying anyone cheated (even though in the line above you asked about "bias rules"--whatever those are). I also suspect you wouldn't have brought this up if Manchester United didn't win. You have never brought it up when either official in question has officiated a Manchester club in the past. So, bluntly, I thought it was a garbage sentiment that you introduced that is more fit for tabloids... which is probably where you got it. It doesn't deserve an answer.
     
    jdmahoney repped this.
  16. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    This is more of a response than the "inquiry" deserved, but it's well-written and to my knowledge also accurate.
     
  17. RefIADad

    RefIADad Member+

    United States
    Aug 18, 2017
    Des Moines, IA
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    #1317 RefIADad, Feb 18, 2020
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2020
    Fair enough. I know that many of us are nowhere near the EPL level. However, there are many of us here that would barely referee if we didn't work games where we had any sort of perceived conflict of interest.

    I've officiated matches with my hometown high school where two of my son's friends were playing. I've officiated matches where my son's friend from church was playing. I've officiated matches of teams within my son's club. Not that I enjoy doing it, but I've run lines for my son's games when they are short officials (Definitely a conflict of interest, but I think I can run a line on a U12 game and not screw things up too badly. Plus, most of the clubs my son plays have his ODP teammates on them, so a lot of people know me and my officiating background). Heck, earlier this month I refereed a state semifinal indoor match with the sister club of my son's club against a team that had my son's basketball teammate and several of his former club teammates. In other words, I had multiple perceived conflicts of interest for both teams, and I'm guessing there were people associated with each club who thought I was probably going to be biased against the other club.

    Long story short is that it's going to be REALLY hard to avoid every single possible perceived conflict of interest.
     
  18. code1390

    code1390 Moderator
    Staff Member

    Nov 25, 2007
    Club:
    Tottenham Hotspur FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    When 31 states are larger than England, it seems pretty crazy to say someone from a specific city should be prevented from working certain teams because of the city they're from. I've literally traveled a longer distance than London to Manchester to work a youth state cup game.
     
    uws22, Dayton Ref, RefIADad and 2 others repped this.
  19. balu

    balu Member+

    Oct 18, 2013
    Matchweek 27

    Chelsea - Tottenham
    Referee: Michael Oliver. Assistants: Stuart Burt, Simon Bennett. Fourth official: Kevin Friend. VAR: David Coote. Assistant VAR: Adam Nunn.

    Burnley - Bournemouth
    Referee: Mike Dean. Assistants: Darren Cann, Mark Scholes. Fourth official: Tony Harrington. VAR: Chris Kavanagh. Assistant VAR: Daniel Cook.

    Crystal Palace - Newcastle
    Referee: Peter Bankes. Assistants: Ian Hussin, Harry Lennard. Fourth official: Stuart Attwell. VAR: Andy Madley. Assistant VAR: Adrian Holmes.

    Sheffield - Brighton
    Referee: Graham Scott. Assistants: Neil Davies, Derek Eaton. Fourth official: David Webb. VAR: Darren Bond. Assistant VAR: Simon Beck.

    Southampton - Aston Villa
    Referee: Craig Pawson. Assistants: Richard West, Nick Hopton. Fourth official: Keith Stroud. VAR: Simon Hooper. Assistant VAR: Andy Halliday.

    Leicester - Man City
    Referee: Paul Tierney. Assistants: Gary Beswick, Constantine Hatzidakis. Fourth official: Jonathan Moss. VAR: David Coote. Assistant VAR: Sian Massey-Ellis.

    Man Utd - Watford
    Referee: Martin Atkinson. Assistants: Lee Betts, Peter Kirkup. Fourth official: Anthony Taylor. VAR: Andre Marriner. Assistant VAR: Scott Ledger.

    Wolves - Norwich
    Referee: Chris Kavanagh. Assistants: Daniel Cook, Sian Massey-Ellis. Fourth official: Peter Bankes. VAR: Michael Oliver. Assistant VAR: Marc Perry.

    Arsenal - Everton
    Referee: Stuart Attwell. Assistants: Adam Nunn, Simon Long. Fourth official: Simon Hooper. VAR: Craig Pawson. Assistant VAR: Stephen Child.

    Liverpool - West Ham
    Referee: Jonathan Moss. Assistants: Marc Perry, Eddie Smart. Fourth official: Lee Mason. VAR: Paul Tierney. Assistant VAR: Stuart Burt.

    Oliver for the big London derby, Tierney and Attwell with important games between other top teams.
     
  20. balu

    balu Member+

    Oct 18, 2013
    "Top six" matches:

    Liverpool - Man City (Community Shield): Atkinson
    Man Utd - Chelsea: Taylor
    Man City - Tottenham: Oliver
    Liverpool - Arsenal: Taylor
    Arsenal - Tottenham: Atkinson
    Chelsea - Liverpool: Oliver
    Man Utd - Arsenal: Friend
    Man Utd - Liverpool: Atkinson
    Liverpool - Tottenham: Taylor
    Chelsea - Man Utd (Carabao Cup): Tierney
    Liverpool - Arsenal (Carabao Cup): Marriner
    Liverpool - Man City: Oliver
    Man City - Chelsea: Atkinson
    Man Utd - Tottenham: Tierney
    Man City - Man Utd: Taylor
    Arsenal - Man City: Tierney
    Tottenham - Chelsea: Taylor
    Arsenal - Chelsea: Pawson
    Arsenal - Man Utd: Kavanagh
    Man Utd - Man City (Carabao Cup): Dean
    Liverpool - Man Utd: Pawson
    Chelsea - Arsenal: Attwell
    Man City - Man Utd (Carabao Cup): Marriner
    Chelsea - Man Utd: Taylor
    Chelsea - Tottenham: Oliver

    Distribution of these matches in the EPL so far:

    Taylor: 6
    Oliver: 4
    Atkinson: 3
    Pawson: 2
    Tierney: 2
    Attwell: 1
    Friend: 1
    Kavanagh: 1
     
  21. Dayton Ref

    Dayton Ref Member+

    May 3, 2012
    Houston, TX
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    I had this exact conversation with a friend this past weekend. He said, "Trying to explain distances here to my family is hard. It is about an hour to London from my parents' place but, 'It is just such a long drive' that they only go a couple of times a year. We drove 3 hours for Men's State Cup. I can't remember the last time my grandparents made a 3 hour drive."
     
  22. socal lurker

    socal lurker Member+

    May 30, 2009
    I don't disagree about the disaster and that the lack of OFR usage is making the disaster worse, but I think you overrate the difference here. With non-PL VAR, the message isn't "may be warranted," it is "I think you should review for a clear error." In either case, the VAR threshold is believing there is a clear error--and the R and VAR both know what that message is, regardless of words used.
     
  23. code1390

    code1390 Moderator
    Staff Member

    Nov 25, 2007
    Club:
    Tottenham Hotspur FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    To paraphrase a quote I've heard: "To an American a hundred years is a long time and to a Brit a hundred miles is a long distance".
     
    Thezzaruz, IASocFan and Dayton Ref repped this.
  24. RefIADad

    RefIADad Member+

    United States
    Aug 18, 2017
    Des Moines, IA
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Perhaps, but I still think that knowing the referee can see for himself would at least show he has the last word on the decision. I get that professional referees likely have big egos, so the optics of the referee being able to see the play for himself might not give him the motivation to overturn it.

    My ego isn't at the level of these guys, so I'm OK being "overruled". However, at that level, the PGMOL referees are competing for FIFA badges or continental/international assignments. They may not want to overturn a call even if the evidence is there. My opinion only, but I think you'd have a better process if you would just let the referees see the play for themselves after being advised a clear error has been made.
     
  25. socal lurker

    socal lurker Member+

    May 30, 2009
    I don't disagree with this at all. There is a reason the rest of the world uses OFR on judgment calls.
    I don't agree with that. They have egos, but they want to get it right. And in competing for appointments, they are going to lose ground if they don't fix clear errors, not gain ground. (And as noted above, the VARs should be being evaluated on what they send down and should have an incentive to be right in what they send down.)
    Again, as in how the rest of the world does it. No question (in my mind anyway) that is a much better process. I'm not disagreeing with you at all about that. I just think you are overestimating the difference it will make in what is sent down. What is going to change what is sent down is the expectations made of the VARs by those who evaluate them and determine their future assignments. It is totally unclear to me how much of what is/ is not being sent down is because of poor choices by individual VARs and how much is because of the instructions they have been given (explicitly or implicitly) by the powers that be. I tend to believe that, because these are ambitious competitive men, that the latter is a significant factor.
     
    MassachusettsRef repped this.

Share This Page