I know. Was responding directly to @RefIADad 's language about how "VAR was put in to correct exactly this type of play." On another note, I've learned it was an incomplete clearing of the APP that led to this mistake, rather than a subjective assessment that there was no clear offside. On the one hand, that's better, because it doesn't indicate gross incompetence relative to Law 11. But it is an unacceptable technical mistake that could be classified as incompetent VARing at this point.
It seems like the "incomplete clearing" would be a pretty significant technical error, almost like not understanding a Law as opposed to a judgment call. I get what you were saying earlier, and I wasn't completely clear in my wording. What I should have said was that IF this type of play fell under the purview of a review (which, because the foul was ultimately deemed as a clear and obvious error to not give a DOGSO red, it was), then not having this as an offside (thereby "wiping out" the DOGSO call) is a big miss. While not fully fluent on all of the protocols, I do know enough to know that once you get to one of those four key plays that you then go back to see if there is anything that would nullify the play (layman's language, but I hope you understand my point). It's kind of like the use of VAR in the CL earlier this year when Makkelie first ruled goal on the field, but then VAR had offside. Since there was a foul that led to advantage for the goal, Makkelie was able to go back to the foul/penalty. Something of a reverse on this situation, but the same general concept as I see it.
My initial thought was that the grass cuts meant it had to be failure to look at it rather than getting it wrong while looking at it. I kinda understand how in this context of the upgrade it could be easier to lose track--but understanding how it could happen doesn't make it acceptable. It again raises all the issues about what happens in competitions when we have less experience with VAR and those folks have to do big games--a problem that gets exacerbated by not using in WCQ as no one is getting experience at that level.
Right. I mean neither is good. I just think this one is a bit better, perhaps? Because Law 11 is something you should know since your entry level class and assessing a potential PIOP is, well, more or less a basic skill of officiating. Clearing an APP is a new concept for officials generally (last 3-4 years) and, unless I'm mistaken with this VAR-AVAR pair, something they've had very limited visibility into given they've combined for a total of a couple dozen matches in the VOR. I'd be willing to bet that neither had yet seen the scenario where an APP offside negated a penalty or DOGSO that hadn't already been given on the field. So, from the perspective that this was a first such incident, it's a bit more understandable than them simply forgetting what offside is. That said, neither mistake is acceptable. But one is getting the basics of refereeing wrong on a decision you've been involved in tens of thousands of time. The other is brand new and something you've only been coached on in an instructional setting.
One thing that's been clear here in Canada in the CPL this year (and confirmed by those officiating), the CSA is emphasizing dealing with DR and FRD. There have been a *lot* of cards for it. And the teams are adjusting. I don't have the stats handy, but if you go and stand in front of the ball or boot it away, it's getting a caution. I've seen it happen a lot. Even if it's a second yellow: RED CARD 🟥Well, this is familiar - @YorkUtdFC go down to 10 men vs. @ForgeFCHamilton as Alvaro Rivero is sent off with a second yellow for impeding a free kick Can the Nine Stripes hold on with a 1-0 lead? #CanPL | 🔴 https://t.co/hishXepRT3 pic.twitter.com/svb5gsnvm5— OneSoccer (@onesoccer) August 5, 2021 I personally like this. I know some consider it harsh, but it is gradually changing behavior in the league. Players are getting frustrated with their teammates now when they do it rather than at the referee (mostly). And the refs are proactive verbally with players that are trying to delay the restart. So they are definitely "earning" their cautions. Anyway, we'll see if they keep this up in the CPL. Not sure if it'd be well received if it were done in MLS, but it's worth noting that the CPL has it as a point of emphasis this year.
The miss in Salt Lake is a good example of just how hard being a VAR is. We are well over 4 years into VAR and MLS and there are still big misses every now and then. All that training and experience and they still can mess up catastrophically. Yet people want to throw officials into the VAR booth, who have no or limited experience, on World Cup qualifying in CONCACAF where a combination of weak/poor on-field officiating and players that behave like Sunday morning men's league will force there to be sometimes three or four reviews/checks? Also, touching up on @MassachusettsRef observation that officials at the highest level have basically forgotten that a tackle from behind is inherently dangerous. Another example. Look at 2:41. How do you not have at least a yellow card there? Just seeing Wood's leg contour in that way makes me squeamish. I think it should be a red card, but I would at least understand a yellow being shown.
100% on the use of VMOs with little-to-no training in WCQ. Of course, there's no good reason why those referees have so little training at this point. Also agree on that tackle. I think the Silva one from the same game, despite what Davies says, is a really tough question. Would be interested in toughts there, but it has similarities to the Sweden red card at EUROs.
It's tough one too and my first thought was to this red card that was eventually rescinded in the EPL last year. I think everyone and including many posters on this board criticized the intervention by VAR and that it shouldn't have been a red card. The question you have to ask is could he have pulled out of the tackle with less force. Both plays make it seem like the defender put his body entire body weight on the attacker's leg after clearing the ball. I genuinely don't know what the right answer. You have to be able to clear the ball there, how can you do it without raking down his knee?
Watching the Montreal vs. NYRB PK retakes from Instant Replay. So...why didn't Micheal Barwegen (AR1) flag the second encroachment? I get why he didn't get the first one...even if he had seen it, that's one an AR is probably going to swallow. But after VAR intervention on the first kick, the second encroachment was super obvious, and it seriously damages the game's credibility for the save to be made, ball put into play as all the players stand around waiting for VAR to intervene. Did you notice that players weren't even really playing after the save, as everyone was expecting it to come back. I don't know what was happening on the coms., but man that looked like a pretty bad AR miss. When the players on both teams stop playing waiting for VAR, that's bad is my point. I wonder if the ARs have been coached to not intervene on encroachment and let that be a VAR only call? Or... I seem to remember a fiasco a few years ago with maybe a Canadian AR where he did flag two encroachments in a row, and all hell broke loose. Was that Barwegen also? Did that play permanently break him from flagging encroachment?
Uh-huh. Canadian whistle (Gamble) but Proctor (who worked a ton with Canadians, for some reason) was AR. Fun times. No. There was actually a play last year, I believe (maybe 2019?) where an AR flagged for encroachment and was wrong. Which is, a problem. I'm not sure if ARs have been told to literally not flag ever for this, but I believe the instruction is pretty close if it's not quite there. Losing a little credibility and time on this beats the alternative in PRO's mind. You'll note that at the Gold Cup, ARs didn't even come in off the corner flag for penalties.
I was amazed at the amount of dissent and time wasting Penso put up with late. He literally called the same player back over around 4 times. Once AFTER he'd reached for his front pocket as a warning to talk about a call. Was a really weak look. Id have thrown that card at an 8 year old girl in a game without keepers.
To answer your question, they didn’t clear the APP. Here’s my question, and sorry if it’s been answered earlier or elsewhere. If Gantar’s decision to give a yellow instead of a DOGSO red had not been a clear and obvious error, then should the VAR have checked the APP? What if Gantar had given a red card and it turns out to have been a clear and obvious error because it wasn’t DOGSO? Would the VAR advise Gantar to give a yellow, or would the VAR have checked the APP and advised him not to give any cards because there was a offside first? Bottom line: When is the APP checked? Is the APP only checked when the result of the review is to confirm or award a goal, confirm or award a PK, or confirm or award a red card, and not any other time? Sorry if there is an obvious answer.
The correct procedure here is to identify that giving a yellow card here was a clear and obvious error once that was determined to then look at the app to determine that there was an offside offense. Therefore the correct outcome was to recommend a review for dogso however there was an offside offense in the app and therefore an indirect free kick should be given in the yellow card rescinded. If the yellow card was the correct outcome or not a clear and obvious error then the VAR would not intervene. This is a weird situation with video review as it currently stands.
So in the case where a red card was given for DOGSO, but the VAR decides that the considerations were clearly not met AND there was a clear offside in the APP, I would think the best outcome is to restart with an IFK for the offside because a foul and a yellow for SPA are still demonstrably wrong. Basically I think you're still supposed to clean the APP on a review involving DOGSO even if you're downgrading.
If there's a review, yes. @ColoradoRef did pose two different questions, even though his ultimate question was "when is the APP cleaned?" To his first question, if Gantar had given a yellow and the yellow was NOT deemed clearly wrong, then that's the end of the story. The APP does not get cleaned. Restart remains DFK even though video proves an offside was missed. To the second question, about a DOGSO red given on field and that decision being deemed clearly wrong by the VAR, you and @code1390 have it right. The APP then has to be clean so the end result becomes IFK for offside. Everything hinges on a red card or potential red card decision being wrong. If that bar isn't cleared, then the APP is not checked. If it is cleared, the APP has to be checked. It's as simple as that. Same goes for penalties.