If he wasn't saying delay and offside in the mics, he is equally responsible for the failure of this play. All procedural stuff.
Right. If. Though, at that point, Hooper is also responsible for not confirming the delayed flag and articulating the on-field decision. There are a number of different ways blame could deservedly go around here.
So many in the public saying they need to fix the process. Except that's already there, they just failed to follow the process that exists. I'm a little more willing to forgive the referee that piece here... IF AR said what he was supposed to. But, then again, really, no reason to vary from the process even if you think it's been obviously communicated. That's the whole point, redundancy to avoid careless mishaps.
It is, of course, worth asking if the standard process in England is both instructed and typically followed as regimentally as it is in MLS. In other words, was this all an unforgiveable--or series of unforgiveable--mistake(s)? Or was this the inevitable outcome of lax or non-existent standards? Based on what we've seen the last four years in England, if I were a betting man...
Me too... I would have thought HW is changing that, but it takes time to change a culture... or maybe it's harder to be the boss when you used to be equal colleagues. Either way, this standards are about to be strict. The tradition in English refereeing may have led some to view VAR as unwelcome intrusion, but they must, at least after the weekend, come to realize if you're going to have VAR you better treat it with the attention it requires.
There are not many still on the list from Webb's time so this should not be an issue. Unlike when Riley went directly from referee to manager. Hopefully with his experience in PRO, Webb will be able to make the appropriate corrections. Yes, especially when if VAR were not in use, this goal would have been disallowed due to the erroneous judgement of the AR, with no further questions asked. PH
I really wish they didn't release that. There is just no explanation. AR and referee did everything right.
That audio, to me, seems to absolve AR1. He said "Delaying, Delaying" and "Coming back for the offside."
As you pointed out earlier, it's even more stark than this. The goal never would have been scored because the whistle would have gone way before a shot. The advent of VAR has, paradoxically, created more controversial situations than it eliminated. Who ever could have possibly predicted that?
Damn. AR1 got screwed there. Said all the right things and stil got canned from his next game. This is 100% on Darren, seemed to be rushing to “check complete” without caring to confirm things. Also shocking they don’t ask or discuss what the on-field was prior to or during the review!
Well, as it exonerates Hooper and the AR, which you note, there's a virtue in that. I mean on this big of a screw-up, no transparency was never going to fly--particularly when it's the first year that you are releasing some audio. It had to be released. And I guess I just disagree with idea that it shouldn't be. It's not like the VAR and AVAR are being thrown under the bus. It's their fault. No way to get around it. I do love how it's the non-referee Replay Operator who first notices the problem. Again--what on earth was the AVAR looking at? And then for "Oli from the PGMOL" to order them to stop the game, have them not initially understand what was happening... and then say it's too late (which, at that point it definitely was, as the ball had already gone out again)... just wow. Your boss is telling you in real-time to fix your unforgiveable error and your reaction is "Huh? Oh, sorry, too late."
Oh! He was the 4th, yes. So he figured it out without even being in the VOR? I guess I don't understand why he was telling England to tell Hooper to stop the game. @Mikael_Referee , is there a reason Oliver wouldn't directly tell Hooper himself?
The "(PGMOL Hub Ops)" label is throwing me off. Does Oliver radio to the VOR through someone else? Or is there another "Oli" involved here?
I do wish that there was some sort of delineation of who could hear what. Is there a separate set of comms the 4th can use to communicate to the VAR room without including the on-field crew?
But this is another issue. The LOTG are clear and explicit in that if a restart occurs no decisions can be changed. I know that it is an unforgivable error but if they went back and reverted it again after a restart, wouldn’t there be another huge disaster with a LOTG misapplication appeal being put in and the game may be replayed?
I scanned back and saw a few posts you guys made, but now that the audio is released, telling a white lie that “uh actually the information to stop the restart came before the restart, didn’t hear it, comm error, etc” would be exposed
That's what I don't understand either. Maybe things are somehow different in the EPL but normally those in the VOR (VAR, AVAR, Replay Operator) are communicating among themselves with no one hearing them until the VAR activates the open channel to the referee. In the other direction, the VOR members can hear the entire conversation among the in-stadium crew. So it doesn't make sense that Oliver would hear what the VOR was talking about without Hooper also hearing it. And that would preclude Oliver from having to tell the VOR anything. So Oliver heard through other means? The more I think about it, the more I think there is another "Oli" here who is PGMOL staff. But I could very well have that wrong.
I have no interest in rehashing this because everything that could be said about it has already been said in both directions. Now that we have the actual facts, we hear that the Replay Operator noticed straight away at the taking of the IFK. If a "STOP THE GAME" followed from the VAR, Hooper would have whistled 3-4 seconds after the restart. That would have worked. Nothing would have been "exposed" because there would have been no need to release the audio. And to the idea that violating this principle by 3-4 seconds would be unacceptable to the masses or really anyone of consequence when it would have awarded a valid goal... again, that debate is above. I think the answer is obvious.