I only saw it live and maybe one replay. My first instinct as a ref is to feel a certain level of sympathy for Hooper as we've all botched an advantage and felt immediately stupid. But when you get to really watch it, Hooper has signaled the advantage after seeing Haaland get up with the ball AND deliver the pass. In a league where refs will do anything to play advantage to avoid a card, I really lost most of my sympathy for him. He's either made a huge mental blunder or maybe his AR did. Simon Hooper showed advantage for City, then Grealish had a clear 1v1...and then he called a foul https://t.co/Avduk0uZII— ⚡️🇧🇼 (@Priceless_MCI) December 3, 2023
My issue is that the assertion that "every VAR overturned penalty results in a dropped ball to the goalkeeper" is demonstrably false, even within the context of penaly decisions that are overturned without an infringement by the attacking team (foul, offside, etc). If the referee gives a bogus off the ball foul, for example, you better not be giving the ball to the goalkeeper to restart if it hadn't even gotten into the PA yet. My other issue is that England is, to my understanding, an outlier in returning to the moment of the incident as opposed to the moment of the whistle, which in this case changes the restart as the ball had already crossed the goal line when the whistle was blown. In other (most? all?) leagues, a corner kick would be given. This assertion he makes is so generalized as to be technically inaccurate and comes without an important caveat that would give needed context. But hey, it matches what some likely underpaid soul managed to get onto the PL website... https://www.premierleague.com/VAR/penalty-decisions-explained The final sentence on that page is basically what he's repeating, and I would not be surprised if he links it at some point. It's not well-written and arguably even worse when taken in conjuction with the rest of the information on that page. It's not their intention, surely, but you can easily interpret that as saying that even a ball being out of play in the APP, as it is not an "infringement" by the attacking team, would result in a dropped ball via factual review. That's obviously ridiculous, but that's what it says. Maybe I'm being unnecessarily nitpicky on it, I dunno, but I feel like these sorts of overgeneralized statements are how we end up with massive misconceptions down the road.
Yesterday in the PL, a keeper was holding the ball. The referee blew the whistle to check on a down player. After maybe 15 seconds of talking to him and not calling on the trainer, he trots over to the keeper and drops it to him, but doesn't require the down player to leave the field. Is this normal? I was always taught that if you stop play because of an injury, the player must leave the field.
I believe it’s a practice that’s not necessarily accepted by people here, but our state referee instructor tells us that once advantage is signaled, you basically never pull it back. You just do wait and see as much as you can, even for 3-5 seconds, and then call back the foul if advantage doesn’t materialize. However, EPL referees seem to do the opposite of this, regularly calling advantage then pulling it back rather than doing much wait and see. I’m not sure how training for this works with FIFA, UEFA, PRO, or the other associations, but I really like the wait and see method because with how obvious and conspicuous the advantage arm signal is, calling it and pulling it back seems like an AR putting up their flag and then putting it down that could lead to a lot of dissent . Once he gave it, he should have just stuck with it, which our method would have done.
Right the wide view showed the AR not following the play down the field after Haaland played the ball to grealish— im sure he had (incorrectly, i think) offside if Hooper doesn’t give the foul.
I remember that video and everyone seemed to support the referee. Hooper should have fallen to his knees and had visible tears streaming down his face after he got up and seem completely distraught. See if the players and pundits would take it easy on him.
Even without the theatrics if the cameras caught him saying "I f***ed up, I'm sorry" a few times it wouldn't have hurt.
Nah, he absolutely would have needed theatrics. Flail his arms in the air. Drop to his knees unable to be picked up. Bright red face, tears strraming down his cheeks when he finally gets up. Maybe even so inconsolable that the 4O needs to do the rest of the game. No way him just apologizing would be accepted by anyone. Obviously a ridiculous proposition, but would really put to test the idea of "are players/coaches/fans/pundits willing to accept that referees are human"
If the referee stops play to check on a player, and the player is OK, then the player doesn't need to leave the field. If he determines the player is injured, then said player must leave the field.
This point shouldn't go unnoticed. If there's a potential penalty incident, the ball goes out for a corner kick, and the referee then whistles for a penalty... but through the VAR and an OFR the penalty gets overturned... it's beyond moronic to reason that the proper restart is a dropped ball to the goalkeeper. Let's review: 1) Team earns a corner kick, which is one of the top set piece attacking opportunities in the game 2) Referee mistakenly tries to give the same team a penalty kick after everyone sees and knows it would otherwise be a corner kick 3) Referee changes his mind, so he gives possession of the ball to the opposing team's goalkeeper I hope we all see the problem here. On top of the APP angle, this is another reason referees are delaying whistles more than they used to. If the ball goes out for a corner or goal kick right after a potential penalty, it makes the restart easy. And it also is totally understandable. What team is going to understand and accept turning their fully earned corner kick into the opposing team's possession just because you thought you saw a penalty but then you didn't? But VAR expert Dale Johnson and the brainiacs at PGMOL fall back on some circa 1986 level reasoning about the ball being out of play when the referee decides it's out of play, or something. Look, one can make a somewhat complicated LOTG argument that dropped ball to the keeper is the proper restart. The text can support that contention. Or... we can just give a team their corner kick back when everyone knows it was a corner kick. Seems like there is both an easy and justified answer. But that doesn't seem to trouble anyone in England.
He has since made the assertion that you would certainly never see this restarted with a corner kick in either UEFA or FIFA competitions, and I'm curious who can produce a counterexample first.
I do believe I recall a WC or other FIFA-level match where this happened and they got the "wrong" result. So I imagined it was a mistake. But maybe the FIFA instructions are, um, this dumb. @Mikael_Referee , any thoughts on UEFA protocols?
The Club World Cup will see a trial of the latest enhancement to semi-automated tech.When a player is more than 50cm off, the assistant gets quick notification which is intended to stop situations when a player is well offside yet the flag stays down until the end of the move.— Dale Johnson (@DaleJohnsonESPN) November 30, 2023 Anyone see this? I'm assuming this is true? If true, the death of ARs (at least for judging offside) is much closer than I thought. I still think ARs will be making offside calls at the 2026 World Cup, but it wouldn't shock me if it's taken out of their hands. AR job duties as we currently know it will be obsolete by the end of the decade for sure.
https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/2...-epl-efl-cups-rs.2116615/page-2#post-39825298 I'll stick with 2034. But if this is deemed successful, yeah, it's going to be close for 2030.
But if the advantage occurred before the player became a PIOP, that is on the attack. That's what I think Hooper assumed, so he called it back.
I'm late to this, but what's the actual argument, grounded in any sort of real analysis, that Hooper had offside? For there to be offside, his AR would have to be in his ear saying offside. And, if that were the case, the AR would then, you know, actually flag the offside when the whistle was blown to sell the "fact" that the advantage needed to be negated. And all these leaves aside the point that this is miles onside anyway and no AR at that level would get this wrong nowadays. I don't get it. People are wishcasting this offside theory for no apparent reason. There's no evidence to support it. I don't know the answer to why other than Hooper effed up big time. Maybe he didn't see Grealish at all. Maybe his perception was skewed and he thought Grealish was very likely second or third best to the ball. Maybe he inverted the players in his mind once the ball was in the air. There are like a dozen "maybes" and all of them are just straight-up screw ups from Hooper. But to get to "maybe he thought he was offside" seems like the absolute least likely one.
Watching the video again, AR is off to the races, trying to catch up to Grealish. He slows up after the whistle sounds, even side stepping a bit until it's clear play has been stopped.
That's odd. His PGMOL diary from today (I know, I know, I shouldn't click... but I had to here) says nothing of the sort and he's now saying exactly what you and I have expressed. That's odd. Really strange for a self-styled "VAR expert" to reverse himself in about 12 hours without acknowledging the change or explaining why. Curious.
If I had to guess, he didn’t see grealish in the middle of the three defenders and figured to ball was kicked into nothing
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...1?shareToken=bdbf00419f8532d75a63cd659eeb5ec7 It's gonna be by 2030 for sure.
If you watch closely, I think Hooper might have had a small inadvertent whistle. I think he blows slightly, signals for advantage, then thinks he has to call it back.