UEFA Competitions 2023-2024 Referee Discussions [Rs]

Discussion in 'Referee' started by MassachusettsRef, Jun 23, 2023.

  1. USSF REF

    USSF REF Guest

    Frankly, the issue is that we're trying to legislate a sport to a worldwide code and more there is worldwide TV coverage so there is a lot of cultural confusion.

    The major American sports don't do this. They have their own rulebook, they hire their own referees, and they issue their own interpretations.

    I'm not foolish enough to think that everyone can get together to agree on this stuff. I mean we've made some progress in that the high tackle that was a run of the mill foul in Scotland and was a red in many places at the same time is becoming more consistently red, but there will always be local differences which is why this gets so confusing for so many.

    And, by the way, I agree the public will never understand, but as it is, the referee community doesn't really know how to approach this right now either and things seem to be handled regionally... my view is if we could get everyone in one page (maybe the big 5 in UEFA need to start it) it will start to get a little better, but Frankly it seems a fool's errand to even try right now.
     
  2. Sport Billy

    Sport Billy Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 25, 2006
    Part of the problem is no one in power is willing to admit that it didn't work.
    VAR has made the game more difficult to officiate, increased controversy, and made the game less enjoyable to watch.
     
    mfw13 repped this.
  3. Patrick167

    Patrick167 Member+

    Dortmund
    United States
    May 4, 2017
    Actually, I don't think this is quite true. Refs have actually not become the focal point at all and VAR has. Yes, there is a VAR Ref, who takes heat but is now rarely even at the stadium. But the center is actually much less taken to task. If VAR overrules a call correctly, nobody spends anytime discussing how the ref got the call wrong in the first place. If VAR doesn't act to reverse a bad call, VAR gets the blame. So, in every instance, the VAR gets the blame and the center rarely gets any vitriol at all.

    Case in point, at the U17 WC there is a blatant hand ball in the box by a German defender against the USA. The ref is in perfect position and looking right at it. He misses it or ignores it. But is there any discussion of how he made such a huge error? No. All discussion was about how the VAR missed it.

    This whole thread contains very little to no discussion of how the ref many consider the current best missed such a pivotal call in the first place.

    As for time taken, I prefer all the players and coaches and fans waiting patiently for the VAR decision than mobs of any of the latter chasing the ref around trying to argue for a change in ruling. Remember that? Every big call resulting in mobs of players accosting the ref? The idea the games had no delays before VAR is ludicrous. Every free kick decision took minutes as the ref would have to first spend a good chunk of time separating himself from the resulting melee. It is much easier to clock a VAR delay and add it on that try and look at your watch with seven players screaming at you from inches away.
     
    code1390 repped this.
  4. mfw13

    mfw13 Member+

    Jul 19, 2003
    Seattle
    Club:
    Newcastle United FC
    Except that he didn't miss the call....the call on the pitch was "no PK".

    If the VAR hadn't intervened, the correct call would have stood.
     
  5. Patrick167

    Patrick167 Member+

    Dortmund
    United States
    May 4, 2017
    Not being perfect and not working is not the same thing.

    Have TV ratings gone down? Personally, I don't like bad calls and games without VAR are full of them. Games with VAR might have some too, but much less.

    The idea that it is more controversial I think laughable. Referee errors have always been a large part of the discourse. I much prefer there being "controversy" because an error was corrected than not.
     
  6. Patrick167

    Patrick167 Member+

    Dortmund
    United States
    May 4, 2017
    How do you figure? He got it wrong looking at it on video? He didn't apply the rule correctly? Either way, the center got it wrong in your mind yet you blame the VAR. The VAR didn't make the call.
     
  7. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    #257 MassachusettsRef, Nov 29, 2023
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2023
    You are parsing something that was definitely not intended to be parsed. To start, I noted that Johnson and others have created a cottage industry around VAR. And when I say attention on "referees"... um, VARs (and ARs, and 4ths, etc.) are referees. The idea that we are talking about VARing instead of unchangeable referee decisions... um, okay. If we need to be pedantic about the terminology, I'll make all the relevant concessions. But the point here is that officiating has more attention, more discussion and more complaints than it used to have. I don't think that assertion can be refuted.

    Without seeing this play, I have no real ability to comment on the merits. But I would suggest that if both the CR and VAR "missed it," it's at least possible that it wasn't punishable. They could be correct just as easily as US fans could be correct, given the current interpretations of handball, as witnessed on this very page.

    But if it was a missed penalty... saying that "all discussion" is about the VAR feels like a hard assertion to make. Regardless, let's use a different recent example, where Gil Manzano didn't make a real decision with the last minute Ukraine penalty appeal against Italy. And then VAR didn't intervene because it wasn't clear. One can say that VAR is the focal point, but I think plenty of people would also rightly ask why Gil Manzano didn't call a penalty or dive, too. I think this is going to be a case-by-case basis on which official is more at fault when something is perceived to have gone wrong.

    Well, because most of the above posts were about agreeing with Marciniak's conclusion. So if UEFA deems he's wrong (which evidence from this morning indicates), then that question certainly is going to be raised.

    I just don't understand this argument. It's like completely devoid from the facts. "Patiently waiting?" There are still mobs. There is still accosting. There are now mobs before AND after VAR interventions. Sure, on the situations where everyone sort of understands a big miss occurred, you can have a more orderly process. But those situations are the exception, not the rule.

    It is undeniable that VAR has led to more delay. It's not about the time getting added back on, necessarily, it's about the completely changed nature of the game.
     
    RedStar91 repped this.
  8. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    You seem to be suggesting something that no one has said.

    If this decision is wrong and deemed wrong by UEFA... then both the VAR and Marciniak are at fault. I'm not sure who is going to argue with you on that.

    The issue, if there is one here, is that a lot of people above (and, hell, some guys in MLS I know and I've discussed this with) think he got it right. As did a few high-profile officiating analysts. So it's really a question about the veracity of the call.
     
  9. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    True.

    This can't be the standard, particularly as populations grow and there's more access to more leagues. Plus people consume media differently now and it is constantly changing. I think the question is whether or not football is growing or receding as a share of sports media consumption. I don't know the answer to that.

    What's a "bad call?" And what constitutes "full of them?"

    If we're going to argue about this philosophically... what sort of margin of error did you personally accept on offside decisions prior to the advent of VAR? Because I think there are tons (like literally in the thousands) of offside decisions that occurred in high-profile leagues/competitions that people simply accepted as "yeah, that's even" that, if VAR existed, would have come back. Were those situations a huge problem for you back then and did you have a desire to confirm an onside/offside decision down to the centimeter?

    Same goes for marginal penalty decisions. If we went back and relitigated a few WCs or EPL seasons in the pre-VAR days, I can't even begin to imagine how many calls might have changed. Were things that bad? Again, the concept of VAR was about fixing egregious errors.

    I think VAR has more or less eliminated the very occassional egregious and unforgivable error. And that's a good thing. That's what was advertised. No complaints there.

    The point here is that it also has swept up many, many other decisions that were and always will be debatable. And it's trying to make them not debatable. But they are. And if we are going to debate them anyway and reasonable people are always going to disagree, was the juice worth the squeeze for all the other ramifications that VAR brought into the game?

    Your seeming belief that VAR is only correcting errors is fascinating to me. As is the apparent belief that there are no other negative--tangible and intangible--effects on the game. I know @RedStar91 has a ready-made rant on these sort of things; the game itself has changed.
     
    JasonMa repped this.
  10. Tigerpunk

    Tigerpunk Member+

    Jun 17, 2004
    Just my .02 but I think the bigger problem here, to the extent they're unrelated, is the handball rule interpretation, not VAR. They're related in the sense that, partly to make it all work with VAR, there's an attempt to take something inherently subjective ("deliberate") and make it entirely objective. In my view, even if that's possible, IFAB has botched that part of the job.

    EDIT: That's not to say there are not issues with VAR, and one of those relevant to here is the custom/rule requiring extraordinary circumstances for the center ref to say, nope, we're sticking to what is called, once summoned to watch the video.
     
    mfw13 and MassachusettsRef repped this.
  11. Tigerpunk

    Tigerpunk Member+

    Jun 17, 2004
    One problem here is that, just like the difference between a correct and non-correct call is on the razor's edge of a line, the difference between a "clearly correct" and a "correct but debatable" decision will be on the same razor's edge. You still have to set rules as to when VAR does and does not intervene, and those will always lead to debates.

    I feel like American football does a better job at this, even though not perfect (and there are still tons of replay controversies). And note American football does not review--at all--a number of more subjective decisions, such as holds and pass interference, no matter how egregious or consequential.
     
  12. RedStar91

    RedStar91 Member+

    Sep 7, 2011
    Club:
    FK Crvena Zvezda Beograd
    This isn't really to single you out.

    It's more of the idea that VAR is "working fine" that many pro-VAR defenders are holding on to.

    There is nothing I can say or do to convince anyone like you or with your mentality that VAR has been an added plus to the game and that the current problem with VAR is "that it's not being used properly" instead of the fundamental design of the system.

    It's clearly not. Coaches, players, and fans are even less happy than before. The press conferences and post match reactions are out of control. Don't just look at the EPL which is on the extreme end of the spectrum.

    If anything the dissent has increased as a result of VAR because players now get two bites of the apple to dissent. First for the initial on field call or no call which was always part of the game. Before VAR, there would be dissent at a call or no call and that was it. Now you, get dissent for the initial decision. Then you get the dissent when the referee gives the VAR signal to go to the monitor, and then you get the post VAR decision dissent.

    The stats are always gonna be skewed and have an inherent bias to VAR to defend the system.

    We watch the EPL week-in and week-out yet the PGMOL/Independent Review Panel, etc. come out and say that VAR has only been wrong like once every three weeks when it is plain to see that it's not.

    We see Raheem Sterling almost chop a man in half and that "stats" said it was a correct use of VAR.

    If you want to talk statistics I'll give you this one and it is really a great microcosm of how VAR isn't really working and why any statistics that show "accuracy" is on the rise are almost always self-serving.

    Anthony Taylor, I believe, just give the first red card to an on field player for abusive language in the EPL since like 2008.

    VAR was introduced in the Premier League in 2019. So pre-VAR, the EPL somehow went over a decade a without a red card for AL. So roughly 4,000 matches without a red card for abusive language.

    VAR gets introduced in the EPL and within 5 years we get a red card for Abusive Language.
     
  13. Rufusabc

    Rufusabc Member+

    May 27, 2004
    Does anyone know a rough percentage of OFR’s that DON’T change the original call?

    so, if our referee in PSG V New goes to the monitor and says “Nah, I sticking with nothing there.” What is the true outcome for him? And how often does it happen?
     
  14. USSF REF

    USSF REF Guest

    There is nothing really analogous in NFL football to what a penalty kick is or what a red card does.

    If there were plays in the game where you immediately gave one team 14 points or reduced the other team's strength by a player for the rest of the game you bet your ass they would have been reviewing this calls by now.
     
  15. TxSooner

    TxSooner Member

    Aug 12, 2011
    Club:
    FC Dallas
    I'd suggest the NFL pass interference penalty, being a spot foul, is close to awarding a PK. That could be 50 yards downfield, or if it happened in the end zone, the ball gets put on the 1 yard line.

    The NFL gave up after one year after figuring out applying subjective review standards to subjective calls isn't going to make the game better.
     
  16. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    It varies--perhaps greatly--competition to competition.

    If he's deemed correct, great. If he's incorrect, not so great. That's really the only thing that matters.

    Not trying to obtuse about this, but it does feel like a lot of people hold this weird conspiracy where referees have to do with VAR tells them. Ultimately, their employers are grading them on the accuracy of their final decision. One of the reasons that VARs and Referees agree so much is because they are all getting the same training (for the most part). If they both end up being incorrect, like what might of happened last night, it probably comes down to a problem with that training.

    See first answer.
     
    socal lurker repped this.
  17. soccerref69420

    soccerref69420 Member+

    President of the Antonio Miguel Mateu Lahoz fan cub
    Mar 14, 2020
    Nat'l Team:
    Korea DPR
    Exactly. I don’t think there’s another sport on the planet where scoring is as sparse as soccer, or where you play permanently down for the rest of the game. Change the rules to stop making individual ref decisions so vitally consequential to the rest of the entire game or deal with it
     
    mfw13 repped this.
  18. USSF REF

    USSF REF Guest

    #268 USSF REF, Nov 29, 2023
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 29, 2023
    You assume I think it's an added plus. I don't.

    The only value I have for it:
    1. A referee who gets a chance to save a few nights of bad sleep and public ridiculing where they can fix a bad mistake.
    2. The drama in some games that it can create along with the referee discussions I get to have.

    That said, if it means that we go from 60% correct penalty decisions to 90% correct penalty decisions over a season, I think it is working to correct a significant number of mistakes. That was the point.

    If they got rid of it tomorrow, if be fine with it. But, I am pretty ambitivilant towards it.

    But, you will not see it go away because it's helping to sell the sport on social media. Excluding vidros of pets and babies, Are any of the major social media platforms good at bolstering happiness? Not really. They are echo chambers of negativity.

    Besides the sunken cost fallacy that will be a part of it, realistically you will see just how much these short, social media ready clips will attract the righteous indignation of fans and so called experts to click on the various media sources so they can all fuel their anger and then allow people to cathartically blast their anger out at referees online all the while driving up clicks which means ad revenue. People get to argue about the football with each other and they get to come together to all agree how the ref is crap whether he gets the call right or not.

    I've said this before and I'll say it again. Fans at home want drama. They live for great moments of play and they also love the controversy despite whatever dissatisfied feeling they get. It's been this way forever regarding the relationship of sports officials to fans. People love a good villian. It's part of the sorts drama. VAR adds to the drama and gives the pundits countless hours of content to discuss which makes their jobs easier.

    And in the end is anyone going to stop watching the sport because they don't like VAR? Nah. They love VAR in the same way people love Darth Vader.
     
  19. USSF REF

    USSF REF Guest

    To br fair, they didn't really try with the PI thing and I kind of feel like the referees sabotaged the attempt.

    But even then a DPI in the end zone gets you to the 1, and maybe a touchdown, but it just isn't the same impact value of a penalty kick.

    If NFL principles were applied to soccer, the would review who got possession of throw ins and the precise location of free kicks, and if the GK had both feet down... oh wait not that.

    Most of the stuff that's black and white would be inconsequential and a waste of time. GLT is great. SAOT can be great, but people don't like precise offside calls at the moment even if they get it right.
     
  20. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    100%. Which makes it all the more ironic how VAR was sold.
     
  21. soccerref69420

    soccerref69420 Member+

    President of the Antonio Miguel Mateu Lahoz fan cub
    Mar 14, 2020
    Nat'l Team:
    Korea DPR
    Fans will deny it, but if games were officiated perfectly, people would be so bored. It’s 100% going to happen in MLB if they go to an automated strike zone, which I bring up because it’s the only decision I can think of among the major sports that is somewhat objective

    When you can’t blame the refs for your loss and instead have to acknowledge that your players/coaches are the reason you lost because they aren’t good enough, people aren’t going to be happy. They will be so bored.
     
  22. USSF REF

    USSF REF Guest

    Your argument is a fallacy because of a referee called a game perfectly they would still argue over decisions.

    Boring is boring...

    But any good game will have people disagreeing over decisions. Look at TV pundits. They can't agree half the time. Or they see what they want because of tribalism.

    We can get objectively better as officials but you know, when a referee does really well, we sit here and praise them in this forum, but most fans don't talk about it. They don't hold the ref up as a hero of the game. But one perceived mistake in a close game and we know how that goes.
     
  23. mfw13

    mfw13 Member+

    Jul 19, 2003
    Seattle
    Club:
    Newcastle United FC
    The VAR is the person who incorrectly recommended a review (since this was NOT a clear and obvious error), and apparently then did not give Marciniak all the necessary angles/speeds to review the play properly on the pitchside monitor.
     
  24. soccerref69420

    soccerref69420 Member+

    President of the Antonio Miguel Mateu Lahoz fan cub
    Mar 14, 2020
    Nat'l Team:
    Korea DPR
    That is why is specifically brought up MLB strike zone, because that’s the only somewhat objective decisions across all sports that we can have automated. Sure people can still complain about those calls, but when you don’t have a human umpire to aim your hatred towards (looking at angel Hernandez), baseball fans will be so bored they’ll ask for human umpires again

    Hell we see it so some extent with GLT because a robot is calling it, no one can complain. And when SAOT comes in, and it’s calling players off by a toenail, it will go from “f EPL VAR for drawing lines, the game doesn’t want this toenail offside!” To “well, the computer is right….” even if SAOT makes the same call that the human VAR would
     
  25. mfw13

    mfw13 Member+

    Jul 19, 2003
    Seattle
    Club:
    Newcastle United FC
    This.

    Just being able to celebrate goals again at the moment they are scored without having to wait five minutes for VAR to decide if there was a foul in the buildup or if somebody was two inches offside is enough to make most fans want to get rid of VAR.
     
    AlextheRef and MassachusettsRef repped this.

Share This Page