UEFA Competitions 2023-2024 Referee Discussions [Rs]

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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?

 

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.

 

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.

 

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

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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

 

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.