this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)

Main

139 readers
3 users here now

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (25 children)

I still don’t understand this whole clear and obvious error requirement. If the ref misses something, then VAR should intervene and inform the referee to relook at the incident. If he deems his original decision correct, then we move on.

The fact that it’s an error but VAR doesn’t see it as clear and obvious and opts not to direct the ref to the monitor is so weird.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (8 children)

It’s so they don’t call the ref over to review every little foul or incident and keep the game flowing.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Thank you. The ref is still (should be) the authority on the field for the flow of the game. VAR should only get involved when it’s a completely obvious mistake (ie offsides, ref completely missed a head butt). Refs do not always get it right, but VAR doesn’t either. People in this sub want the game to stop everytime there’s a potential disagreement? F that, respect the authority of the expert on the field and let them play the game.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

You are missing a key issue in your comment. The introduction of VAR has impacted how refs call games. We see this clearly with offsides - they generally let the play continue because they know VAR will make the definitive call. It's not that hard to imagine that refs are also hesitant to call other things or less likely to give red cards because they expect that VAR will let them know if they need to change it. Except VAR isn't telling them because their bar for "clear and obvious" is hard to gauge and ever moving.

If you have the whole panel saying that Bruno's elbow was a red but half saying it wasn't "clear and obvious", then how you define "clear and obvious" is an issue. Especially because it was "clear and obvious" to review Havertz tackle... but then again it wasn't so obvious because the ref on the field didn't deem it was a red... so how is that obvious when the ref on the field disagrees?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (22 replies)