20 Aug 2023 08:01:42
I would hope (not just as a Liverpool fan but as a football fan) that the red card yesterday will be appealed and overturned.

I would have hoped it was viewed and dealt with as such by the very tool that was brought in to help with these types of judgment. Unfortunately it was not putting some further questions forward around VAR value.

It was not deliberate that is clear, the level of contact was very soft side footed rather than full on hard high studs and it even seemed as though Mac Allister tried to break the momentum of his forward action by pulling away from clearly a 'going for the ball' challenge.

In my view this could never have resulted in injury to the opponent, small or severe.

Now we forever see examples of those that would or those that do, whether they are similar challenges or completely different. One completely different one which got overturned (and I actually understand at a level the overturning but nevertheless in my mind is worse simply because of the deliberate nature and the ultimate impact of the deliberate action) is the Son challenge on Gomez a few years back. Like I say not a comparable challenge BUT the act of tripping was deliberate and we saw what the deliberate act resulted in!

I guess what I am saying is that I think there is need to consider the likelihood of true harm the "deliberate" challenge could do to the opponent and if it has done true harm and was deliberate there is a stronger case but if there is pretty obvious view that true harm would have been highly unlikely as per yesterday then it really ought not be red.

1.) 20 Aug 2023
20 Aug 2023 08:39:20
This goes back to the question of its value if it’s only an ‘obvious error’ threshold, as it really could be more useful in these tight calls if the ref could ask to see the replay before making such a big decision (as in rugby) and/ or if the opposition could ask for a review if it’s a decision they disagree with (like they do in cricket) .

At the moment it’s not being used to help make better decisions, and tight calls that go the wrong way are left unaddressed, making everyone question its value.

2.) 20 Aug 2023
20 Aug 2023 08:40:27
It’s never a red card and referring and VAR are a complete farce. If that’s a red card then football is finished because no player will tackle any more. Can anyone tell me what clear and obvious means because after years of watching football with var I still have no clue!

3.) 20 Aug 2023
20 Aug 2023 08:44:20
Completely agree
The whole thing is a joke- and let’s be balanced

Trent made a deliberate attempt to bring the ball down for Bournemouth’s opener but was ruled not to have so the offside decision stood

System is a shambles.

4.) 20 Aug 2023
20 Aug 2023 09:01:26
Personally I don’t see it getting overturned. I don’t think it was a red, nor should be a red but 2 officials have both agreed its red and that’s why I don’t think they’ll go against them.

As for the tackle itself, when will players conduct come into the equation? The Bournemouth player has gone down like he has been shot and it definitely impacts the ref thinking. If the Bournemouth player just shrugged it off I think it would only have been yellow. Our players are no saints in this either so I’d like it all cleaned up. It can hide genuine injuries when players act like that.

I don’t blame the ref for sending him off, his angle, the reaction and the small amount of time to make a decision I can follow the logic to get to a red card. It’s football and you get some decisions for and against. But what I can’t follow is someone watching in a room with endless replays, watching that and getting to the same conclusion.

5.) 20 Aug 2023
20 Aug 2023 08:58:01
I think the issue is with the ‘clear and obvious’ interpretation. There was a foul, the studs were up and so the referee interpreted this as serious foul play/ use of excessive force. This is highly subjective and for most people they would say it was not the correct decision as he clearly attempted to reduce the impact on the player at the last second. Within the term of a clear and obvious mistake, whilst most would deem this very harsh, a mistake wasn’t made and hence VAR didn’t intervene. This is where the system is flawed as if the ref were to have had the opportunity to look at this again on the monitor, he may have changed his decision. However under the current guidelines this option is not available.

6.) 20 Aug 2023
20 Aug 2023 08:58:53
SG I agree it could be value (to get the right result) for the ref to 'ask' to review the screen but I also think it would also result in a flourish of stoppages because a lot of our ref's would over use it.

I personally dislike watching all American sport (not because I don't like the sport but because there is no end of stoppages for commercial breaks! ) . I could see this occurring if ref's have that available in their armoury. I just think it is an easy fall-back and one that a lot of them (who let's face it are paid handsomely in the prem to do a solid skilled job! ) would revert to far too much. And if they don't we'd be moaning more.

Long/ Thiago I of course agree it was not a red, but giving the ref benefit of doubt due to speed in which it all happened, I don't think it is as cut and dry as you say in live motion and hence I felt VAR could / should have been the one to do the job! Failing that the appeal process ought!

7.) 20 Aug 2023
20 Aug 2023 09:11:27
I think the big issue is consistency and this will never really happen due to the highly subjective nature of making calls like this. I always think back to the one where Kane almost chopped Robertson in two yet that was only deemed a yellow card. Insane decision but justifiable under the current guidelines.

8.) 20 Aug 2023
20 Aug 2023 09:14:33
Was a yellow, much worse challenges have been given a yellow.

9.) 20 Aug 2023
20 Aug 2023 10:11:30
SGRed, 100% agree! Refs should be empowered and encouraged to ask to see the replay prior to making their decision and making a wrong call. I’m sure that refs are reluctant to use the monitor at present because they only get sent to see it if they made an error. Change the narrative and give the ref back control of decisions, let them see a replay and then decide on the action because right now You are 100 right VAR on subjective calls is being used to vindicate ref decisions as opposed to making correct calls.

10.) 20 Aug 2023
20 Aug 2023 10:22:37
To be honest I have thankfully not come across a person (and I have fair few friends and acquaintances that have opposing teams reasons to be biased and less than reasoned) that loves football and wants to see it be played the right way with the right decisions actually say it was a red card. ALL the opposite.

I am sure there are some but I think they are either those rival fans that just can’t claim any reason to side with us despite their views being different if it were their team on the receiving end or those that just are happy to see the beautiful game ruined.

I always like to think I’d give a balanced view and I would be exclaiming this to be at best a yellow if it were any team on the receiving end. Same for everyone I know and have talked with about it!

11.) 20 Aug 2023
20 Aug 2023 10:44:10
Said it before, VAR should be on referral.

Where is AI in this? Surely this is where VAR is going. AI has no allegiances, hopefully less bias.

The ref, before they make a big call (penalty, red card) should blow the whistle, not make a judgement, but ask VAR to make the call.

Not “have I made an error? ”, “is it a clear and obvious mistake? ”. Immediately you have introduced bias and error into the system.

Before flourishing a card, ask VAR what the decision should be.

Managers should have the ability to have a limited number of appeals to VAR if they think an error has been made.

So refs can ask VAR before making a decision.
Managers can ask VAR if they think the ref or linesman has made an error.

End of story.

12.) 20 Aug 2023
20 Aug 2023 11:13:37
The other thing that irks me about VAR is that because they have this “clear and obvious error” threshold, it makes the referee going to the monitor redundant cos you’ve already primed the ref to over turn their original decision.

13.) 20 Aug 2023
20 Aug 2023 13:54:50
This is a really interesting discussion.

I really hope they stick to the current basic process of the VAR, i. e. it's the VAR is there to detect major howlers anywhere on the field and review all decisions in the box.

I like how good it's becoming at objective decisions, e. g. offsides and ball going out of play.

For subjective decisions the referee and the VAR room having a chat to discuss whether a review is required, and whether the ref needs to go to a screen, is all fine. The last thing we need is the ref reviewing far too many decisions on the screen, or reviews by election.

In cricket reviews by election work because decisions are not subjective and the wicket keeper and bowler always have a good view of the play. In football the team captain will not always have the best view, and the ref might still take a different opinion based on a screen review than what fans want. Such a system will only create more controversy and issues.

Us fans need to realise that most decisions in football are subjective, so there will always be controversy. I think it's great that PGMOL are becoming more open about admitting errors. They will only get better by admitting errors. What we need next is for refs and the VAR guy to do a public debrief after each game on the decisions they took. Also PGMOL should work closely with broadcasters to educate the pundits on what the rules are and how they are policing it. I feel half of the nonsense around VAR can be fixed by having inept pundits not spouting nonsensical opinions about what the rules are and what VAR has done.