VAR using Ex Pros

[Percival King]

2 hours ago, TexasAndy said:

There's has been talk for a long time about using ex players as part of the VAR decision making process but are we really going to get genuine decisions with the likes of Lennon and Boyd making calls?

Managers and players talk about referees knowing the laws but not the game but it seems a lot of managers, players and ex-players know the game but not the laws. I've watched Sportscene where there's been two ex-players analyse an incident using the exact same footage but come to different conclusions. That might be honest differences of opinion which happens for subjective decision but add in the paranoid and conspiracy theory laden nature of Scottish football and it would go into meltdown. As for using folk from overseas, just for opinions Sky Sports use a guy who was born in a foreign country, who reffed at a high level in a different country from Scotland and was on the FIFA list yet he gets called out as bias so the same could possibly happen whoever is used.

[ToadKiller Dog]

Reminds me of the panal of 5 exhibs players who refused Jason Scotland a work permit,he had previously scored the winner knocking hibs out of the cup in the semi final stage 

.

 

[Mikey1874]

10 minutes ago, jamboinglasgow said:

I agree with a lot on here.  The presenter on Clyde Superscoreboard last night made the same point about ex-pros in VAR, unless you had someone who had never played in Scotland before then you will get the same nonsense as Celtic fans claiming Beaton is Rangers fan and anti-Celtic. I see a lot on here agree as do I.

 

One thing I do see is there has been a lot of criticism, particularly down south, about the length of time some decisions take. I do wonder if that is a consequence of the scrutiny every VAR decision now gets in the press and on TV. If you are operating VAR, rather than having a look checking once and passing the decision to the ref, you are going to repeatedly check everything just in case you have missed something tiny, which if missed will be picked up by the pundits who will make a big deal out of it. So what may have taken a minute to check becomes 5 minutes.

 

I almost think there needs to be less focus on VAR decisions to make things work rather than the intensive level it is now.

 

They need to play some of the audio like they have in England. Then it will show what they check and that actually decisions are made quickly mostly. 

[JimmyCant]

1 minute ago, BRY said:

 

But therein lies the subjectivity.

Who's to say what was an accident and what wasn't...?

We’re seeing numerous penalties for handballs which are clearly accidental. And you can see quite clearly in slowed down VAR they are accidental. Yes there will still be occasions where the officials have to be subjective, assisted by VAR but we can’t have penalties for clearly nonsense accidental ball to hand incidents like we’re seeing almost every week

[Ribble]

5 minutes ago, jamboinglasgow said:

I agree with a lot on here.  The presenter on Clyde Superscoreboard last night made the same point about ex-pros in VAR, unless you had someone who had never played in Scotland before then you will get the same nonsense as Celtic fans claiming Beaton is Rangers fan and anti-Celtic. I see a lot on here agree as do I.

 

One thing I do see is there has been a lot of criticism, particularly down south, about the length of time some decisions take. I do wonder if that is a consequence of the scrutiny every VAR decision now gets in the press and on TV. If you are operating VAR, rather than having a look checking once and passing the decision to the ref, you are going to repeatedly check everything just in case you have missed something tiny, which if missed will be picked up by the pundits who will make a big deal out of it. So what may have taken a minute to check becomes 5 minutes.

 

I almost think there needs to be less focus on VAR decisions to make things work rather than the intensive level it is now.

 

There should be a time limit for VAR checks, NFL I think have a 90 second limit where the video ref has to find concrete video evidence that the on field decision was wrong. Bring that in would put the focus back on the on field officials to actually make a decision rather than waiting for VAR to make the decision for them. Celtics offside goal is a prime example, Idah clearly offside but we than had more than a minute of play resulting in the ball being in the back of the net, followed by 2/3 mins of a VAR check to rule on the original offside, we've then had 3/4 wasted minutes of the game due to the linesman just not putting his flag up for a clear offside. The opposite could be said for Shanklands offside goal as that is one that should be allowed to play on due to it being a very close decision however if VAR can't tell if he's offside or not after 90 seconds then the goal should have stood.

[gorgierulesapply88]

Celtic and Rangers have abstained or voted NO on ANY changes proposed by Budge and others.

 

There was talking of using English refs, from a room in York or thereabouts. 

 

The clubs pay for it, the lines on offsides are comical. Re-refereeing games happens in EVERY game. It was brought in for clear and obvious mistakes. Yet, it still takes 2minutes to come to a decision in most cases.

 

The system is there for 2 clubs.

[OmiyaHearts]

Given that so many on here think refs have a conspiracy against non-old firm teams anyway, what would be the difference if it was lennon and boyd?

[Fozzyonthefence]

29 minutes ago, upgotheheads said:

 

It's not always about interpretation, sometimes the rules are wrong in the first place. The handball we got wasn't even claimed by our own players, there was no risk of a goal coming directly from it and the player had no idea where the ball was. It shouldn't be too difficult to frame a set of rules, here's my suggestion.

 

The ball must be moving towards the goal, or toward an attacking player with sight of the goal.

The arm should be in a position that effectively increases the body profile of the player. 

We already have that rule. 

[Hagar the Horrible]

This boils my piss, when players say that quote "they have never played the game" sorry everyone has played the game. They have never paid £30 to watch a game weekend and week out. Apart from not knowing the rules, players have not refereed a game either, and yet these people professionals in real life are instructed in the game and scenarios.  Pundits .might know what's behind the curtains in a club, and can see tactical awareness especially those that at least tried management. How many players are there gone onto become accountants or lawyers? How many can tie their own shoe laces? Even if they did get coaching on being a ref and a Var ref nothing much will change. It's not VAR it's the rules, a contact with studs in the face is dangerous in every universe not just when it suits celtic or not. 2 players handling the ball in the box is a penalty it would have been given for celtic every time. The last penalty against celtic in the 4.3 game would not have been given without VAR. 

 

Players are not the brightest in the world, and decisions are done because they are not best placed to make decisions where safety is concerned. The laws do need looked at, return to the old offside rule and hand ball is hand ball intentional or otherwise, if would have been given in the middle of the park, a penalty might be a double punishment but them is the rules and should be the same for all clubs, not when the rare occasion it's against the OF.

 

As for contact with a high boot in the face, why is there even a debating point. Some pundits clearly have had one too many

[GorgieFifeLife]

3 minutes ago, OmiyaHearts said:

Given that so many on here think refs have a conspiracy against non-old firm teams anyway, what would be the difference if it was lennon and boyd?

There is an argument to say that Lennon and Boyd would make sure to be seen to make decisions fairly as their allegiances are out in the open whereas referees allegiances are not so certain.  Not that I am for one second recommending that ex pros should be involved in this.  It must be the worst idea I have ever heard on how to improve the Scottish game.

[Deevers]

23 minutes ago, gorgierulesapply88 said:

Celtic and Rangers have abstained or voted NO on ANY changes proposed by Budge and others.

 

There was talking of using English refs, from a room in York or thereabouts. 

 

The clubs pay for it, the lines on offsides are comical. Re-refereeing games happens in EVERY game. It was brought in for clear and obvious mistakes. Yet, it still takes 2minutes to come to a decision in most cases.

 

The system is there for 2 clubs.

Exactly so - and that’s why the toys go out of the pram when the decisions go against them.  The SFA have the opportunity to draw a line in the sand with this by throwing out the appeal and ensuring that Rodgers is properly punished for his allegations. I hope they don’t go belly up with this.

[Dazo]

1 hour ago, OTT said:

 

Its just when we cast our minds back to when Lennon triggered a referees strike, nobody ever said that wished the Scottish referees would come back sooner, also don't think there was any real controversey with any of them. 

 

Theres always going to be sour grapes when a team loses, but I think the Scottish refs association has been ran into the ground. Moving to full time professional refs appointed by UEFA would be a welcomed change IMO. 

I don’t know the answer if indeed there is one but can remember a plenty of complaints against some of our European refs when competing in Europe. Professional refs is a step forward though. 

[OTT]

7 minutes ago, Dazo said:

I don’t know the answer if indeed there is one but can remember a plenty of complaints against some of our European refs when competing in Europe. Professional refs is a step forward though. 

 

I was chatting to one of my mates about that actually - think the big issue is that Scottish refs allow a much more physical game (and make a lot of bad and inconsistent decisions), but the problem is that European refs straight up don't allow it. Coupled with that, teams like Fiorentina and PAOK are a lot smarter about how they foul, so where they get at worst a talking to, we're not being as clever about it and picking bookings etc. Probably fair to say its a lack of experience in game management. If you listen to players that have gone to Italy for example, they talk about coaching being so much more tactical, and I'd bet a kidney that extents to instructing players on how to foul in a way which maximises the impact but minimises the punishment. 

 

Probably verging into other territory but I yeah, I think as a starting point professionalisng refereeing would be a really good start. 

 

 

[ToadKiller Dog]

Why has there never been a rush of ex full time players to become refs ?

I would say the explorer knows it's not a job they think is easy or worth doing ,what makes pundits think there will be explayers wanting to do the VAR ?

[upgotheheads]

43 minutes ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

We already have that rule. 

 

Then maybe the wording should be 

The ball must be moving towards the goal, or toward an attacking player with sight of the goal AND

The arm should be in a position that effectively increases the body profile of the player. 

[sirwalter]

So, what's this all about? Think short careers, think pension funds...

[Firefox]

One of the biggest complaints about VAR is the lack of consistency. What we have is some refs that try to use a bit of common sense re the handball issue and others that stick by the letter of the law and that's where the inconsistency comes into play . To get consistency what we need is all referees sticking to the letter of the law, regardless of how stupid it looks. VAR can advise them to take another look but if it's handball by strict definition of the rule, then it's a handball. That would stop all the whataboutery from managers. 

The current handball rule is stupid and you now have players running about with their hands behind their backs to avoid being hit on the arm by a stray ricochet. There's no more unnatural position for your arms when you're jumping or running than behind your back. 

[OmiyaHearts]

1 hour ago, GorgieFifeLife said:

There is an argument to say that Lennon and Boyd would make sure to be seen to make decisions fairly as their allegiances are out in the open whereas referees allegiances are not so certain.  Not that I am for one second recommending that ex pros should be involved in this.  It must be the worst idea I have ever heard on how to improve the Scottish game.

I agree, mental idea to let players get involved in this.

[Thunder and Lightning]

Surely with all the experts on the laws posting here some have taken up challenge and will soon be gracing the pitch? 

[colinmaroon]

2 hours ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

A lot of decisions have to be subjective, there is no way around this.  Offside is objective, handball should be objective but many fouls are subjective because contact doesn’t necessarily mean foul. 

 

Agreed!  And that's where the controversy comes in.  The problem today is that the subjective application of the laws of the game are taking over from objectivity.   Was the sending off dangerous play?   Of course it was, therefore all you can say is that red was right BUT I FEEL......  Point is that the sending off has precedence as well; it wasn't an isolated case.

 

Brenda moaning it cost them.  If Valentine hadn't responded to Millar's ear bashing Aberdeen wouldn't have got the penalty and arguably we win 1-0 and win the league.  That is "cost."  Ironically, if VAR had been available it would have shown the Aberdeen player (Bett?) handled the ball first.

 

 

 

 

[periodictabledancer]

54 minutes ago, Firefox said:

One of the biggest complaints about VAR is the lack of consistency. What we have is some refs that try to use a bit of common sense re the handball issue and others that stick by the letter of the law and that's where the inconsistency comes into play . To get consistency what we need is all referees sticking to the letter of the law, regardless of how stupid it looks. VAR can advise them to take another look but if it's handball by strict definition of the rule, then it's a handball. That would stop all the whataboutery from managers. 

The current handball rule is stupid and you now have players running about with their hands behind their backs to avoid being hit on the arm by a stray ricochet. There's no more unnatural position for your arms when you're jumping or running than behind your back. 

I reckon the problem is with the handball rule itself : it needs to be changed because this idea that it can strike a player who doesn't necessarily have his arms extended (like defenders routinely used to do before the law change) can be construed as deliberate handball is placing officials in a ridiculous position IMO. We get a pen on Sunday and I'll take it as it is a pen within the current interpretation of the laws of the game - but it's a ridiculous decision. 

IMO the law needs to be changed : did the player move his hand/arm towards the ball, did the player deliberately extend his arm to obstruct the path of the ball ? Does the "offender" gain any advantage ? If not, no offence. 

Instead refs are being asked to inetrpret a video clip to see if a players arms are extended (even where there is no intent) and award a penalty on that basis. 

 

We have a similar sitaution with shirt pulling and deliberate fouling : you can see a cystal clear offence but refs & ex-pros routinely will say "that's not enough" to award a foul, even when an obvious fould has occurred.  It's absurd. 

 

[Rampant]

3 hours ago, JimmyCant said:

GENUINELY Accidental handball should never be a foul/penalty IMO. 

 

And if a player accidentally trips and falls into an attacking player, wiping them out in a clear goalscoring opportunity, no foul in that scenario?

 

I agree the handball rule should change, but intent is so hard to measure.  The subjectivity, which I think is easier to judge, is whether the defending team gain an advantage from the ball contacting a hand?  If so, foul and penalty.

 

So v Celtic, not a penalty. But v Dundee, Shanklands shot at goal which was muted by striking a hand, penalty awarded.  That was harsh on Dundee given the player was close and didn't know much about it, but accidental or not, Hearts were disadvantaged and Dundee gained from the ball hitting their players hand and that shouldn't be allowed to happen.

[Lord Beni of Gorgie]

5 hours ago, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said:

One thing VAR proves is that players (or ex-players) are stereotypically thick, with a failure to understand the rules.

This is true.

 

The problem I believe is referees being slaughtered for trying to interpret the rules to the detriment of afore mentioned thick players, against their team/agenda, the referees therefore have become chained to the rulebook to be as consistent as they can.

 

This year they probably have been pretty consistent, though no one will care to admit it. Particularly on handball.

[AllyjamboDerbyshire]

5 hours ago, TexasAndy said:

There's has been talk for a long time about using ex players as part of the VAR decision making process but are we really going to get genuine decisions with the likes of Lennon and Boyd making calls?

Whether or not VAR is a success/good thing, it has to be based solely upon the laws of the game, whether we agree with them or not. Gut feeling or 'knowing' what the player was intending to do should never have an impact on any decision. If VAR has any purpose then it has to be used to bring about the correct decision under the laws and to aid the referees to do that, whether or not it achieves that won't be improved by people who have never bothered to read the laws of the game in their lives. I still don't think VAR is doing as good a job as it should, but that won't be improved by adding more people, some with nothing more than opinions, to come to a collective decision.

[colinmaroon]

3 hours ago, JimmyCant said:

We’re seeing numerous penalties for handballs which are clearly accidental. And you can see quite clearly in slowed down VAR they are accidental. Yes there will still be occasions where the officials have to be subjective, assisted by VAR but we can’t have penalties for clearly nonsense accidental ball to hand incidents like we’re seeing almost every week

 

Intentionality/accidental is the wrong focus.   The player doesn't need to "intentionally" handle the ball.  The question is has he made his body bigger by stretching an arm, even then handling the ball unintentionally, and it's a penalty.  The argument really is, is his "body"/arm part of a natural movement.  On Sunday the two Celtic players (who both "handled" the ball) went in with arms flailing.   This is not an isolated, "a penalty has never been given before for this" incident.  There is precedent already this season.

 

Anyway, if it was anybody but the Bigot Brothers, it would all have been forgotten by now.   Looking objectively at the long-term record of controversial decisions Celtic have had more benefit than loss by a long way and, honestly, Brenda's bleating smacks of hypocrisy.

[chrystaf]

3 hours ago, Ribble said:

 

There should be a time limit for VAR checks, NFL I think have a 90 second limit where the video ref has to find concrete video evidence that the on field decision was wrong. Bring that in would put the focus back on the on field officials to actually make a decision rather than waiting for VAR to make the decision for them. Celtics offside goal is a prime example, Idah clearly offside but we than had more than a minute of play resulting in the ball being in the back of the net, followed by 2/3 mins of a VAR check to rule on the original offside, we've then had 3/4 wasted minutes of the game due to the linesman just not putting his flag up for a clear offside. The opposite could be said for Shanklands offside goal as that is one that should be allowed to play on due to it being a very close decision however if VAR can't tell if he's offside or not after 90 seconds then the goal should have stood.

Entirely agree. The problem is that what you are talking about are changes to the system and that may have to voted on nationally.

And of course you're right about the flagging of offside.  This waiting for a goal which may be minutes of play since the offside is ludicrous.   The sole reason for it is so if the offside was wrong then the goal would stand.  If the flag went up right away and was wrong then there would be no way of awarding a goal.  MY gripe is that a player could be seriously injured during that period of wasted minutes.

 

[gorgierulesapply88]

3 hours ago, ToadKiller Dog said:

Why has there never been a rush of ex full time players to become refs ?

I would say the explorer knows it's not a job they think is easy or worth doing ,what makes pundits think there will be explayers wanting to do the VAR ?

There is no money in it for them. It has to be a full time role. With sessions taking place at Oriam & Toryglen West Coast based refs. Although the majority stay within 7miles of Glasgow!!

[H2]

7 hours ago, GBJambo said:

Disaster . The players don’t know the rules plus they wouldn’t be impartial 

The Celtic Manager doesn't know them either!

[Deevers]

Never mind. Celtic have got their 12th man for their game on Sunday. With a Willie Collum in the middle, they’ll  have nothing to complain about.

[Harry Potter]

6 hours ago, RENE said:

I've said it before, we should be using ex refs from England or Europe with no connection to Scottish football.  Only the clubs should be told who they are and no information given to the media. Then, and only then, will we be sure of no bias.

Too much common sense in that, never happen.

[Marvin]

8 hours ago, meister said:

"Welcome to Tynecastle for the Edinburgh Derby under the lights, your referee for this evening is Willie Collum and is assisted in the VAR suite by Mr S Conroy and Mr T McManus................."

 

It would all be fine I'm sure 😆

 

I will have nightmares about that. Could be worse mind. Paul Kane on VAR 😖

[Gundermann]

6 hours ago, ToadKiller Dog said:

Reminds me of the panal of 5 exhibs players who refused Jason Scotland a work permit,he had previously scored the winner knocking hibs out of the cup in the semi final stage 

.

 

He's famous for something else, no... 

 

 

No ex Old Firm whingers if this idea takes off.

[Robbo-Jambo]

8 hours ago, colinmaroon said:

The queue of of Old Firm players, John Sutton, Andy Walker, Davie Provan,  you can just see it

 

"He didn't mean to lift his foot that high.  A breath of wind caught his leg  and he was forced to lift his foot.  We reverse the decision.  There was no intent to raise his foot.  However, it was turned into dangerous play by Cochrane putting his head in and he is given a retrospective yellow."

 

 

Or even Chris.

[Jambo in Bathgate]

8 hours ago, TexasAndy said:

There's has been talk for a long time about using ex players as part of the VAR decision making process but are we really going to get genuine decisions with the likes of Lennon and Boyd making calls?

What a stupid idea! Have the pro’s become referees first!? The problem is the same a referee decisions, if it goes for you everyone is happy if not the other side moan. It’s the time it takes. On Sunday the VAR check was quick regarding their penalty. Ref told he was correct. Our penalty took an age as did Shankland’s offside goal. 

[Jambo61]

6 hours ago, JimmyCant said:

We’re seeing numerous penalties for handballs which are clearly accidental. And you can see quite clearly in slowed down VAR they are accidental. Yes there will still be occasions where the officials have to be subjective, assisted by VAR but we can’t have penalties for clearly nonsense accidental ball to hand incidents like we’re seeing almost every week

Unless they declare beforehand (pun intended) all handballs, even the new firms, will be penalties! Then we all know!

[Pasquale for King]

Have you heard them talk about it wasn’t a foul etc, Ian Black does it on here. They would need to be totally up to date with the rules of the game, can’t see them doing that. 

[Dsjambo]

Notice it’s mainly the ex-pros calling for VAR to be run by ex-pros and as pointed out many times already this would be a bigger disaster than we have now. Most of them are clueless and thick as mince.

[mscjambo]

Ex pros who don't know the laws of the game.

 

Far be it for me to defend officials but you've got clowns like Lennon and Neil McCann defending yangs red card claiming there's no malice...utterly clueless and irrelevant points 

[Sooks]

Terrible idea . One listen to the former player pundits this week is enough to tell you that 

 

Just get the officials trained better . VAR itself is absolutely fine 

[Bazzas right boot]

It should be done for the banter.

 

K Boyd on VAR for an OF game.

 

 

[Bazzas right boot]

32 minutes ago, Dsjambo said:

Notice it’s mainly the ex-pros calling for VAR to be run by ex-pros and as pointed out many times already this would be a bigger disaster than we have now. Most of them are clueless and thick as mince.

 

Correct. 

 

There could be an argument for ex pros to help establish the actual rules , or even current players.

 

Common sense has left the building with some rules imo.

 

But not to officiate games in any way.

 

Celtic v Hearts

Andy walker on VAR.

 

 

 

[Bazzas right boot]

9 hours ago, JimmyCant said:

We’re seeing numerous penalties for handballs which are clearly accidental. And you can see quite clearly in slowed down VAR they are accidental. Yes there will still be occasions where the officials have to be subjective, assisted by VAR but we can’t have penalties for clearly nonsense accidental ball to hand incidents like we’re seeing almost every week

 

Tbf, that's the rule that needs changed. 

The hand ball rule is a big slice of jobbie pie atm, it's ridiculous. 

 

The refs need to apply the rules,  but I agree , the handball rulecis stupid atm.

 

 

[colinmaroon]

4 hours ago, Robbo-Jambo said:

Or even Chris.

 

Oops!  Names at my age become a bit of a struggle. 

 

[TexasAndy]

17 hours ago, chrystaf said:

Entirely agree. The problem is that what you are talking about are changes to the system and that may have to voted on nationally.

And of course you're right about the flagging of offside.  This waiting for a goal which may be minutes of play since the offside is ludicrous.   The sole reason for it is so if the offside was wrong then the goal would stand.  If the flag went up right away and was wrong then there would be no way of awarding a goal.  MY gripe is that a player could be seriously injured during that period of wasted minutes.

 

I also think that the reason for keeping the flag down just in case it might be a wrong call is affecting the flow of the game.  I have no doubt that our defence was distracted from the moment everyone could see that Idah was offside.  Even after the O'Reilly 'scored' there was no immediate celebration from him or any of his colleagues.  All the players involved knew it was offside.  So the play from the moment the flag should have been raised was not genuine.  Total waste of time.

[Deevers]

12 hours ago, Sooks said:

Terrible idea . One listen to the former player pundits this week is enough to tell you that 

 

Just get the officials trained better . VAR itself is absolutely fine 

This is the way it should operate. Well trained motivated officials none of whom have any bias towards either of the Old Firm. We’ll probably have to import from elsewhere. 😁