The Audio from the Diaz Goal released

complete farce,one guy seemed to know it was all wrong, VAR guy du#idntt

I dunno what their trying to achieve with it

Its a mess from every possible angle

Responsibility.

Speak up stop the frigging game and award the goal.

It's completely stupefying that they didn't make the instant decision to reverse the call. Headless chickens spring to mind.

Guy doing the var seems as if he's buzzing

Is he excited having sent off Jones?

All talking over each other,total sh1t show.

They all sound like lads down the bar ffs

These lot are supposedly running a multi billion pound game now you couldnt make it up

Im only shocked I didnt hear “bruv” during the audio

“Bruv he ruled it out onfield innit”

“Whats that bruv?

“He ruled it out onfield but it was onside bruv”

“You sure bruv”

“Yes bruv”

“Oh fe ck bruv”

That was the real gist of it

the replay operator was the only calm one who actually knew what was going on, and rightly assumed the var guys knew it'd been flagged offside as it's their jobs to know. Something was amiss that day, too many decisions went Tottenham's way, including the still image projected on to the screen with Jones's red card, when does that ever happen, whenever I see a ref going over to the monitor it's always a video in motion in a loop and then changed to a different angle.

Im absolutely confident their betting as they control the game from the var box

Got to be,no different to photo betting on the nags 

in reality to show how far  VAR has corrupted the game,the root of the problemn here was the LINO doing his job and making a decision and getting everyone confused,as every other LINO would have just kept his flag down and pass the buck to VAR
doesnt explain why for the 1st time a LINO put his flag up and was a YARD out on a bred  n butter, right in front of him decision

P45 or P60

The lino wants sacking 1tp

Hes behind the play ffs and still flags it despite at best being 20% sure

Pathetic all round, unfit officials are no good

We need to hear audios from all the other matches.

Thatd be fun liberator

Can you imagine the shyte theyve been getting away with

Did the ref not state to VAR what decision he had given?

This seems to be the core of the issue. Has the actual match ref been dropped?

He was 4th official last night at Fulham

Its all a sh!tshow racingqueen

At best they come across incompetent

Whether the ref told them or not they are supposed to watch the match. Once Liverpool didn't celebrate the goal the decision given was obvious.

Clearly they had looked away from the live feed as soon as the ball hit the net.

The ref deserves dropping as well. He needs to communicate the decision he has made. Its his decision and the onus is on him to communicate it.

The VAR should have said 'check complete, onside' or just 'onside' instead of 'check complete'. Wouldn't have happened then. That'll prob be their solution to it.

It comes to something when they cant even communicate a  simple decision like that

I wonder if any of them have betfair accounts. Quick text to their mates before they give their decision. It's like having tomorrow's racing results.

Yes the communication between var and onfield team
was shocking.

Now we need to find out if that was normal or if
this bunch were just lazy and blazé.

If that was normal behaviour it's no wonder var
has been so shite, hopefully it improves.






We also find out semi automated offside works
in world cup, and champs league, because addidas ball has a chip, but
EPL don't want semi automated offside because
our nike ball hasn't got a chip in it.

Working on a chip less solution...

EPL ball contract switches in 2025 to Puma.

This is currently expected to be chip less.

Puma supply serie A, they have semi
automated offside, without chips.

Apparently once the game restarts they are not allowed to stop it again, but you've got Michael Oliver screaming at them from the PGMOL hub to delay, I can't believe they froze, I'd be telling the ref to stop the game whether I was allowed to or not, as long as the correct decision was reached I wouldn't care the repurcussions.

Sack them all start again.

Oct 4, 2023 -- 6:12AM, duffy wrote:

Apparently once the game restarts they are not allowed to stop it again, but you've got Michael Oliver screaming at them from the PGMOL hub to delay, I can't believe they froze, I'd be telling the ref to stop the game whether I was allowed to or not, as long as the correct decision was reached I wouldn't care the repurcussions.

It wasn't Michael Oliver, Duffy.  It was Oli Kohout - the VAR Hub operations manager.

the more involved the more chance of a cokk up

interesting thogh that its a liverpoo cokk up that gets the headlines.the bubbly baby gets the milk

Come on, 19, this is the biggest ****-up they've had! You can't miscommunicate the awarding of a perfectly good goal and expect nothing to be said, whoever the affected party.

This isn't about who it happened to, this is about how bad it is!

been plenty howlers as bad as that but yes your right its made worse by the audio.the others didnt get afforded that luxury though

Good to see most fans of other teams seem that this is a shambles and are not criticising or throwing out the lazy "victim" stuff.

It sounded like the only guy in the room who realised the mistake was a kid on a work experience weekend, who repeatedly tried to get the attention of England and his cronies in relation to the miscommunication.

In regards to Liverpool's failed appeal on Jones - if what was said by PP was right - it will be interesting to view future games - will the on field ref be shown stills of incidents as he gets to the screen or will he watch the incident real time. I think that's important. Showing the still the way they did is like a barrister in a court room presenting the evidence to influence the jury.

The kid has a degree in sports technology

Exactly the kind of guy that should be managing
the VAR room. But refs are control freaks, why else
become a ref?

Somebody needs to wrestle control to folk that
understand is to fix errors not a toy, and not
to help out mates.

Somebody needs to wrestle control to folk that
understand VAR is to fix errors not a toy, and not
to help out mates.

It's 8 mins between sending off and goal
incorrectly disallowed.

VAR operators seemed high as kites for disallowed goal.

Still thinking about sending off, adrenaline?

Or is that their normal way of operating var..
.. surely they can't act like that for 100 minutes.

Liverpool should have requested audio of whole
game, get a better feel of what was going on.

nineteen points • October 4, 2023 7:45 AM BST
been plenty howlers as bad as that but yes your right its made worse by the audio.the others didnt get afforded that luxury though

you're missing the point - offsides are supposed to be an objective decisions i.e. you are either offside or onside based on the lines drawn. The other howlers are subjective decisions based on the view of the ref and VAR

VAR isnt being used correctly for subjective decisions. Both the Gusto and Jones red cards were given as yellows by the onfield ref and as they were both not clear and obvious errors (based on the subsequent debate) why did VAR intervene. At the start of the season we were told that the onfield refs were being left to run the game in situations like that with minimal VAR interference. The situation now is that its like russian roulette which decisions VAR decide to get involved on so there is no consistency

Just as an example early in the season Alexis Mcallister got a red card in the first half against Bournemouth which was then reversed as the ref got the decision wrong. VAR chose not to intervene - lets go with the decision of the on field ref

VAR isnt being used correctly for subjective decisions. Both the Gusto and Jones red cards were given as yellows by the onfield ref and as they were both not clear and obvious errors (based on the subsequent debate) why did VAR intervene. At the start of the season we were told that the onfield refs were being left to run the game in situations like that with minimal VAR interference. The situation now is that its like russian roulette which decisions VAR decide to get involved on so there is no consistency

The other backdrop here is the apparent wish to keep a game
11 v 11.

And more physical contact is allowed this season.

Jones for me is a red, but it's not a deffo red.

Ref sees it as yellow, and VAR really shouldnt
be getting involved since his foul follows an
impact off top of ball.



But... If ref gives explanation and he has seen
something other to what actually happened VAR can
ask him to look again.

What faith do we have that ref and VAR communicated
accurately about the red card, given the farce
of 8 minutes later.

Zero faith from me.

agree with yhtl they sounded like 2 excited kids on play station or 2 fans in those fanzones

agree with yhtl they sounded like 2 excited kids on play station or 2 fans in those fanzones

why not throw the shovel away and stop digging?.let the refs make decisions and we all have to stand by it.they are big boys and very well paid.nobody dies when the get it wrong,just over paid prima donnas who will be off to next team that pays more.

Not an option 19, VAR is here to stay.

yes we all know VAR is here to stay but we should have control on when its used i.e not to reverse decisions which could have gone either way

there is no consistency in any shape or form.even the commentators change their tune depending on who is playing

'VAR really shouldnt
be getting involved since his foul follows an
impact off top of ball.'

Nowhere in the rules is this stated to be relevant. If you endanger the safety of an opponent it is irrelevant whether you get the ball or not. If Jones goes for the bottom of the ball and follows through, that is a yellow as it is considered not high enough to constitute a danger in nearly all cases. You go for the top of the ball you are risking being sent off.

The rule states 'A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.' The word used is 'must', ie there is no discretion for the ref on the basis of him getting the ball  or intent once the tackle is sufficiently high and sufficient force is applied. It was a clear red under the rules. It doesn't help when former players like Neville think that intent or getting the ball are relevant. They aren't.

For offside it can be clear cut. Obvious mistake (Liverpool) then VAR gets involved. Correct decision displayed (onside/offside). Not "Check Complete"

For tight decisions that cannot be easily confirmed, then attacking team gets the vote, regardless. If the two lines touch, then its onside. Much better game, much quicker and far more exciting for fans. Even an infant could get that right.

I know it's not in the laws.

Must refers to after they have decided the
foul play or dangerous play.

I've already said I felt it was a red, but
as devil's advocate the ref did not initially.

The VAR protocols were clearly breached by var
in getting ref to upgrade to red, as replay is
supposed to be at real speed not a photo of the impact.

The VAR reviews the broadcast footage, using as many angles as possible. Real-time replays will be used initially to check for intensity. Slow-motion replays will be used to identify the point of contact.

The cowboy attitude to var has to stop.

I dont like var, but it can work well, then you get a player like diaz score a top drawer goal only to be let down by a bunch of clowns

I think we have to be wary on how quick the game is, as I reckon that was the issue here. They might have been a bit giddy from the sending off (don't buy that really) but the audio here sounds really rushed like they were really against the clock. The procedure just needs stretching out a bit in cases like this to ensure clarity. Not saying you need 2 minutes but you can spend more than 10 seconds on it.

Klopp wants a replay!

"it would be the right thing to do" he says

Obviously I don't, but what do the neutrals on here think? How many games would need to be replayed through errors? Could be a bigger problem long term.

I disagree (as a LFC fan), but I can't for the life of me come up with a situation where the erroneously not given goal shouldn't be added after the event.  It's a pretty exceptional case.

ridiculous to have a replay, it was a human error and he wouldn't be calling for a replay if it'd been the other way around. It could also set a precedent, every time a ref makes a big mistake that changed the game, let's have a replay? and Klopp is aways talking about there being too many games.

Before VAR, when you went with the lineman's flag, yet the Sky cameras clearly showed the goal being onside afterwards, i.e factual as with the Diaz goal, you never had calls for replays so why would there be any difference here, Tottenham would be mad to agree to it as it'd also impact upon their fixture schedule.

would they start with 11
then take a man off
same starting sides etc etc
jog on klopp not happening

We've barely got a fixture schedule this year Scandy

No way they'd agree anyway, although Levy might be tempted as home games are quite a money-spinner these days.

Can't have a replay but I suppose you've got to start your bargaining from a high point to try and get anything near reasonable.

My money is on no other outcome at all. Chit happens.

yeah, which is why you have to have a strong opening gambit

Yeah the VAR operator comes out of it best but even he could have done more, he realizes and explains the problem but only says "Are you happy with that" he knew bloody well that no-one would be happy with it but sounded just a little bit nervous at really getting stuck in.

What he should have been doing was shouting, stop the fcuking game because if you don't their will be asterisks next to Liverpool and Spurs in the table for the rest of the season, someone at that moment should have relayed the enormity of what was happening and gotten through to the VAR guy and his assistant.

Someone needed to be Ripley taking control off of Gorman (Aliens)

The Oli guy who I mistakenly thought was Oliver, (thanks Latalomne) understood the enormity but was powerless to stop the game himself by the sounds of it.

The Tenerife airport disaster occurred on March 27, 1977, when two Boeing 747 passenger jets collided on the runway at Los Rodeos Airport[1] (now Tenerife North Airport) on the Spanish island of Tenerife.[2][3] The collision occurred when KLM Flight 4805 initiated its takeoff run during dense fog while Pan Am Flight 1736 was still on the runway. The impact and resulting fire killed everyone on board KLM 4805 and most of the occupants of Pan Am 1736, with only 61 survivors in the front section of the aircraft.[2][3] With 583 fatalities, the disaster is the deadliest accident in aviation history.

Immediately after lining up, the KLM captain advanced the throttles and the aircraft started to move forward.[31] Meurs advised him that ATC clearance had not yet been given and van Zanten responded: "No, I know that. Go ahead, ask." Meurs then radioed the tower that they were "ready for takeoff" and "waiting for our ATC clearance". The KLM crew then received instructions that specified the route that the aircraft was to follow after takeoff. The instructions used the word "takeoff," but did not include an explicit statement that they were cleared for takeoff.

Meurs read the flight clearance back to the controller, completing the readback with the statement: "We are now at takeoff."[4] Van Zanten interrupted the co-pilot's readback with the comment, "We're going."[4]

The controller, who could not see the runway due to the fog, initially responded with "OK" (terminology that is nonstandard), which reinforced the KLM captain's misinterpretation that they had takeoff clearance. The controller's response of "OK" to the co-pilot's nonstandard statement that they were "now at takeoff" was likely due to his misinterpretation that they were in takeoff position and ready to begin the roll when takeoff clearance was received, but not in the process of taking off. The controller then immediately added "stand by for takeoff, I will call you",[4] indicating that he had not intended the instruction to be interpreted as a takeoff clearance.[32]

A simultaneous radio call from the Pan Am crew caused mutual interference on the radio frequency, which was audible in the KLM cockpit as a three-second-long shrill sound (or heterodyne). This caused the KLM crew to miss the crucial latter portion of the tower's response. The Pan Am crew's transmission was "We're still taxiing down the runway, the Clipper 1736!" This message was also blocked by the interference and inaudible to the KLM crew. Either message, if heard in the KLM cockpit, would have alerted the crew to the situation and given them time to abort the takeoff attempt.[33]

Due to the fog, neither crew was able to see the other plane on the runway ahead of them. In addition, neither of the aircraft could be seen from the control tower, and the airport was not equipped with ground radar.[4]

LEGACY:

As a consequence of the accident, sweeping changes were made to international airline regulations and to aircraft. Aviation authorities around the world introduced requirements for standard phrases and a greater emphasis on English as a common working language.[16]

Air traffic instruction must not be acknowledged solely with a colloquial phrase such as "OK" or even "Roger" (which simply means the last transmission was received),[64] but with a readback of the key parts of the instruction, to show mutual understanding. The word "takeoff" is now spoken only when the actual takeoff clearance is given, or when canceling that same clearance (i.e., "cleared for takeoff" or "cancel takeoff clearance"). Until that point, aircrew and controllers should use the word "departure" in its place (e.g., "ready for departure").


NOONE DIED ON SATURDAY!

Oct 4, 2023 -- 3:50PM, duffy wrote:

Yeah the VAR operator comes out of it best but even he could have done more, he realizes and explains the problem but only says "Are you happy with that" he knew bloody well that no-one would be happy with it but sounded just a little bit nervous at really getting stuck in.What he should have been doing was shouting, stop the fcuking game because if you don't their will be asterisks next to Liverpool and Spurs in the table for the rest of the season, someone at that moment should have relayed the enormity of what was happening and gotten through to the VAR guy and his assistant.Someone needed to be Ripley taking control off of Gorman (Aliens)The Oli guy who I mistakenly thought was Oliver, (thanks Latalomne) understood the enormity but was powerless to stop the game himself by the sounds of it.

Agree - i think the language he used reflects his lack of authority / confidence to make the point.

someone in the media used the word "efficiency"  - and when you listen to it, I think there are indications they are trying to be efficient - Hooper says something like " nice jobs guys"  - like, bang we smashed that nice and quick. I wonder if there has been a discussion at their get togethers and a directive to make the decisions as quick as possible to keep the flow of the game and minimise stoppages and delays - if they were thinking about that they would have been better with Rothko's approach - stop over-involving VAR in things that are not clear and obvious and trying to re-ref.

Regards replaying - not for me. I think the golden chance at redemption here was at HT - approach the managers and propose the walk in goal thing that has been done before. But, that comes back to the point Duffy makes - there isn't the autonomy in decision making to do this hence England saying "its too late..its too late..."

Good discussion on this - I reckon Howard and his team could do worse than read through some of the discussion here.

Couple of other things, I thought for all the world that they didn't even do a check because we never saw the lines drawn but they did do a check, why then didn't we see the lines, if the game was stopped whilst we see the lines being put up then that pause would have been enough for them to realize that it had been flagged for offside.

Also we've always known that offside isn't an exact science because they can't know the exact moment the ball leaves the passers foot and we saw for the first time that being carried out here, they just freeze the moment they think he passes it and take that as gospel.

Spot on about the ball freeze - it took me by surprise as well -  I've heard someone talk about chips, and then others talk about FPS in relation to cameras... and how it was impossible to get the super close ones right...but what we are seeing here, its clear they cannot and should not be trying to rule on these - because they can't. 

In the audio you hear someone saying "perfect" after he does his wee point + click thing and I am thinking to myself...actually, no it's not. Surprised no-one in the media has commented on this.

Why weren't these "protocols" sorted out before VAR was implemented? They obviously don't have the capability, in terms of properly trained officials or a system that is understood by all using it. This "Olly" guy was clearly very reluctant to get involved and expand on his poorly communicated and misunderstood instruction to delay, other than nervously saying "yes" when the other official said his name, in an apparent attempt to get him to clarify his understanding of the situation, and tell them what to do. He was probably scared of saying the wrong thing, which indicates to me that he had little confidence in himself or the system, and didn't know what to do. If the staff are not capable of working VAR properly, it should be binned until such time that they know exactly what they are doing and are competent in using the technology.
It seems to me that all VAR is doing is giving more people more chances of getting it wrong. It's a big money-spinner for a few of the "top" officials, but if it is compromising the integrity of the game, then the greedy people behind VAR should be told to back off.

1 min or 10 mins they were never going to get this right because they didnt no the lino had given it offside ,so alarm would only ring when game was restarted,maybe the 3rd voice could have jumped in earlier if he thought their chat led,  him to believe they hadnt noticed it was given offside,but deffo give impression of 2 lads lounging about eating pringles/snacks instead of watching the game as though they were reffing it live themselves

i think the car crash impression of the audio puts VAR in more danger than the mistake,its openned everybodys eyes to the chaos that must go on every sat,
one ?
team of at least 3 involved there , if their were 8 games all at same time
is that 8 x teams of 3,in 8 seperate rooms ?

i think the car crash impression of the audio puts VAR in more danger than the mistake,its openned everybodys eyes to the chaos that must go on every sat,
one ?
team of at least 3 involved there , if their were 8 games all at same time
is that 8 x teams of 3,in 8 seperate rooms ?

Doesn't  help there were 2 Ollies in this,Michael Oliver and another.

where's his accent from btw? all I could hear was 'dilly dilly', until it was in print and was actually 'delay delay'