Refs called over by VAR

TBF that may have been a correct change, but it happens EVERY time...

They are called over because var have told them they are wrong.

A chance to correct their decision

VAR sent him to the screen to change his decision but he stuck to his onfield one...a rare event indeed but correct...

told them they are wrong.

Told them they might be wrong - that's the big difference.

But they ALWAYS check and change their minds...or almost always.

That’ll be him going on gardening leave.

probably LH.

They gave the penalty apparantly on the field, but was called over to check it - then no pen.

no, he didn't give it originally..

Was what BBC said anyway...

Man Utd 2-0 Sunderland

This is a strange one. The on-field officials have now changed their call to penalty. But the VAR team still looking so it could be overturned yet.

I think it was quick as he was called over immediately after, I think...

No they are called over because they are wrong.

They can stick with it if they wish.

It's never about 'wrong' anyway, it's always an opinion - either ref or VAR....

It's not re reffing, it's showing them what they got wrong
/missed based on the chat and what var has seen

You'd expect 99% of var calls to be implemented.

Either way, question remains, why are they so weak they never (or not that I see) challenge the VAR view, it's often a marginal call either way...

Thats not really true though is it - many times no-one agrees even after multiple videos playing...

Because they are wrong or missed something

How would they know they missed something, they may have seen it all and come to a view?

Ref chats with var, tells them what he's seen

Var says that's not what happened,... Look at this.

VAR says 'I didn't see it that way' is what you mean. The ref usually saw it as well (most cases) and decided different, in cases like this one.

Atwell is often the VAR guy himself - and often makes stupid views presented to refs....

Var has film evidence to show ref why he's wrong.

re Utd incident...suggestion seems to be assistant convinced him to give it (he hadn't originally) and then VAR called him over to correct it to no pen..watching the game on a stream it appeared they'd called him to overturn to a PEN.

Yes, they replay it multiple times as 'evidence' until the refs get brainwashed at slow motion speed...

He consulted with lino and then gave pen. Seems correct.

Stu you seem brainwashed against accepting what Var is doing.

We've seen enough cases to know the VAR/ref overturns are not always correct for certain - sometimes they are plain stupid.

Ref asks for replays

He can request different speeds too.

you were being too definite in your claims THTL - citing word like 'wrong'

That is the word.

If it was clearly wrong, then why consult the ref at all...just use VAR...

Eh?

Var cannot overrule ref, without refs say so.

But why, if VAR can be as definite that they were 'wrong'?

I know the answer is because VAR cannot be that definite of course, they just have a view on it like the ref does.

Attwell himself has given enough moronic VAR calls - they are just other refs,

It's based on the video evidence

And yep Var has got stuff wrong, and will get it
wrong again.

Which is why ref gets to see it, and can take as
long as he likes to view incidents from multi angles
and at multi speeds to see it as best as possible.

They have multiple angles, but the ref also has the on pitch view in real time - which they don't.

My point is they rarely trust their own initial views, once VAR gets involved.

The new but as yet unwritten law of the game of football is - “the referee’s decision will at all times be final, once VAR has made that decision”.

Of course they don't trust their initial view

Var is correcting them, they have video of it
and only bring ref to monitor when he's wrong.

Interesting to hear the audio of Sunderland non pelanty today.

Ref and lino award it, then ref, on Var advice, change it.

Were they 'correcting' them on numerous previous times when they gave moron decisions - often with Atwell making them?

Anyone arguing VAR never gets it wrong, well, really....??

Nobody is arguing Var never gets it wrong.

That's a strawman that has already been dealt with.

Ref tells Var what he has seen

Var tells ref, err, that's not what happened, or
shows him what he has missed,

So ref will change decision 99% of time

But that's pathetic then - as I said, what VAR tells the ref is often just a take from a ref on what happened.

They should not be changing view 99% of the time based on that, apart from the obvious blatant cases, which most are not (hence the stupid cases as above).

I'd love to hear other's views of what VAR 'tells or shows' the ref - if they agree with you.

As you already agreed with, VAR has given wrong decisions or views.

Hence by definition what VAR 'tells' the ref can be wrong - so it is the ref's judgement that is the bottom line.

They are discussing what ref saw, and what he missed
and how it has impacted upon the decision that has been made.

There is a load of scope for other stuff, but that's not
what he's called to monitor for.

Well I'm starting to agree with your most recent description, which is less definite about the ref's initial decisions and views being 'wrong'.

It doesn't matter what other people's opinions are
other than if they like Var or not.

What I am telling you is not my opinion
it's what the refs are actually doing, which
is what I've read week on week.

It's quite alright to not like it, but you can check
what I've said with Google or ai bots.

My initial point was whether the refs should be changing their mind as often, solely due to VAR.

I still stand by my view that they shouldn't, as VAR is not some infallible process in decisions, as you admitted above.

Of course they should because they are being shown evidence that
contradicts their initial decision

Not sure how many more times you need to hear it.

It takes a bit of bottle for a ref to go against VAR and stick to his initial decision. I’m sure many have felt like they’ve had to change their decision, possibly when they didn’t want to. The last thing they want is to be lambasted by MOTD pundits that evening. Far easier just to listen to the voices in your ear and go with what they say.

You are of course right y-h-t-l but the point is that VAR do not get things right consistently enough.  So it is thus inefficient which begs the question as to whether it is worth having.  The Chelsea defender went off but the Brentford one didn’t. Glaring example.

I think the lucrative match fees play a large part in their acceptance of things too kenbo.

Var gets stuff wrong, absolutely

But these monitor calls to refs are over decisions Var can show to
the ref that what ref said is not correct.

But

Referee sees stuff that is subjective such as force of tackle
and they tend to go with refs call. So a worse challenge
can be yellow and a lesser one red, and var doesnt
get involved... Then you get Gordon on Virgil which is a dreadful
challenge that ref saw as yellow, but is clear red and var steps in.

But you will still get inconsistent decisions with var
as the threshold for an intervention is set fairly high

Of course they should because they are being shown evidence that
contradicts their initial decision

Not sure how many more times you need to hear it.

It's not that complicated, I'm obviously disagreeing with the value of that 'evidence or chit chat rubbish they have' vs the ref's own view they made on the pitch.

Ref says he saw it

Var shows him he's wrong



[] Ref changes decision.
[] Ref insists he saw it despite evidence to contrary.