First ever video decision

[hibbysam]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

There was a massive appeal by the Sydney FC players, as you would expect whether there was a video ref or no video ref.

Rules mean that players cannot request it be referred to the video ref and if they do, they'll get a yellow card.

Didn't stop them though..although nobody got booked.

I guess the ref WAS sure...as I say he just missed it and waved play on.....until he got the advice over his earpiece .

Common sense with handballs if there is a massive players appeal at the time then going upstairs would be justified. I get it if the ref actually seen it and said no and they kept going then book them, but you can normally tell when something has happened and when you have that help then you should be using it.

[Forza Fred]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Funnily enough the rules as they stand don't allow the VAR to review a red card situation, but do allow it to be used for a yellow card situation, including the second yellow, which would obviously lead to a red.

I think they need to look at this.

On the subject of the Old Firm, I remember when the no pass back to the keeper rule came in and a Hibs player headed the ball back to our keeper resulting in the Huns supporters having near apoplexy...the commentator pointed out that they obviously didn't understand the rule as you were allowed to head the ball back..

It will take them a while to come to terms with any rule change I reckon....

Correction...it CAN be used for red card situations, but not on second yellows that may lead to a red card.

The original interpretation was mistakenly reported.

[Deansy]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Couldn't give a flying fig about old firm. More worried how it would affect us with referee decisions we get.

For starters it'll save us the time and expense currently wasted in appealing and winning the wrong decisions that've been given against us. But the BIG winner for us is the 'Retrospecive Red-Card' (rrc)scenario. To the best of my memory, RRC's have been issued to Jambo-players on 5 separate occasions. All that means is that those players missed a game for them so we got no benefit from it at all. Now, if the ref (for argument's sake, let's say Craig Thomson .....) contrives to 'miss' the red-card offence, using video-evidence we could prove the red-card is merited, they're down to 10-men and WE benefit from it there and then - winner !

Overall, I believe video-evidence will make already biased referees (think of games when we play either of the OF ....) think twice about giving wrong/unfair decisions - for me video-evidence will be great for the game.

[Steve-O]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

As are biased referees who deliberately cheat, diving players and those who feign being elbowed and head butted.

Not only will referees decisions be improved by video technology, much of the above will stop too.

It's a perfect fit for football.

What if the Video ref is biased? In my view, there was a foul on the player before he handled the ball, so it's already proven it's not perfect after one use!

[poolman]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It depends what you consider to be carnage.

Domestic violence spikes and the media degenerate into a frothing mess every time there's an Old Firm anyway. If there's a contentious decision then these things increase.

I think the potential for carnage would be reduced if there was greater chance of arriving at the correct decisions, and if everyone knew in advance that theoretical situation described above was a possibility.

Knowing Scottish refs, they'd probably view video evidence in an Old Firm game and decide to send of Marvin Bartley for Hibs anyway.

I LOVE that last sentence

Brill 😂

[Forza Fred]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

What if the Video ref is biased? In my view, there was a foul on the player before he handled the ball, so it's already proven it's not perfect after one use!

No yellow tinted glasses there at all....😉

[DH1875]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Just occurred during Wellington Phoenix v Sydney FC in Australian A League.

Ref missed clear handball by Phoenix defender, and was subsequently advised by VAR that it was a penalty.

He got the message 56 seconds after the handball occurred, having allowed play to go on.

Before anyone asks had the Phoenix scored in that 56 seconds, the goal would have been disallowed.


No doubt you will see coverage on the telly, but the video ref did its job.
1-1 draw by the way.

Its not the first ever video decision . As already stated in the thread, it was used recently in Spain's game against France and to be fair, it worked out pretty well to be honest.

[Forza Fred]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Its not the first ever video decision . As already stated in the thread, it was used recently in Spain's game against France and to be fair, it worked out pretty well to be honest.

I probably should have added"...................ïn a "'country's main domestic league competition"'

As I understand it, the Spain v France game was a friendly.

apologies for my impreciseness...

[Austinho]

I remember read the match report for the Spain v France match:

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Video technology was used to correct two wrong decisions as Spain beat France in a friendly in Paris.[

France striker Antoine Greizmann had a goal ruled out for offside by the video assistant referee.

And Spain's second goal was awarded by the video official after an assistant referee wrongly flagged for offside.

David Silva opened the scoring for Spain with a penalty after Laurent Koscielny was judged to have fouled Deulofeu.

Griezmann had earlier had a headed goal ruled out when referee Felix Zwayer reversed his initial decision after receiving a message in his earpiece from the video assistant referee, who was sat in a truck outside the Stade de France.

Replays showed Kurzawa was narrowly offside when he headed he ball to Griezmann, with the decision to overturn the goal made in around 30 seconds.

Now, does that not sound like the dullest, most sterile match report ever written?

In my opinion the controversial moments are some of the real talking points and what sets football apart as an exciting entity.

[BlackSheep]

Like any rule change or addition, everyone, players managers and fans alike would have to deal with it. There would be an adjustment period and a lot of hot air about these decisions in the early days but at the end of the day rules are rules and it surely will prove positive in the long run.

[greenlex]

Players tend to redact to injustices (take yesterday as an example when Darren made no reaction to the ken as he knew it was) I think if a wrong call or no call when it should have been made situation then like in tennis the team captain should be allowed to challenge it. The captain should be allowed 3 challenges per game so it's not stopping the flow of it too much or contesting every offside decision for example. The only other time the video ref should get involved would be if the ref wasn't sure enough to make a decision and asked himself.

[Eyrie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Players tend to redact to injustices (take yesterday as an example when Darren made no reaction to the ken as he knew it was) I think if a wrong call or no call when it should have been made situation then like in tennis the team captain should be allowed to challenge it. The captain should be allowed 3 challenges per game so it's not stopping the flow of it too much or contesting every offside decision for example. The only other time the video ref should get involved would be if the ref wasn't sure enough to make a decision and asked himself.

And if the original decision is upheld, award a free kick to the other team. If the original decision is a penalty which is then scored, the scoring team get the kick off.

I'd also make it two challenges rather then three.

[where'stheslope]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

What if the Video ref is biased? In my view, there was a foul on the player before he handled the ball, so it's already proven it's not perfect after one use!

Then the video evidence will prove they are corrupt!!!

If the ref gives a dodgy decision he can say he never seen it or his view was blocked, a video ref can't say the same thing as we all get to see it from different angles on TV!!!!

[Hibs1969]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Leigh Griffiths disallowed free kick against Hearts would have been given a few years ago....

And Forster's header against them at ER. IIRC the point from that game would have kept us up that year.

[NorthNorfolkHFC]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

56 seconds is a long time to relay a message given you said it was a clear hand ball.

That's what I thought? It should be pretty instantaneous? Unless the boy was getting a cuppa


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[emerald green]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

As are biased referees who deliberately cheat, diving players and those who feign being elbowed and head butted.

Not only will referees decisions be improved by video technology, much of the above will stop too.

It's a perfect fit for football.

Spot on.

Anything which cuts out and/or reduces the amount of refereeing "mistakes" is to be welcomed.

[Forza Fred]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Like any rule change or addition, everyone, players managers and fans alike would have to deal with it. There would be an adjustment period and a lot of hot air about these decisions in the early days but at the end of the day rules are rules and it surely will prove positive in the long run.

[Smartie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That's what I thought? It should be pretty instantaneous? Unless the boy was getting a cuppa


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How "Scottish football" would it be for the players to be milling about the pitch for 15 minutes because the video ref had gone for a dump?

"Sorry boys. Thought I could fart my way out of that one, or at least get to half time but needs must. Right, where are we? In a rush? F** it, penalty Rangers then."

[Hibbyradge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I remember read the match report for the Spain v France match:



Now, does that not sound like the dullest, most sterile match report ever written?

In my opinion the controversial moments are some of the real talking points and what sets football apart as an exciting entity.

I remember being thrilled when Colin Campbell was brought down in the box in the 1979 cup final and when Leigh Griffith's goal wasn't given against hertz, I was beside myself with excitement.

[Hibbyradge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

How "Scottish football" would it be for the players to be milling about the pitch for 15 minutes because the video ref had gone for a dump?

"Sorry boys. Thought I could fart my way out of that one, or at least get to half time but needs must. Right, where are we? In a rush? F** it, penalty Rangers then."

15 minutes for a dump? You need to up the fibre in your diet!

[Smartie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

15 minutes for a dump? You need to up the fibre in your diet!

I was thinking more of Bobby Madden sitting there having been relegated to video ref duties after hitting the Tennents lager too hard the night before, reading the Daily Record from cover to cover.