Presentation from British Airways duo comes as exclusive YouGov poll for The Times reveals that three quarters of football fans want to keep VAR — but with changes to the system
Did they really need another industry specialists to explain/demonstrate this?
How can the same clarity and professionalism be present in another English sport (Cricket), but not in the far richer PL?
Player or Umpire Review option, each has distinct hand sign
Player review capped at 2 per innings, and 15 sec clock after any umpire decision, before the window to challenge it closes
As soon as sign made, the 3rd umpire controlling DRS (Decision Review System), turns mic on, broadcast to everyone on field and on air: ‘Umpire/Player review for X, Original decision was Y’
Then conducts video analysis, all the time mic on, on-air. Gives reasoning and decision as per laws of game. Asks on field umpire to reverse or uphold decision, AND on-field screen shows entire process and decision in writing.
You’re telling me no one in professional football ever saw this in professional cricket?
Or does PGMOL not want oversight and responsibility?
Cricket has the advantage of being largely objective. The ball touched the bat or it didn’t. The ball pitched in line or it didn’t. The batsman made his ground or he didn’t. When the tech fails, like spotting if fingers are under a grounded ball, then you still get controversy.
Football has so much subjectivity in the rules that developing a simple system for it is hard. What is a fair tackle, what is excessive force, what is interfering with play, what was a goal scoring opportunity?
The specific post is about communication howlers in VAR.
It’s about process which tennis, rugby, cricket have all shown for years to be very transparent and meticulous.
Football’s refusal to benchmark and adapt these SOPs is the problem.
Not the fact that a ‘reckless tackle worthy of red vs yellow’ is a subjective call (which it is) - follow a transparent process, mic up, and own your decisions.
PGMOL makes calls and then gives hare brained explanations to protect its ilk.
Did they really need another industry specialists to explain/demonstrate this?
How can the same clarity and professionalism be present in another English sport (Cricket), but not in the far richer PL?
Player or Umpire Review option, each has distinct hand sign
Player review capped at 2 per innings, and 15 sec clock after any umpire decision, before the window to challenge it closes
As soon as sign made, the 3rd umpire controlling DRS (Decision Review System), turns mic on, broadcast to everyone on field and on air: ‘Umpire/Player review for X, Original decision was Y’
Then conducts video analysis, all the time mic on, on-air. Gives reasoning and decision as per laws of game. Asks on field umpire to reverse or uphold decision, AND on-field screen shows entire process and decision in writing.
You’re telling me no one in professional football ever saw this in professional cricket?
Or does PGMOL not want oversight and responsibility?
Cricket has the advantage of being largely objective. The ball touched the bat or it didn’t. The ball pitched in line or it didn’t. The batsman made his ground or he didn’t. When the tech fails, like spotting if fingers are under a grounded ball, then you still get controversy.
Football has so much subjectivity in the rules that developing a simple system for it is hard. What is a fair tackle, what is excessive force, what is interfering with play, what was a goal scoring opportunity?
It’s not about objective vs subjective rules.
The specific post is about communication howlers in VAR.
It’s about process which tennis, rugby, cricket have all shown for years to be very transparent and meticulous.
Football’s refusal to benchmark and adapt these SOPs is the problem.
Not the fact that a ‘reckless tackle worthy of red vs yellow’ is a subjective call (which it is) - follow a transparent process, mic up, and own your decisions.
PGMOL makes calls and then gives hare brained explanations to protect its ilk.