I dearly love these videos as both a referee and spectator. Having said that, I can’t watch those week’s video. It is so choppy and frenetic it was stressing me out!
What about the RSL v STL game? There were at least two incidents that VAR needed to check and could've drastically changed the game. Just showing the "good catches" isn't very interesting
"Inside Video Review" rarely discusses situation that don't actually involve a Video Review (it's in the name). There are dozens of situations per game where the VAR doesn't see a clear and obvious error by the referee - I'd think that "no error - check" would be pretty uninteresting itself. A weekly show that does talk about controversial calls is "Instant Replay" on the MLS channel.
@@johnmcgimpsey1825 If the game is delayed due to a VAR review, as was the case in the game, I feel like we should see it regardless of the final determination. At the very least, so fans can understand why there wasn't a clear and obvious error. I feel like this series is more focused on "look at how well we did" rather than "here are notable video reviews, and why each decision was made". Maybe my expectations are off, but I feel like bad calls should be acknowledged. I know fans can be brutal to the refs, but my hope is that clear communication will make things better. Especially with the atrocious scabs
@@DrDisemb0wel "I feel like bad calls should be acknowledged." They are in the context of plays that went for an on-field review. Typically you'll hear 'PRO would have preferred...." when they don't agree with the call. When you have a Center Referee and VAR making a decision on a play, it should be rare that there is a major error. Maybe they were separate thoughts, but it feels like you're saying the RLSvSTL plays were absolutely wrong and that PRO is hiding it by not addressing them. My conclusion, without seeing the plays (include a link/timestamp if you like) is that that VAR didn't have enough evidence to justify an on-field review. There is a very clear line right now as to what is shown on this show. As soon as non-OFR decisions are brought into the discussion, then you're looking at a much longer segment with comments and comments of people asking why *their* game wasn't part of the review (when for most it was pretty obvious why it wasn't). Remember, *every* play is looked at by VAR so then it just becomes a matter of opinion which ones should be in the segment.
In the next video I sure hope we see a review of the PK call in the Galaxy vs LAFC game.
welcome back refs
Um....was that a handball by Columbus right before the PK for Rossi? Not even mentioned by the VAR. Maybe my eyes are messing with me.
Nice new graphics
I dearly love these videos as both a referee and spectator. Having said that, I can’t watch those week’s video. It is so choppy and frenetic it was stressing me out!
VARlington!
What about the RSL v STL game? There were at least two incidents that VAR needed to check and could've drastically changed the game. Just showing the "good catches" isn't very interesting
"Inside Video Review" rarely discusses situation that don't actually involve a Video Review (it's in the name). There are dozens of situations per game where the VAR doesn't see a clear and obvious error by the referee - I'd think that "no error - check" would be pretty uninteresting itself. A weekly show that does talk about controversial calls is "Instant Replay" on the MLS channel.
@@johnmcgimpsey1825 If the game is delayed due to a VAR review, as was the case in the game, I feel like we should see it regardless of the final determination. At the very least, so fans can understand why there wasn't a clear and obvious error.
I feel like this series is more focused on "look at how well we did" rather than "here are notable video reviews, and why each decision was made". Maybe my expectations are off, but I feel like bad calls should be acknowledged. I know fans can be brutal to the refs, but my hope is that clear communication will make things better. Especially with the atrocious scabs
@@DrDisemb0wel "I feel like bad calls should be acknowledged." They are in the context of plays that went for an on-field review. Typically you'll hear 'PRO would have preferred...." when they don't agree with the call.
When you have a Center Referee and VAR making a decision on a play, it should be rare that there is a major error. Maybe they were separate thoughts, but it feels like you're saying the RLSvSTL plays were absolutely wrong and that PRO is hiding it by not addressing them. My conclusion, without seeing the plays (include a link/timestamp if you like) is that that VAR didn't have enough evidence to justify an on-field review.
There is a very clear line right now as to what is shown on this show. As soon as non-OFR decisions are brought into the discussion, then you're looking at a much longer segment with comments and comments of people asking why *their* game wasn't part of the review (when for most it was pretty obvious why it wasn't). Remember, *every* play is looked at by VAR so then it just becomes a matter of opinion which ones should be in the segment.
Yeah. Arango’s violent conduct gets no mention!? It was reviewed. No call and then he goes on to score a hat trick. Garbage.