Howard Webb on transparent decision-making, the role of VAR and Manchester derby offside controversy | Football News

PGMOL referees chief Howard Webb has said he wants to “pull back the curtain” on the officials’ decision-making, and admitted Bruno Fernandes’ controversial goal in the Manchester derby will now be ruled offside.

Former Premier League referee joins Sky Sports ahead of the Friday Night Football match between Chelsea and Fulham to discuss the first two months on the job.

While VAR and time-wasting are high on the agenda, Webb has also been questioned about high-profile incidents, including his decision to allow Fernandes to play against Manchester City despite Marcus Rashford being in a position normally offside. .

The goal sparked debate among pundits, fans and coaches, and Webb has now given his take on what happened.

Read on for the verdict and everything the official had to say on Friday Night Football…

What are your immediate priorities?

One of the things you have to do is respect the way the Premier League plays – the flow and tempo of the game.

I think it’s done pretty well these days, not trying to spoil the game by letting it breathe. I’ve done a few tours of the clubs in the last few weeks and the feedback I’ve been given has been positive about the way the referees are handling things on the pitch.

But of course, there is a lot of talk about VAR and how to use it. I want to use it as it was always intended: as a safety net for those clear errors, and allow the referee to referee the game. Our game throws a lot of subjectivity and if we participate in subjective situations, we can experience inconsistencies.

I tried to guarantee VAR [officials] know they have a duty to identify obvious mistakes, but don’t get too involved in things that create debate and differences of opinion.

If the decision rests with the referee, what is the point of VAR?

The point of VAR is to stop situations where I usually see myself making decisions on the pitch, going into the dressing room and thinking ‘oh my, how did I miss that?’ – that should not happen now. VAR is there as a safety net.

But what I don’t expect is that there are some situations where a 60/40 opinion can be split, not only for the people in the stands, but the media, players, coaches and even the officials. One VAR in one week will recommend a review and in the same week, another will not. I think that will create a situation where people lose faith in what it is for.

But making sure that the VAR officials have the skills to recognize when something is wrong, they will always step in and correct the situation which I used to hate when you look at the screen and you know you are wrong.

Officials like to use VAR. It gave him comfort to know that he wouldn’t make the same mistakes he would make over the next few days.

Is the bar too high for VAR to step in and change referee decisions on the pitch?

I agree and if something is clearly wrong, they should be involved. We don’t want the bar to be so high that you never see VAR being used.

If there is a clear mistake tonight [at Stamford Bridge] on the field, I expect VAR to recommend that Stuart Attwell go to the screen, have thought and change the call if he agrees it is a clear error. They also have the ability to stick to their decisions if they want to.

Also, if we miss one because VAR doesn’t recognize it as a clear mistake, I will come out and say ‘we have to go there’ so people don’t lose faith in where the bar is. Human error can happen on the field and in the VAR booth.

But here to stay. It’s an amazing tool and we want to make sure it improves the game and doesn’t ruin the game we love so much with the flow and tempo. We only want to use VAR for times when it’s clearly wrong, and we don’t want to get involved and disrupt the game. I think this is the best way to use it.

Will we ever see open mic communication in the Premier League like it is used in the NFL?

I’m all for openness and transparency and try to pull the curtain back on decision-making. I think if people can see the reason for the decision and understand it better, they may not agree with the outcome, but at least they better understand and accept what happened.

We are trying to work with the broadcasters to tell the story to the people at home, but also the people in the stadium need to know.

You will see in the Club World Cup as recently as the last few days in Morocco, the referee has come out, looked at the incident in the video review and announced the result for the stadium. This is something we will look at closely and see if it works.

If that’s the case, we’ll open a conversation about how to use it like that in the stadium. The fans are important people who create the atmosphere and should know what is happening through the video board or by other means.

This is a possibility, so let’s see how it works in the Club World Cup and if it works in the future.

Should VAR have involved Andy Carroll and Fabinho last weekend?

Fabinho is one of the most widely recognized that should have caused a video review. The referee showed the yellow card and the VAR did not feel it had reached the threshold which was a clear error.

We think it was a mistake, VAR should have stepped in and overturned the decision. You could make the same case for the tackle by Andy Carroll on Eriksen, which was not a good tackle.

There are some subjective elements in many tackles, but some of them stand out and we have to be involved. What we need to do is not only to admit that we have to participate, but to learn from it so that it happens less often than often.

We mentioned that we want to keep the tide in the game, we want to allow some contact and not punish. But we also need to know if there is a need to intervene, if there is a contact that has a detrimental effect on the player or that has a dangerous element for the safety of the opponent. That’s what we have to do.

How do you analyze the Fernandes-Rashford incident in the Manchester derby with the officials after the match and how do you see it now?

I think this is the most talked about incident in the Premier League so far this year. An offside player who does not touch the ball, the question then becomes whether he interferes with the opponent.

Over time, the law of the game has been moved in the direction where it will be penalized for being in an offside position without touching the ball, you must be one of the four quite specific. The goal is to be consistent with the application.

Rashford didn’t do all four of those things, but you could make the argument that he did. Of course there is an element of interpretation required, there is subjectivity to this. On that day, the officials did not feel like interfering in the way established in the law. That can be supported.

The game tells us that there is hope that the situation should lead to offside. We are here to serve games and listen to games.

If the same situation happens again, you will see a different result now based on everything you have done since then.

When you say game, who have asked?

We talk to other associations, such as LMA, PFA, clubs. We talk to league executives, our officials, we discuss the situation and tweak things as we go.

You can’t say it was a wrong decision because the law is quite subjective, there is some flexibility in the way you can interpret the law. It is clear that most people will expect to be offside if the same thing happens again.

The problem is that Rashford is following the ball quite far and getting closer. In general, he may have been affected by Akanji or the goalkeeper in these situations and therefore the game is expected to be offside.

How do you plan to fix the time-wasting if the ball has not played for as long as it should?

Apart from VAR, effective match time is the most talked about thing, how to get more playing time.

One way we can do that is by adding a lot of time at the end of the game like we saw in the World Cup, where normal things that wouldn’t be added – like goal celebrations – we see every second added at the end of the game.

That doesn’t usually happen in Europe’s top five leagues, so why in a game England won 6-1. [against Iran], we saw nine minutes at the end of the game. You won’t see it in the Premier League, La Liga or Serie A. But we see it and it’s a choice.

One of the things we also have to do is keep the momentum in the game, so we have to spend time. Players will kick the ball or stand in front of a free kick and it is clearly a waste of time.

One of the things I would like to do is give officers tactical awareness so that they can understand things more easily. We created a team with several talented and gifted individuals to give officials tactical awareness and physical preparation, everything they need to cope with what is presented in the modern game.

There is no doubt that the team is more than ready to get those marginal advantages and we need to be able to do the same to give tactical officials to deal with tactics intended to delay the game.