Pressure for quick VAR decisions obvious in rushed derby review
· BBC-PL
The controversy surrounding the VAR decision to allow Erling Haaland's winner in the Manchester derby has rumbled on for days, so what led to the error?
Refereeing has always been a goldfish bowl of scrutiny and pressure, heightened by the introduction of VAR.
The Premier League made a "more efficient application of VAR to reduce delays" one of its football principles for the season.
Has the game tried to prioritise speed over accuracy?
Rushed and chaotic rather than calm and collected
Supporters have grown tired of long delays while the video officials review incidents
The urgency in Donohue's voice was all too apparent.
> "Let's go, let's go, let's go, let's go!"
It was a panicked exchange between the VAR and the replay operator. Not calm, collected and methodical. Rushed and chaotic. The opposite of how a video official should operate.
Officials hear repeatedly - from fans, pundits, radio phone-ins and newspaper columns - that VAR has to be quicker. That delays are not acceptable.
In the Premier League stakeholders' survey - which includes managers, coaches and supporters - the key theme for improvements to VAR was the speed of decisions.
This has to create pressure - but it is no excuse for such an error.
City boss Enzo Maresca had some sympathy speaking on Wednesday, though he was of course the beneficiary of the gaffe.
> "To make a decision in 10, 20 seconds is not easy for them," said Maresca.
> "Sometimes they make mistakes. I make mistakes, players make mistakes. It's part of our job."
Referees' chief Howard Webb has taken the desire for quicker reviews on board, but it is still a balancing act.
There has been a positive impact, as far as the stats go.
VAR delays - including the referee making an announcement to the crowd - have been reduced, from an average of 46 seconds per game to 36 seconds season-on-season.
Yet the only other VAR mistake, the failure to award a penalty to Arsenal at Aston Villa , also arguably came about because the incident was cleared too quickly.
What would you do to fix VAR?
Crucial failure in process a key cause
Completing a VAR review in the shortest possible time is not about skipping steps. And it was a critical mistake by Donohue and Antrobus.
Speed is a factor, but the most serious error in process came before Donohue tried to rush through the attacking phase.
Donohue asked the replay operator to stop the video on the first replay when Josko Gvardiol touched the ball to cross into the area. He then went immediately into the semi-automated offside technology.
This should not have happened.
The VAR team should have assessed the full picture, from the playing of the cross to the head of Haaland. This would have provided awareness of Fernandez's position and impact.
They did not, and the events inside the penalty area were not considered until the attacking phase was looked at.
By then, all that mattered to Donohue and Antrobus was whether Fernandez touched the ball. This would have created a new phase and placed Haaland offside.
Donohue has received much of the criticism, but arguably Antrobus' involvement, or lack of, was just as influential.
The AVAR's contribution to the entire review was to utter "no, yeah" about the potential touch by Fernandez. This was one second before Donohue uttered the words "final decision is goal, check complete".
Antrobus' role is to provide the checks and balances, to make sure the VAR has not missed anything. This fell short.
There has been only one lengthy VAR delay this season, in the game between Brentford and Sunderland . A Dan Ballard goal was ruled out for a subjective offside against Kevin Danso.
Antrobus was the AVAR in this game, too. There was a great deal of criticism in some parts of the media for that delay, which took over four minutes.
Could that have played on Antrobus' mind on Sunday? We cannot know for sure.
Ironically, Antrobus played a crucial role in steering VAR Tim Wood to the correct offside decision against Danso.
There is also the role of the support VAR, who sits in the operations room next to the match hub at Stockley Park and can intervene on points on protocol.
Aware of what was unfolding with the review, no action was taken.
It would still have been salvageable in the period between the goal being scored and the kick-off.