PGMOL, why did you not instruct Martin Atkinson and Andre Marriner about the signal protocol when they were going to use the Video Assistant Referee?

I read with great interest an article on the Daily Telegraph website yesterday stating that PGMOL General Manager of Professional Game Match Officials Ltd Mike Riley had revealed that changes were planned for the use of the VAR ahead of its next outing in two FA Cup third-round replays next week.

This week’s two VAR games saw the referee employ a ‘finger to ear’ signal when communicating with his video assistant.

But Riley accepted it had not been obvious to spectators that checks were being made when goals were scored or after penalty decisions. There was particular confusion about whether Brighton & Hove Albion’s winning goal in Monday night’s FA Cup wins over Crystal Palace had been checked for handball.

Mike are you not aware of the ‘IFAB Document Version Six‘ that clarifies clearly the signal to be used by the referee.

Incidentally I believe that the PGMOL planned the introduction of the VAR very well and the appointment of Marriner and Atkinson was a good move because these are two referees in top form.

So PGMOL and the FA here is the protocol laid down by the IFAB and I cannot understand why it was not adopted in the two games to date

5.1.4 How is a review communicated? 

When a review is requested by the referee directly or following information from the VAR, the referee will clearly indicate that the review process has been initiated by outlining the shape of a TV screen with both hands.


Comments yesterday attributed to the PGMOL indicate that they are considering the use of the big screen in the stadium to communicate to fans that the VAR is under review.

This for me is a positive move but requires permission from the IFAB. 


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here