Video Assistant Referee (VAR) ~ Yes or No?

jsp

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2012
Messages
7,836
What's everyone's feeling on this?

Right now it seems to be bringing up far to many questions rather then offering solutions to the problems it is trying to solve.

For me technology should only be used to deal with matters of fact and goal line tech has solved that perfectly there's no disputing it once the alarm goes off the ref gives the goal and the players seem to accept the decision straight away now. All he has to do is point to the watch and the players can't dispute it at they know it's right.

For a game like football where the rules are much more opinion based than fact based technology is much harder to use as all it can do is offer replays to officials to help them make better decisions. The technology can't help you make the correct decision it can only offer you a better view of something.

To be honest the way I see it is I'd rather keep the game the way it is and deal with the controversy that comes with it as it keeps the game flowing and part of sport is accepting that people will make mistakes.

I accept we're only in a trial stage but they've done various trials over the last 2 years and they've still got a lot of problems to solve before they can role it out across the board.
 

JSNFRMN

Moderator
Joined
Mar 26, 2010
Messages
21,657
Age
27
Location
Wales
I'm pro-video reviews but very disappointed with how it was used in Confed Cup. Total lack of transparency with the game's viewers, we need to see replays and need to hear how the referees come to the decision. I can't for the life of me figure out how they came to the conclusion that elbow was only a yellow last night, very naive if they thought it was accidental, there's a lot of elbows in the game that get punished that can be passed as accidental, Jara had no purpose throwing his elbow there though.
 

Mr C

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2017
Messages
2,367
I think it's a good idea for penalty decisions.
 

jsp

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2012
Messages
7,836
You have to assume that the referee couldn't say that it was 100% intent to harm an opponent which is where it crosses from a yellow card to a red, although anyone who's played the game knows that was a cheap shot to stick one on an opponent there's no reason to have your elbow pointed when you make that challenge. That's a referee error not an error in the technology, I also think it was a ref not really wanting to send someone off in a final.

It's the timing thing I don't know if I want to wait 2-3 minutes for them to get it right like you say if there was some fan engagement it might be different like there is in Rugby where you can hear the ref ask what he wants the TV ref to review and you can then watch what he's watching before hearing him deliver his verdict. I could be wrong but the on field official in Rugby can't go and check the monitor he takes what the TMO has said and implements it last night it felt like the VAR didn't have the guts to say to the ref it's a red card instead he said you need to watch it which added another minute on to it. They need to get that decision time down but I believe it takes between 15-30 seconds to load up first replay and it can take 60 seconds before all the angles are available.

Another issue I have with it is I think it will reduce the number of goals in a game as it will only give refs more reasons to disallow goals unless they impose some sort of advantage system where the refs play on to see if a goals scored then goes back to check a foul or an offside.

I think the Rugby system is the one to try and copy I don't like the idea of teams having appeals as that isn't football and teams will use them tactically like they do in Cricket or Tennis I don't believe you can appeal anything in Rugby. I think in Rugby the refs are limited on what they can check most of the time when a try is scored it's did they ground the ball correctly and was the player in or out of play and even then they don't always get them 100% right as the replays can be inconclusive.

I think they might have to bring it in slowly just say for the first wave it'll only be used to check penalty or red card decisions as it's an easy place to stop the game for the refs to check what happens if it wasn't a penalty restart with a goal kick if it was obviously you restart with a penalty.

The bit I can't get my head around how it will work with offsides will they just say to assistant don't flag offsides anymore and if a goal is scored we will go back to check? If they put the flag up the game stops so if a player is wrongly flagged offside he doesn't get the benefit of VAR because you can't put him back in the position he was in.
 

SuperRash

Moderator
Joined
Apr 11, 2016
Messages
2,421
Age
31
I think it wasn't used to the best of its abilities in the Confed Cup. I am all for technology if it pushes the game further but it seems very all over the place at the moment.

Like was said previous there needs to be full transparency and viewers need to be aware of what's being discussed, very much like cricket.

No system is ever going to be perfect to start with. I use cricket as an example again, the decision review system was okay at the start but had some flaws the game halted to a standstill but now it's improved no end. It should be persevered with but it needs to be constantly tweaked and managed to make it viable and useful.
 

bludsucker

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2013
Messages
2,796
The system in its present form is all over the place. A lot is left at the discretion of the on field referee. I will be against it in its present form. Maybe they could do something like the DRS in cricket with a soft decision from the onfield referee. Also a limited no of referrals to each team will reduce the no. of stoppages.
 

jsp

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2012
Messages
7,836
The system in its present form is all over the place. A lot is left at the discretion of the on field referee. I will be against it in its present form. Maybe they could do something like the DRS in cricket with a soft decision from the onfield referee. Also a limited no of referrals to each team will reduce the no. of stoppages.
Do you not feel that will just start being used tactically by teams like it is in cricket? Most of the time the guy who reviews knows he's gone but they do it on the chance that the tech might bail them out on a no ball or the ball pitching outside the line.

I don't think I like the review style in football I'd rather the Rugby style where it's there for the ref to use at his discretion when he in't sure on something.

The thing is the technology is supposed to be there to stop the "howlers" what I think it will end up being is a comfort blanket for the ref to avoid making big decisions on his own he'll always refer it to the VAR which is sort of how it works in Rugby now the refs tend to check just to make sure rather than stand by their decision.
 

jsp

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2012
Messages
7,836
Video assistant referee controversy in Dutch Super Cup

This is where the system is just mad if the VAR is checking something the game has to stop, how can a team go up the other end and score then find that goal ruled out and the other team has a penalty for something that happened 2 minutes ago.

If they're not stopping the game surely there needs to be a signal from the ref to indicate to managers, players & fans at the game that something is under review.
 

jsp

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2012
Messages
7,836
So the Premier League have voted not to use it next season as they think it needs more trials but we will have it at the world cup.

FIFA have today announced that VAR reviews will be shown on the big screens inside the ground (where available) which I think is an improvement but we still won't know what the referee and the VAR are discussing and why they came to their decision.
 

Mr C

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2017
Messages
2,367
it's joke, they should trial and get it correct before using it at these levels. You can't wait 5 mins in a game waiting for a decision. And bringing them back out the changing rooms at half time...
 

jsp

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2012
Messages
7,836
Well the thing has been in trial stage for about 2 years in various places across the world now but they kept tweeking the procedure for how it works and how to do it but the current procedure has been in place for about 12 months now.

It's been used in MLS, Bundesliga, Serie A & Eridivisie all season and the general consensus is they're getting better at operating it as it's a case of practise makes perfect.

I think it's too soon for the World Cup but FIFA say they don't want a world cup being decided on a dodgy call when the technology exists but the issue will be that the people operating it won't all be that experienced with using it. I don't recall seeing anything from UEFA saying it they'll be using it in the CL next season but my assumption is they'd like to get it in as soon as possible as we are past the point of no return with it now.

The technology does work what we need is education on how it works not just the people operating it but the broadcasters and also fans need to understand it because we get a lot of mixed messages from pundits who clearly don't have a clue on how it works.

Fans feedback in all leagues seems to be consistent generally speaking they don't like the way it stop/starts the game and no one watching has a clue what is going on.
 

IDFD

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2017
Messages
3,362
Age
31
what are people thinking on this now?

Tottenham just correctly given a penalty they wouldn’t have otherwise got and I think it’s got to be the way football goes.
 

jsp

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2012
Messages
7,836
I think we are past the point of no return but it still needs tweaking but I think it has to be in for the PL next season.

We saw at the weekend that there's still a lot of learning to be done which will hopefully speed it up both Utd & Burnley had penalty decisions that took 3 or 4 minutes to work out similar to Spurs the Utd one also involved checking and offside first.

For the only major change I'd make is the ref shouldn't be able to go and check the monitor after the VAR review the VAR official makes the decision if he's not 100% that it needs changing he sticks with the original decision bit like umpires call in cricket.

Also, if the VAR is reviewing something, like in the Burnley game the penalty shouldn't be taken until the VAR has finished it's review. Once the VAR is happening and the ball goes dead game should stop until VAR completes the review.

With all these things practise makes perfect and over time it'll be adjusted to make it better but it's the way the game is going now.

I also think the VAR decision should be explained over the PA system in the ground so fans know what has happened you don't need to show the replay just explain what happened and why the decision has been called. "Penalty for Man Utd due to foul by number 15 on number 8" something that simple or goal disallowed due to "number 9 being offside when pass made by number 6"

I also think the clock should stop when VAR stops the game to make sure proper time is played I think VAR possibly moves us closer to trials of a stop start clock as the logic for added time is nuts and massively inconsistent.

I think they'll also need to change the offside law to favour the attacker so if you have any part of your body onside that's onside rather than the current rule of any part being offside means offside. I'd just flip it around as I think VAR will stop goals being given it basically means the assistants are only their to flag the obvious ones anything marginal they allow play to carry on and call for a VAR check. I think my issue with VAR on offside is if the assistant flags and you were onside you don't get the chance to review and get your chance back.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Forgot your password?
Don't have an account? Register now
Top