[Football] VAR

[Kinky Gerbil]

From what I've read it's been performing OK in other leagues too, getting around 99% of decisions correct. Of course there are some issues which need to be worked out, but that's to be expected given its in the early stages. Of course people will remember the few incorrect decisions rather than the many correct decisions.

http://www.espn.co.uk/football/blog...working-well-in-serie-a-bundesliga-mls-so-far

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42733272

I might be reading this wrong - but is this saying even after VAR they got the decision wrong?

Number of key incidents reviewed by VAR this season (through Oct. 12): 309
Number of incidents correctly overturned after review (through Oct. 12): 288 decisions rubber-stamped (93 percent); 21 overturned

7% still incorrect after VAR?

Maybe put it down to teething problems. Var technology for football probably needs a couple of seasons not just a few matches.

How do you speed it up?

I cant see a way to do it unless the refs come to a decision quickly leading to a higher risk of getting it wrong.

The first half of that game was ruined last night -

 

[seagulls4ever]

I might be reading this wrong - but is this saying even after VAR they got the decision wrong?

Number of key incidents reviewed by VAR this season (through Oct. 12): 309
Number of incidents correctly overturned after review (through Oct. 12): 288 decisions rubber-stamped (93 percent); 21 overturned

7% still incorrect after VAR?

I got that stat from here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42781236

The video assistant referee (VAR) system has been accurate in 98.9% of decisions so far during its two-year worldwide trial, says the International Football Association Board.

A report from football's lawmakers said VAR was used in 804 competitive matches in more than 20 competitions.

It said the technology increased the accuracy of decisions that can be reviewed from 93% to 98.9%.

Key Ifab findings:
In the 804 matches there were 3,947 checks for possible reviewable incidents.
56.9% ofchecks were for penalty incidents and goals.
There was an average of fewer than five checks per match.
The median check time of the VAR is 20 seconds.
The median duration of a review is 60 seconds.
68.8% ofmatcheshad no review.
One decision in three matches is a "clear and obvious error".
In 8% ofmatches the VAR had a decisive impact on the outcome of the game.
24% of all matches were positively affected by the involvement of VAR (changing an initial incorrect decision by the referee).
The average time'lost' due to the VAR represents less than 1% of overall playing time.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

I remember all this shrill whining and pearl-clutching when the introduced DRS into cricket a decade ago. Sure it wasn't perfect and it took them a few years of tweaking to get it right, but it works and is now an established part of the international game.

Some people despise change in any form. VAR is the future, whether some like it or not. Of course it's not perfect, but nothing ever is when first introduced. It took them a century to get the off-side rule working, and even then it's not faultless.

Ah, the ‘there must be something wrong with you if you disagree argument.’ Usually a good sign of straws being clutched.

 

[HP Seagull]

I remember all this shrill whining and pearl-clutching when the introduced DRS into cricket a decade ago. Sure it wasn't perfect and it took them a few years of tweaking to get it right, but it works and is now an established part of the international game.

Some people despise change in any form. VAR is the future, whether some like it or not. Of course it's not perfect, but nothing ever is when first introduced. It took them a century to get the off-side rule working, and even then it's not faultless.

It's absolutely crippling the game and is yet again another side effect of the money involved, and managers/clubs desperate to blame the ref when a decision goes against them.

I think we can all agree that the best thing in football is the unbridled joy at scoring a goal. That ten or 20 seconds after the ball going in can't be replicated. If every goal is going to be reviewed by VAR, this experience will be totally ruined. There might be a cheer, but rather than wild celebration there will be apprehension for a minute or two while all eyes turn to the referee.

Not only that, it's also ripping the fans off. In the Liverpool/West Brom game the first half was stopped for something like seven minutes, but only three minutes added time were played. That means the fans are watching less football.

Football is a human sport with human brilliance and human mistakes. That's why we all love it and why in my opinion it's the best game in the world. Where would the people that advocate VAR stop? Remove the human/on-field referees altogether and review every decision five times to make sure they're totally accurate?

The ironic thing is, I reckon over the course of the season, if VAR got every decision right (which it has clearly demonstrated it can't), clubs would have as many of their own goals disallowed as the opposition. I wonder if there would be such clamour for it if this was realised.

 

[amexer]

Not just about getting right decision right. All decisions eg fouls and dives that are a matter of opinion should be left to Ref.

 

[m20gull]

He does feint to kick the ball. He completes his run up, by stopping. He then starts a second run and kicks the ball.

Which shows that there is scope for interpretation and disagreement. All VAR is doing is shifting the debate, but crucially undermining the referee's authority.

 

[Falmer Flutter ©]

I just don't understand this need for football to be a perfect game with perfect decisions. It's a game played by humans, officiated by humans and watched by humans, with genuine human emotions of joy, despair, anger, relief etc. Do you know what word can be used for something that is ultimately clean and perfect? Sterile.

 

[the right footed denilson]

I just don't understand this need for football to be a perfect game with perfect decisions. It's a game played by humans, officiated by humans and watched by humans, with genuine human emotions of joy, despair, anger, relief etc. Do you know what word can be used for something that is ultimately clean and perfect? Sterile.

Absolutely spot-on. Poc said the same thing in his post-match last night too- the emotion is being taking out of the game.
One day we're going to get to a very horrible point where football just becomes a bland nothingness.

 

[GOM]

VAR has worked pretty well up until tonight, I think, despite people and the media claiming clearly correct decisions were 'controversial'. However, tonight those in charge did not appear to utilise VAR as it was intended - with corrections being made for a foul in the lead up to a goal, and the awarding of a penalty due to a foul being inside the box, which were not 'clear and obvious'. However, this is why it's being tested, and I expect everyone will learn from tonight to allow improvement of the process and decisions going forward.

I think we're losing sight of the fact that VAR is only supposed to intervene in the case of a clear and obvious error made by the referee. Tonight, he chalked off a Spurs goal on a highly MARGINAL decision, courtesy of the bloke watching it on telly in Heathrow. He actually didn't even bother going to the touchline to have a look for himself - he RULED OUT A GOAL after pressing his ear. And then not looking at it!!!

I'm sorry, but that is farcical. Quite apart from the other multiple VAR cluster****s that happened tonight (8 minutes worth of reviews, 5 minutes of added time ??), if we're going down this road, then there is literally no point in having a man in the middle.

Under the current format, VAR is a disaster. UEFA have already stated it will NOT be used in next seasons Champions League, and its pretty obvious why. Lets see a World Cup Final play out like tonight and see the fallout. Frankly, I can't bloody wait (unless England get stiffed).

Nail on the head, 'clear and obvious'. They seem to have lost sight of this. If the decision takes more than 30 seconds it does not meet the criteria (in my opinion)

 

[Brok]

I can see the advantage of VAR in some, more 'clinical' sports, but football? Forget it.

 

[Captain Sensible]

I thought the whole idea was for the ref to referee the game as normal but consult the VIdeo Ref if unsure, as in rugby. Or the Vid ref to alert the ref if he’s obviously missed something. Not to stop the game after each goal and wait 30 seconds before giving it. I am in favour of video reviewing games but only if the ref requests it or has missed something. Also the crowd should hear the reason behind the review. The game yesterday was a farce.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

Let's be honest. It's crap isn't it.

Football is not a sport suitable for this. Goal line technology Is BRILLIANT. That's a Yes or No decision and doesn't hold up the game.

This, however, is rubbish. It's not fair on the refs either. They are the focal point for this when they have built a career on making gut instinct decisions.

 

[Captain Sensible]

Let's be honest. It's crap isn't it.

Football is not a sport suitable for this. Goal line technology Is BRILLIANT. That's a Yes or No decision and doesn't hold up the game.

This, however, is rubbish. It's not fair on the refs either. They are the focal point for this when they have built a career on making gut instinct decisions.

Exactly, the ref should only use Video Reviews when they are unsure. It clearly doesn’t work the way they are using it.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

I thought the whole idea was for the ref to referee the game as normal but consult the VIdeo Ref if unsure, as in rugby. Or the Vid ref to alert the ref if he’s obviously missed something. Not to stop the game after each goal and wait 30 seconds before giving it. I am in favour of video reviewing games but only if the ref requests it or has missed something. Also the crowd should hear the reason behind the review. The game yesterday was a farce.

Yes and this fundamentally changes the game. There is a parallel in cricket where umpires at times have stopped checking for no balls as they take the view that this can be checked if a wicket falls. This means that the nature of the vast majority of deliveries has changed from pre VAR times. These unintended consequences change the nature of the spectacle. Those that cannot see the anti VAR argument and put it down to fear of change are being way too simplistic and naive.

 

[HP Seagull]

Exactly, the ref should only use Video Reviews when they are unsure. It clearly doesn’t work the way they are using it.

I think the problem here is that, due to the huge amount of pressure on referees from managers, players, fans and the media, they will almost certainly consult VAR if there is even a hint of doubt. From their perspective it or worth a two minute delay to avoid the amount of stick they would receive for getting a key decision wrong.

As a result it is unlikely it will ever be used in the format you mention, even though it probably should be.

I am totally against VAR for the reasons outlined previously, but the only way I can see it not ruining the game is if it is limited for use on, for example, key offside decisions. Even then it is seriously flawed and down to interpretation, as per the Mata goal the other week.

 

[jimhigham]

I think we can all agree that the best thing in football is the unbridled joy at scoring a goal. That ten or 20 seconds after the ball going in can't be replicated. If every goal is going to be reviewed by VAR, this experience will be totally ruined.

Totally this and we've already experienced it. When we got the late winner in the cup against Palace I should have been going totally loopy. Just the knowledge that VAR was there, lying in wait, tempered any sense of celebration until it was clear that the goal stood and by then the moment has passed.

I know that it's here to stay and I know that I'm a Luddite and all of that but for me something beautiful about the game has been lost. Personally I would be prepared to accept some howlers and some injustices to get it back. Notts County's first goal in the 1991 playoff final came from a corner that never was. I got over and kept coming back for another 27 years precisely because I continue to crave the moment HP Seagull describes. It saddens me to think that we are happy to dilute it.

 

[Falmer Flutter ©]

Totally this and we've already experienced it. When we got the late winner in the cup against Palace I should have been going totally loopy. Just the knowledge that VAR was there, lying in wait, tempered any sense of celebration until it was clear that the goal stood and by then the moment has passed.

I know that it's here to stay and I know that I'm a Luddite and all of that but for me something beautiful about the game has been lost. Personally I would be prepared to accept some howlers and some injustices to get it back. Notts County's first goal in the 1991 playoff final came from a corner that never was. I got over and kept coming back for another 27 years precisely because I continue to crave the moment HP Seagull describes. It saddens me to think that we are happy to dilute it.

Don't forget that the bit in bold isn't currently covered by VAR, but it'll be next. I've mentioned this on another thread, but all it will take is an "important" goal scored from a corner that wasn't and we'll have howls of "well the technology's there so why isn't it being used?" And then it'll be throw-ins, goal kicks, the coin toss...

 

[A1X]

I think there are three very obvious, very easy improvements you can make with VAR.

1. Remove the ridiculous pitch-side screen. Pointless waste of time.
2. Mic up the refs and put the replay on the screens at the ground. If small clubs like Man Utd don't have them then tough titties.
3. Maximum of 30 seconds to reach a decision from referral. Anything obvious (e.g. miles offside, clear foul) would be spotted but if no conclusion then reverts to "referee's call" (i.e. the on-field decision).

Oh, and get the bloody line straight.

 

[theboybilly]

Tuned in late. There's a clear tug on Rochdale's number six shirt as the ball goes across the box stopping him attacking the ball at the near post. Why are people questioning it?

And something a decent lino should spot without VAR

 

[Hamilton]

Only football could make such a pig’s ear of introducing what is relatively simple technology.

At this stage the VAR should be open to the referee, and should, in my view, only be called upon when the referee decides that they do not have enough information to make a decision.

VAR decisions should be made faster and should be televised to the crowd. Home audiences should be able to hear conversations between officials. That introduces transparency.

Recently Jon Moss was heard to say in a game before being asked to make a decision, “well I didn’t see what happened.” Then he calls on VAR.

In rugby, the TMO can intercede, but the flow of that game is somewhat different. To get VAR up and running, let’s put some simple parameters around it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk