Pal v Eve

[es1]

A lot can happen in 30 seconds in a football match (the limit bandied round on here). There might be multiple things to challenge (example New V Ars there were 3 contentious decisions 2 of which were unable to be determined). Is each individual challenge 1 challenge or can you challenge as much as you like with your one challenge?

i think this is the first issue you've raised with a challenge system that could genuinely pose a threat to its effectiveness.

but i think it still comes down to the manager/captain or whoever using their challenges wisely and accurately, if you want to challenge 2 separate things in one play then you can, as long as you havent burned through them previously.

 

[GraemeS]

I struggle to understand how you think the challenge procedure would be so straight forward.

A lot can happen in 30 seconds in a football match (the limit bandied round on here). There might be multiple things to challenge (example New V Ars there were 3 contentious decisions 2 of which were unable to be determined). Is each individual challenge 1 challenge or can you challenge as much as you like with your one challenge?

What if the referee genuinely isn't sure what is being challenged 30 seconds later... Possibility. Suggesting there be no interaction hasn't really been given much thought.

And still no one has been able to say who then controls the images the referee sees... And how we overcome the issue that it takes experienced replay operators 2-3 minutes to get operate the complex offsides yet clubs will be expected to decide in 30 seconds with often misleading camera angles where player looks well on or off but the lines prove otherwise.


No interaction between referee and manager, but the club have to prove and justify that they are wrong. And how do they do that if there is no Comms or have you just created the sales position I referred to ?
The manager is unlikely to defer the responsibility not challenging to anyone but himself, and if he has to prove and justify he isn't going to be able to do that in silence

You're nitpicking details. Similar questions existed before the current iteration of VAR was created and were answered to some extent. Pay me to sit on IFAB's board and I'll think about them in more detail and arrange a trial to test the method. But nothing here is automatically an insurmountable obstacle, just a query that needs to be answered and trialled. Maybe they'll become a major issue, but assuming they will be at this point is premature.

 

[JamesL]

And has anyone from a PL club gone on record suggesting they want a challenge system?

 

[GraemeS]

And has anyone from a PL club gone on record suggesting they want a challenge system?

A lot of people have said they don't like current VAR and I personally don't think a completely no-review world is likely to be acceptable to FIFA/IFAB any time soon. So a challenge system seems to be one possible option that has been implicitly asked for, even if not explicitly.

 

[JamesL]

You're nitpicking details. Similar questions existed before the current iteration of VAR was created and were answered to some extent. Pay me to sit on IFAB's board and I'll think about them in more detail and arrange a trial to test the method. But nothing here is automatically an insurmountable obstacle, just a query that needs to be answered and trialled. Maybe they'll become a major issue, but assuming they will be at this point is premature.

Details have to be nitpicked for an effective solution.
You couldn't implement a half baked protocol and wait to see what issues come out to fix.
I work in an agile way at work (and based on your language in this thread I reckon you do too) and I just don't see how you could put this into an agile delivery, not in this industry anyway.

 

[GraemeS]

Details have to be nitpicked for an effective solution.
You couldn't implement a half baked protocol and wait to see what issues come out to fix.
I work in an agile way at work (and based on your language in this thread I reckon you do too) and I just don't see how you could put this into an agile delivery, not in this industry anyway.

I honestly think answers exist for all your questions - I just don't really feel like saying "I think a challenge system might work better" then means I'm automatically obliged to carry out a full feasibility study and have to type out a full VAR 2.0 protocol. I'm not exactly busy at work (it's the third day back after a long break in our quiet season!), but I'm still a bit too busy for that!

 

[JamesL]

I honestly think answers exist for all your questions - I just don't really feel like saying "I think a challenge system might work better" then means I'm automatically obliged to carry out a full feasibility study and have to type out a full VAR 2.0 protocol. I'm not exactly busy at work (it's the third day back after a long break in our quiet season!), but I'm still a bit too busy for that!

Ditto.

But this is a public forum and I am of course entitled to my own opinion that differs from yours. And can of course post questions, responses and debate and you are of course entitled to not reply . By replying i assume you are open to debate.

 

[GraemeS]

Of course - but I refer you back to my previous post #42. Remember the thing with current VAR where assistants would stick their flag up and stand still and it was then up to the ref to decide if they wanted to play on or just accept the flag and stop the game? That was a live process that had been trialled and it still needed some further development - and I think all of your questions are much simpler than that one!

 

[Runner-Ref]

I struggle to understand how you think the challenge procedure would be so straight forward.

1-A lot can happen in 30 seconds in a football match (the limit bandied round on here). There might be multiple things to challenge (example New V Ars there were 3 contentious decisions 2 of which were unable to be determined). Is each individual challenge 1 challenge or can you challenge as much as you like with your one challenge?

2-What if the referee genuinely isn't sure what is being challenged 30 seconds later... Possibility. Suggesting there be no interaction hasn't really been given much thought.

3-And still no one has been able to say who then controls the images the referee sees... And how we overcome the issue that it takes experienced replay operators 2-3 minutes to get operate the complex offsides yet clubs will be expected to decide in 30 seconds with often misleading camera angles where player looks well on or off but the lines prove otherwise.

1- This could come down to the APP. Whatever they decide is classed as an APP, if 3 incidents happen within that APP, maybe just the 1 challenge can be used.

2- Mentioned this in other post. But the a method of communicating this isn't difficult to come up with.

3- You would still have an operator who controls the images the referee see's. If the clubs can't decide within 30 seconds, then a C&O error hasn't occurred. One of the main complaints of VAR is that is takes too long. So the clubs can't really complain that they have to make a decision within 30 seconds. It may even help them sympathise and understand referees a bit more.

VAR was implemented half-baked; they're still playing about with it now. Just look at the Women's WC. They were trialling the referee speaking to the stadium.

Bringing in a challenge system wouldn't be a 100% fix, nothing will. And I doubt it would come in initially as the finished product and would need some tinkering. But its got to be worth a shot, as the current incarnation of VAR is just working. Either that or the people using VAR aren't capable. We're a number of years into it now, and if anything, it seems to be going backwards.

 

[Runner-Ref]

And has anyone from a PL club gone on record suggesting they want a challenge system?

From a PL club I don't believe anyone has specifically requested it. But Serie A have been exploring the possibility of bringing it in.

 

[DJIC]

I get the Manger Challenge debate, but isn't the simpler solution to bin off Clear & Obvious, the range being used is 'to VAR it is a clear & obvious foul' to' it is a clear & obvious howler' & then everything in between these two.

You then have the issue of the referee disagreeing/going against the C&O VAR call, which if you think it through is flawed. Before a game, Ref, ARs, VARs will all say we work as a team, we need to support each other etc, they then will meet up a few days later, awkward conversation with your colleague, the PGMOL colleagues are their only support network (not clubs, media etc), so are you going to jeopardise your relationship with these colleagues, do it twice & you could be ostracised. So realistically saying the ref needs to be braver, is easier said then done.

I would like them to trial, the ref is the sole judge of going to the screen, as referees we know which decisions we would like a second look at (about 3 KMI a match), VAR can check offside for goals, & off the ball violent conduct only. Other than that referee is sole control of VAR.

 

[Runner-Ref]

1-I get the Manger Challenge debate, but isn't the simpler solution to bin off Clear & Obvious, the range being used is 'to VAR it is a clear & obvious foul' to' it is a clear & obvious howler' & then everything in between these two.

2-You then have the issue of the referee disagreeing/going against the C&O VAR call, which if you think it through is flawed. Before a game, Ref, ARs, VARs will all say we work as a team, we need to support each other etc, they then will meet up a few days later, awkward conversation with your colleague, the PGMOL colleagues are their only support network (not clubs, media etc), so are you going to jeopardise your relationship with these colleagues, do it twice & you could be ostracised. So realistically saying the ref needs to be braver, is easier said then done.

3-I would like them to trial, the ref is the sole judge of going to the screen, as referees we know which decisions we would like a second look at (about 3 KMI a match), VAR can check offside for goals, & off the ball violent conduct only. Other than that referee is sole control of VAR.

1- Binning C&O would be great- but what is C&O? No one can pin down what this means.

2- This is the exact issue I was getting at earlier. The referee's almost don't want to upset each other, and I understand why, but it's not benefitting the game.

3- That could potentially work. But that will then add scrutiny on the referee further, as they'll not only be questioned why they went to the screen and did x,y & z. But also why they didn't go to the screen at all.

 

[GraemeS]

Any other system that allows an on-field official to request a review also comes with another source of reviews being initiated as well. Rubgy can have the ref or the TMO request a review, cricket has both umpire and player reviews etc. I wouldn't like the idea of a system where the ref is the only person who can request a review - again, we should be learning from other sports, not trying to create things from scratch unnecessarily.

 

[santa sangria]

Then onfield referee checks it and makes a decision on their own. No VAR in their ear telling them what they think they have seen.

I don't really buy the '2 PGMO officials have seen it' part. 2 officials saw the incidents I mentioned earlier in Spurs vs Brighton game, yet they were later judged by HW to be incorrect.

2 referees saw the non-award of a pen in the Utd vs Wolves game, but they were still judged to be wrong by HW. So 2 PGMO referees making a decision does not necessarily make it correct.

Will it clear up every single decision? No. Would it maybe help relations between clubs and referees as the clubs are at least getting an input? It's got to be better than it is right now.

Think of the Spurs vs Liverpool game- not a chance we don't get the correct outcome in there's a challenge based system.

Chelsea vs Spurs last season with the hair pull. Chelsea easily challenge that and Spurs are down to 10 men.

So there's at least 2 major errors that have been fixed.

Unless the challenges were already used

 

[Runner-Ref]

Unless the challenges were already used

Well that'll teach 'em to not be do reckless with them

 

[JamesL]

1- This could come down to the APP. Whatever they decide is classed as an APP, if 3 incidents happen within that APP, maybe just the 1 challenge can be used.

2- Mentioned this in other post. But the a method of communicating this isn't difficult to come up with.

3- You would still have an operator who controls the images the referee see's. If the clubs can't decide within 30 seconds, then a C&O error hasn't occurred. One of the main complaints of VAR is that is takes too long. So the clubs can't really complain that they have to make a decision within 30 seconds. It may even help them sympathise and understand referees a bit more.

VAR was implemented half-baked; they're still playing about with it now. Just look at the Women's WC. They were trialling the referee speaking to the stadium.

Bringing in a challenge system wouldn't be a 100% fix, nothing will. And I doubt it would come in initially as the finished product and would need some tinkering. But its got to be worth a shot, as the current incarnation of VAR is just working. Either that or the people using VAR aren't capable. We're a number of years into it now, and if anything, it seems to be going backwards.

If my memory is correct there have been very few changes to the protocol itself. So I don't think it's fair to say it was half baked. The only thing that has really been adjusted is interpretation to what is written, which is totally normal for laws. In real world, often it takes someone to test something in the high court to get a judgement and in the process creating case law. Which can completely change how organisations apply written law, without there being any changes to the language. Not quite the same in that we aren't taking the finer details to court for judgment but principally the same in that the powers have reacted to situations and stepped in to say this is what the written words mean.

From a PL club I don't believe anyone has specifically requested it. But Serie A have been exploring the possibility of bringing it in.

They can't just bring it in. They can't really explore it either. The only real thing they can do is to make representation to IFAB for consideration. All member associations are bound by the laws of the game, they can't go off making any modifications they like.

 

[Runner-Ref]

If my memory is correct there have been very few changes to the protocol itself. So I don't think it's fair to say it was half baked. The only thing that has really been adjusted is interpretation to what is written, which is totally normal for laws. In real world, often it takes someone to test something in the high court to get a judgement and in the process creating case law. Which can completely change how organisations apply written law, without there being any changes to the language. Not quite the same in that we aren't taking the finer details to court for judgment but principally the same in that the powers have reacted to situations and stepped in to say this is what the written words mean.


They can't just bring it in. They can't really explore it either. The only real thing they can do is to make representation to IFAB for consideration. All member associations are bound by the laws of the game, they can't go off making any modifications they like.

If they're making changes or tweaks to wording, they're still changing it. Much like PGMOL keep changing their thresholds. So there's no reason why a challenge system wouldn't be brought in and tweaked.

Yeah, they're obviously not going to randomly introduce it. But they've been in talks with IFAB for a year or 2 over looking to implement it. This is off the back of clubs

 

[JamesL]

If they're making changes or tweaks to wording, they're still changing it. Much like PGMOL keep changing their thresholds. So there's no reason why a challenge system wouldn't be brought in and tweaked.

Yeah, they're obviously not going to randomly introduce it. But they've been in talks with IFAB for a year or 2 over looking to implement it. This is off the back of clubs

Yes but you actually need to have a written protocol and to have considered most possibilities and probabilities to write it. I haven't said you can't make tweaks, we're changing the laws all the time. But you don't want to be making wholesale changes, you want to have considered the bulk of what you can, from what you know.
You can't just tomorrow say challenge in 30 seconds and not think how that will impact the game, and test it against things that have happened.

 

[JamesL]

Does anyone know why there were 2 VARs last night?

 

[Runner-Ref]

Yes but you actually need to have a written protocol and to have considered most possibilities and probabilities to write it. I haven't said you can't make tweaks, we're changing the laws all the time. But you don't want to be making wholesale changes, you want to have considered the bulk of what you can, from what you know.
You can't just tomorrow say challenge in 30 seconds and not think how that will impact the game, and test it against things that have happened.

And all of this stuff would need putting into place before it was put out into the wild.

The 30 second thing is just an example of how it could work. But I honestly don't see how it would be that difficult to do.

VAR currently is not fit for purpose. Anything has to be better than what we currently have. In theory VAR is a simple idea. A simple idea that they have managed to make a complete and utter mess of.

Other sports have a challenge system, I don't see why it wouldn't work for football. The idea of football is a quick flowing game doesn't really wash, as VAR has put a stop to that already