A&H

Chelsea v Man Utd

No, to want the challenge system is to assume that the game will be healthier overall if the players/manager share some of the blame for misuse of VAR, rather than heaping it all on referees and lawmakers. I honestly don't really care how successful the player's challenge % ends up being, that's very much not a factor.

@socal lurker tries to paint some horror scenarios where due to their own actions (using up challenges/failing to have a spare sub), a team doesn't have a challenge available to correct a terrible mistake late in the game. Yes. That's the point. Again, we only need to look at cricket, tennis, NFL etc - when that happens in those sports, the commentators then look at the earlier occasion where a team wasted a challenge on a low% overturn and blame the player for that earlier poor decision - pressure is immediately removed from the officials, because if the player hadn't gambled earlier on something unlikely or inconsequential, the opportunity to fix a clear mistake would have remained.
We are looking at this from different angles. I want an implemetation that works with no one to blame. For example, there has been only a few occasions when GLT hasn't worked since it's intro before VAR.
 
The Referee Store
We are looking at this from different angles. I want an implemetation that works with no one to blame.
Point me at a sport where that occurs? In fact, I would go further and argue that the essence of all sport is people trying to do something difficult and sometimes succeeding, sometimes failing. If a player/team loses any sporting encounter, they have tried to do something and failed, that's baked into what sport is at it's very core. And that failure will innately come with reflection and blame, I don't think there's a universe where we can have a competitive sport without that.

Therefore, a football match will happen, one team will achieve their goals and the other won't* - and I think any sport is a lot healthier if the team who fails to achieve their goals looks at what they did and what they can do differently, rather than pointing at a referee and going "You did this to me"


*I phrase it that way because even in the case of draws, there is usually a team who feels they should have won and a team that feels they did well to hold on for a point
 
I may have typed the second part of my post after you started quoting it but I think I already answered that. :)
But that still supports my point. If GLT shows the ball hasn't crossed the line then the fault instead lies with the striker who couldn't get it in. And similarly, if it does cross the line, the self-reflection comes with the GK and defenders who failed to keep it out.

Blame and fault still exists - but it lands on the head of the players who are competing, NOT the referee who is supposed to be a neutral arbiter. A challenge system, where a manager/captain loses because he's frivolously wasted his challenges earlier in the match has this exact same benefit.
 
VAR has placed huge emphasis and focus on Officiating. Anything that detracts from this would be beneficial. I'm therefore in favour of a 'challenge system', although I'd have very little faith in FIFA/IFAB to make it work
 
[QUOTE="Mr Dean, post: 187786, member: ]Just give each team one 'challenge' each and let them decide when VAR should intervene - I guarantee they'll only use the challenge in 'clear and obvious' situations.

I very much doubt that. Football culture isn't like that.
There would be a challenge whenever a late or potentially match-deciding goal was scored - irrespective of whether or not anything was "clear and obvious".
[/QUOTE]
That happens in every sport with a challenge system unfortunately; there's nothing that can be done to eradicate frivolous challenges late in the game. But, it's much better than the current system where there's a pointless review/check every few minutes or so.
 
AI is a million miles off being able to do this. Like the automated camera system in an SPL game that followed the assistant referee's bald hear instead of the ball ... :)
Why are they trialling it then? It's the (relatively near) future, not the present
Besides, we know the genie is out the bottle now, so we can debate the imminence of AI technology, but less so its inevitability
 
Last edited:
Why are they trialling it then? It's the (relatively near) future, not the present
Besides, we know the genie is out the bottle now, so we can debate the imminence of AI technology, but less so its inevitability

You always push the boundaries, and for helping with VAR decisions, which is probably where they are going with the semi-automated comments, it may well be able to help. Its nowhere near advanced enough to be able to replace human intervention though.
 
You always push the boundaries, and for helping with VAR decisions, which is probably where they are going with the semi-automated comments, it may well be able to help. Its nowhere near advanced enough to be able to replace human intervention though.
I (me) do indeed always push the boundaries, with you in particular! What appears to be discord, is just my probing you. I've said this to @Russell Jones , 'we don't learn much from those we're aligned with'. You & I seem just far enough apart on things for this to work well (for me) ;)

Anyway, this is FIFA's veiled admission that the VAR/offside debacle is not working
 
Dale Johnson seem to think it's coming in 2022. Probably be a trial in UEFA U17s in something.
Don't they the last 5 years of AI development, will be matched in the next 6 months? If they've got working driverless car prototypes and robots that can walk it can't be that far away.
 
Dale Johnson seem to think it's coming in 2022. Probably be a trial in UEFA U17s in something.
Don't they the last 5 years of AI development, will be matched in the next 6 months? If they've got working driverless car prototypes and robots that can walk it can't be that far away.

That's my point, the driverless cars are crashing and walking robots are falling over. There's an argument to say that AI can help replace the manual drawing of lines, but for it to replace human intervention in offsides is years away as the technology just isn't there.
 
That's my point, the driverless cars are crashing and walking robots are falling over. There's an argument to say that AI can help replace the manual drawing of lines, but for it to replace human intervention in offsides is years away as the technology just isn't there.
What you just said is exactly what they're talking about doing.

As stated in the article:
While the technology would provide the images, the VAR would still determine if the correct player was being used and that the player was active for offside.
 
My take is: of course you can program to model the player's positions on the field, the ball, the moment of contact etc. and get information in seconds via a GUI if an attacker is beyond the second last defender. And yes, it would include shoelaces, armpits, dreadlocks, ponytails etc etc.

If you want to spend the money.

Personally, I think this is a ridiculous thing to spend money on, particularly as I can't see another useful application or synergies outside of the military.

But there is soooo much money in football, and so many tech companies waving their shiny new toys - and incentives - at football's executive class, that "some" of the money might get spent.
 
Unfortunately, this is not always the case with the challenge system. Nothing can be done to eliminate the inappropriate challenges that come late in the game. But, it's much better than the current system where nonsense reviews / check every few minutes.
 
Back
Top