Looking at you know what differently?

[PinnerPaul]

The 'people' you mention happen to be the Heads of Refereeing at UEFA and MLS!

VAR isn't there to make 'reasonable decisions' - we all do that already, its there to correct obvious errors!

 

[onthebrink]

The 'people' you mention happen to be the Heads of Refereeing at UEFA and MLS!

VAR isn't there to make 'reasonable decisions' - we all do that already, its there to correct obvious errors!

But equally it can't be there just to correct errors as blindingly obvious as the Thierry Henry handball because they occur once in a blue moon and you could get any random person off the street pretty much to look at them rather than having top level qualified referees.

Things like the Henry handball are obviously high-profile and memorable examples to use but clearly it is there for other things too. There's a very delicate and subjective balance as to when the threshold for VAR intervention is crossed - we don't want every decision being too forensically reviewed for minutes on end and having VAR intervene just for the sake of having something to do, but equally I think they should be actively involved in the decision-making process rather than just completely sitting back and finding ways to justify an unsatisfactory decision which I think has happened a bit too often in the PL.

 

[Martiju]

But equally it can't be there just to correct errors as blindingly obvious as the Thierry Henry handball because they occur once in a blue moon and you could get any random person off the street pretty much to look at them rather than having top level qualified referees.

But that's exactly what the argument in favour of VAR was! Those kinds of game changing issues that weren't spotted on the FOP and then the marginal offside calls. The former is probably less than once in a blue moon, the latter once or twice a game.

What we now have is every significant match-changing moment being picked over so that all the spontaneity and excitement of the PL is being drained. And that's even without considering the inherent unfairness of some of those really marginal calls where it's impossible to tell, even after countless replays.

 

[onthebrink]

But that's exactly what the argument in favour of VAR was! Those kinds of game changing issues that weren't spotted on the FOP and then the marginal offside calls. The former is probably less than once in a blue moon, the latter once or twice a game.

What we now have is every significant match-changing moment being picked over so that all the spontaneity and excitement of the PL is being drained. And that's even without considering the inherent unfairness of some of those really marginal calls where it's impossible to tell, even after countless replays.

But you can't really have VAR and barely use it - the PL tried to do that last season in many ways and people just didn't accept it on the whole. 'What's the point of VAR if they're not going to use it? Why do they just protect their colleagues all the time?'

I think the Newcastle V Brighton red card incident was a very good use of VAR. I'm sure some VARs would have looked and said 'I can sort of see why Kevin Friend went yellow - perhaps it's not a completely awful decision and I'll just stay out of it' - but I think by far the best decision was a red card (which the vast majority on here seemed to agree with) and Craig Pawson (who I rate as one of best VARs in England) alerted the referee, which I think was right especially now the on-field referee can confirm via the monitor.

 

[PinnerPaul]

But that's exactly what the argument in favour of VAR was! Those kinds of game changing issues that weren't spotted on the FOP and then the marginal offside calls. The former is probably less than once in a blue moon, the latter once or twice a game.

What we now have is every significant match-changing moment being picked over so that all the spontaneity and excitement of the PL is being drained. And that's even without considering the inherent unfairness of some of those really marginal calls where it's impossible to tell, even after countless replays.

Exactly - what Martiju says is emminently sensible but a) isn't how VAR is being 'sold' by those at the very top, nor more importantly b) how it is being used.

b) has in my opinion led to players believing they have a chance of overturning nearly every pen and getting nearly every goal 'checked'

 

[Big Cat]

But you can't really have VAR and barely use it - the PL tried to do that last season in many ways and people just didn't accept it on the whole. 'What's the point of VAR if they're not going to use it? Why do they just protect their colleagues all the time?'

I think the Newcastle V Brighton red card incident was a very good use of VAR. I'm sure some VARs would have looked and said 'I can sort of see why Kevin Friend went yellow - perhaps it's not a completely awful decision and I'll just stay out of it' - but I think by far the best decision was a red card (which the vast majority on here seemed to agree with) and Craig Pawson (who I rate as one of best VARs in England) alerted the referee, which I think was right especially now the on-field referee can confirm via the monitor.

Kevin Friend probably would've went red if VAR wasn't there as a back-stop to re-referee
The ARs have been glorified Touch Judges for a good while. The on-field Referee is rapidly becoming a slave to minor foul play only
VAR has gate-crashed and taken charge of the show. One has to be strangely sceptical/bemused over where this motivation is driven from

 

[socal lurker]

b) has in my opinion led to players believing they have a chance of overturning nearly every pen and getting nearly every goal 'checked'

To be pedantic, every goal and every PK is checked by the VAR. If that check identifies a clear error, then it goes to a review.

I'm not a fan of VR at all and would like to see it abolished. But it also appears that the PL--now in two different incarnations--is doing the worst job of implementing it.

 

[Martiju]

To be pedantic, every goal and every PK is checked by the VAR. If that check identifies a clear error, then it goes to a review.

If it only was clear errors, that would be fine. As already said though, they're so few and far between that it then looks like VAR isn't being used at all. Of course, that could be clarified by communication ('goal checked, no obvious and clear error').

Of course, that process also then acts as judge and jury, as if a 'clear error' is identified the review has essentially already been concluded! Hence the farcical theatre of going to the screen. Again, easy to solve -albeit partially - through communication - 'referee to review' rather than 'VAR review'.

 

[onthebrink]

I think the PGMO basically tried to go down the route of only doing the once in a blue moon clear errors at the start of last season and it just didn't work. From memory, there was only 1 subjective decision changed in about the first 6 or 7 weeks of the season and Mike Riley had to come out publicly and say VAR had failed to correct at least four errors and many were saying there were more than that.

 

[PinnerPaul]

I think the PGMO basically tried to go down the route of only doing the once in a blue moon clear errors at the start of last season and it just didn't work. From memory, there was only 1 subjective decision changed in about the first 6 or 7 weeks of the season and Mike Riley had to come out publicly and say VAR had failed to correct at least four errors and many were saying there were more than that.

but that's the nub of the problem - the definition of 'errors'.

As I've said - very recently I have heard the heads of refereeing at UEFA and the MLS state that VAR is for those once in a blue moon errors, but as we see,it is not only being used for that. Most penalty decisions for example, in my view, should never be put in the 'obvious' error category. It needs a whole new sea change and its not going to happen. If the referee decides for example 'No pen' but VAR detects a slight touch by the defender on the attacker, that, to me is NOT a clear error by the referee with one view in real time, problem is, THAT touch is then replayed by the TV companies and everyone screams 'Penalty! Why didn't VAR get involved'.

 

[one]

Here is the problem. The factual decisions are treated as black and white while they are not. They are decided by technology that has a margin of error (frame rate, resolution, line angle accuracy...). And that technology is applied manually by a human who can err themselves. The problem here is not the protocol, it's the application of it.

Subjective decision are based on the interpretation of what 'clear and obvious' error means. For me it means if it is shown to 10 peers of the referee, all of them disagree with the decision. But at the moment it looks like if the VAR disagrees (and possibly hlaf of the 10 peers) then a review is recommended. That for me is not a clear and obvious error.

I think it should be shelved untill they can get the technology and the understanding of the concept right. But it won't happen because it would be a embarassing backflip for a sport with the biggest budget in the world.

 

[PinnerPaul]

Here is the problem. The factual decisions are treated as black and white while they are not. They are decided by technology that has a margin of error (frame rate, resolution, line angle accuracy...). And that technology is applied manually by a human who can err themselves. The problem here is not the protocol, it's the application of it.

Subjective decision are based on the interpretation of what 'clear and obvious' error means. For me it means if it is shown to 10 peers of the referee, all of them disagree with the decision. But at the moment it looks like if the VAR disagrees (and possibly hlaf of the 10 peers) then a review is recommended. That for me is not a clear and obvious error.

I think it should be shelved untill they can get the technology and the understanding of the concept right. But it won't happen because it would be a embarassing backflip for a sport with the biggest budget in the world.

You've nailed it there I think!

 

[socal lurker]

The genie is out of the bottle and ain't going back. There is no longer a question of "if" there will be video review, only what it will look like. (And the general trend in VR in sports is that the use grows, not that it shrinks.)

 

[Big Cat]

There is the longer question (or gathering reality) that the VAR is the referee for KMI's with the ref & ARs demoted to menial roles

 

[socal lurker]

There is the longer question (or gathering reality) that the VAR is the referee for KMI's with the ref & ARs demoted to menial roles

Not really.

First, for judgment calls, the R is going to the OFR and making the call. (And we see Rs disagree with the VAR. Not often, but it shouldn't be often given what the standards are supposed to be for sending things down.) Second, the R is still going to 100% own calls within the gray zone that don't trigger video review.

With respect to OSP, yes, I would agree that the role of the AR is seriously impaired, as there is no clear error standard, and the R is going to accept the VAR opinion on OSP every time.

 

[onthebrink]

but that's the nub of the problem - the definition of 'errors'.

As I've said - very recently I have heard the heads of refereeing at UEFA and the MLS state that VAR is for those once in a blue moon errors, but as we see,it is not only being used for that. Most penalty decisions for example, in my view, should never be put in the 'obvious' error category. It needs a whole new sea change and its not going to happen. If the referee decides for example 'No pen' but VAR detects a slight touch by the defender on the attacker, that, to me is NOT a clear error by the referee with one view in real time, problem is, THAT touch is then replayed by the TV companies and everyone screams 'Penalty! Why didn't VAR get involved'.

I think the reality is people just didn't/don't accept the approach of the VAR hardly ever doing anything. The PL initial attempt just didn't work - although it generally seems to me there is less controversy in the CL?

The point about 'a room of 10 people all disagreeing with the initial decision' is reasonable in theory but whether it works in reality I'm not sure. There's obviously not 10 people there at the time and I think it's very difficult sometimes for them to judge what the mood will be after - especially as part of the public/media response seems to be just disagreeing with whatever VAR does! There's quite often not that much at all between intervention being appropriate and being inappropriate.

 

[Tealeaf]

Remember my “wall” argument?

Match of the Day used that principle during the analysis of the West Ham - Man United game. Its available, so would be useful for offside and end the lines debate once and for all.

 

[PinnerPaul]

Remember my “wall” argument?

Match of the Day used that principle during the analysis of the West Ham - Man United game. Its available, so would be useful for offside and end the lines debate once and for all.

Hmmmm, even Gary Lineker seemed to imply that what the BBC used wasn't 100% accurate.

 

[PinnerPaul]

On VAR as a whole there was (for a change) a decent discussion on MOTD 2 on Sunday about it. They actually admitted that they (the media) were part of the reason for both the introduction and the problems we now face.

Was good to hear a reasonably thought through argument instead of the usual ref bashing.