A&H

VAR opinion. Thoughts?

The Referee said:
The difference is in rugby the referee asks the video ref before signalling for a decision; he doesn't signal for a try (goal), prompting huge celebrations from the crowd, only for the video ref to say "actually, nah"
Click to expand...
Uhm... they do award or disallow the try before going upstairs, unless it is for a "check grounding"/unsighted decision. Already seen a dozen celebrations this year be cut off because of something the referee wasn't certain enough to call, but was suspicious enough to review.
 
The Referee Store
The Referee said:
But I doubt a rugby-style system will work in a free-flowing game like football.
Click to expand...

Aside from the protocol and how it is implemented, this is the biggest problem with VAR in football.

Other sports such as rugby and cricket where VAR has been successfully implemented lend themselves to its use due to the nature of the games.

Rugby has a lot of natural breaks in the game when they stop for line outs and scrums etc, where as it is possible, although pretty unlikely, that a football match could continue for 10 minutes or more without a natural stoppage in play following an incident that needs to be reviewed.
 
zarathustra said:
Aside from the protocol and how it is implemented, this is the biggest problem with VAR in football.

Other sports such as rugby and cricket where VAR has been successfully implemented lend themselves to its use due to the nature of the games.

Rugby has a lot of natural breaks in the game when they stop for line outs and scrums etc, where as it is possible, although pretty unlikely, that a football match could continue for 10 minutes or more without a natural stoppage in play following an incident that needs to be reviewed.
Click to expand...
I can't say I watch much rugby, but the lineouts I've seen haven't taken noticeably longer than some throw-ins.
 
'The best matches are those where the referee is rarely needed'
Recognise this philosophy?
There was an hour long debate on National Radio this morning FFS
So much for the anonymity of the referee when the circus is being debated on prime time radio
Right at this moment, the noise coming out of football is like watching an episode of Eastenders
 
zarathustra said:
Aside from the protocol and how it is implemented, this is the biggest problem with VAR in football.

Other sports such as rugby and cricket where VAR has been successfully implemented lend themselves to its use due to the nature of the games.

Rugby has a lot of natural breaks in the game when they stop for line outs and scrums etc, where as it is possible, although pretty unlikely, that a football match could continue for 10 minutes or more without a natural stoppage in play following an incident that needs to be reviewed.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more.

Rugby is very one-dimensional in a sense when compared to football. Unless there is a phase of broken/open play, virtually all players are situated on "their side" of the ball and the game is all about possession and position. Football is far more free-flowing and "random" when it comes to where all 22 players are (excluding the GKs) and, like you say, the game just doesn't lend itself to be "VAR'd" in the same way.

If it were, the matches would end up being pretty much controlled by the VAR over comms with the on-field ref's being little more than an on-field "presence". :cool:
 
zarathustra said:
Aside from the protocol and how it is implemented, this is the biggest problem with VAR in football.

Other sports such as rugby and cricket where VAR has been successfully implemented lend themselves to its use due to the nature of the games.

Rugby has a lot of natural breaks in the game when they stop for line outs and scrums etc, where as it is possible, although pretty unlikely, that a football match could continue for 10 minutes or more without a natural stoppage in play following an incident that needs to be reviewed.
Click to expand...

Hockey is quite a free-flowing game and the challenge system they use works quite well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nij
The Referee said:
The difference is in rugby the referee asks the video ref before signalling for a decision; he doesn't signal for a try (goal), prompting huge celebrations from the crowd, only for the video ref to say "actually, nah"
Click to expand...
Not always - there have been occasions when the player is lined up ready to take the conversion and the TMO notices something and informs the referee.
 
zarathustra said:
Aside from the protocol and how it is implemented, this is the biggest problem with VAR in football.

Other sports such as rugby and cricket where VAR has been successfully implemented lend themselves to its use due to the nature of the games.

Rugby has a lot of natural breaks in the game when they stop for line outs and scrums etc, where as it is possible, although pretty unlikely, that a football match could continue for 10 minutes or more without a natural stoppage in play following an incident that needs to be reviewed.
Click to expand...
Hockey has had video review for over a decade, and is at a faster pace than football. That's with players able to ask for review on specific incidents (basically equivalent to goal or PK or DFK-near-the-box decisions).
Doesn't even require ball going out of play most of the time.
Seems like a lot of people want perfection immediately instead of letting it develop according to what works and what hasn't. It's only been a year - relax.
 
zarathustra said:
Other sports such as rugby and cricket where VAR has been successfully implemented
Click to expand...
Has it though? I know a lot of cricket/rugby fans complaining about use of tech. Yes it has improved them but there are still plenty of decisions going wrong and if that is the case I wouldn't call it a successful implementation.

I read a cricket fan comment a few days ago praising the VAR system because reviews are left in the official's hands. Grass is always greener on the other side.
 
one said:
Has it though? I know a lot of cricket/rugby fans complaining about use of tech. Yes it has improved them but there are still plenty of decisions going wrong and if that is the case I wouldn't call it a successful implementation.

I read a cricket fan comment a few days ago praising the VAR system because reviews are left in the official's hands. Grass is always greener on the other side.
Click to expand...

Are decisions going wrong, or is that one set of fans don't like the decision, and therefore say it is wrong when it isn't?

A bit like a player being offside by a couple of inches, everyone is complaining about no one wanting these types of very close calls being given and that it is because VAR is rubbish, but they forget that the play was offside and the decision was correct.

I regularly go to international games at Cardiff, I don't think I've ever seen a decision that was wrong, or that a majority of people were unhappy with, except in cases where they are trying to see if the ball was grounded but none of the camera angles can say one way or the other due to players being in the way etc.

Also, lets not forget that cricket decisions by their third umpire are pretty much all factual, i.e. did the ball bounce just inside or outside the boundary, was the batsman safe, did the ball touch the ground or did the fielder catch it just before it touched the ground.

They also use a lot of technology, Hawkeye (same system used in the premier league for GLT, and tennis) is used to plot the predicted path of the ball when it has been interrupted by the batsman, ultraedge that uses microphones to see whether the ball hit a bat or pad, and hotspot which shows where the ball has been in contact with a bat or a pad.

I would suggest that most people who complain about VAR in sports like Rugby or Cricket would change their tunes pretty sharpish if their sports suddenly stopped using it.

VAR in football is going to take years to perfect, and this is what the clubs wanted, they don't care about the fans, only about the money that (what they believe to be) incorrect refereeing decisions has cost them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nij
Nij said:
We've accepted assistant referees virtually making decisions on a range of situations for decades, then AARs adding their bit to some of them, then GLT adding its bit.
VAR is just a natural evolution of the same process that has been ongoing since the earliest days.
Click to expand...
Oh come on! You can't possibly be comparing the use of GLT, AAR's and VAR to the existence of linesmen/AR's - or claiming that it's part of some continuous, gradual process stemming from their introduction. You seem to be implying that Linesmen/AR's were introduced just a couple of decades ago but that's not the case - they've been around for nigh on 150 years.

There's absolutely no way that these extremely recent, fairly precipitous and, in the case of GLT and VAR, fundamentally electronic technology-based systems (all brought in within the last 7 years) are some kind of natural outgrowth of a system of having just the three match officials that had remained absolutely unchanged (other than the change of name from linesman to AR, which in no way altered their function) for nearly a century and a half.
 
Peter Grove said:
Oh come on! You can't possibly be comparing the use of GLT, AAR's and VAR to the existence of linesmen/AR's - or claiming that it's part of some continuous, gradual process stemming from their introduction. You seem to be implying that Linesmen/AR's were introduced just a couple of decades ago but that's not the case - they've been around for nigh on 150 years.

There's absolutely no way that these extremely recent, fairly precipitous and, in the case of GLT and VAR, fundamentally electronic technology-based systems (all brought in within the last 7 years) are some kind of natural outgrowth of a system of having just the three match officials that had remained absolutely unchanged (other than the change of name from linesman to AR, which in no way altered their function) for nearly a century and a half.
Click to expand...
If the technology for GLT or VAR OS had existed a century ago, we wouldn't even been having this discussion.
Someone else like me would be saying it about more advanced technology and someone else like you would be calling their comments a joke because there's no way they could compare quantum simulation to traditional video review that had been around for decades.

VAR as a concept is no more complicated than having ARs is. Just one more person watching the game with input on the decision. That football resisted the change and acted as if there wasn't an issue for so long is not a point in its favour, either.
 
Nij said:
VAR as a concept is no more complicated than having ARs is. Just one more person watching the game with input on the decision. That football resisted the change and acted as if there wasn't an issue for so long is not a point in its favour, either.
Click to expand...
For me, the fundamental difference and break point comes because the latest 'advancement' in officiating brings with it an inevitable change to the natural flow of the game. All the other changes, AR, AAR, GLT have successfully improved decision making accuracy without any material delays as their assistance can be given to the on field referee more or less immediately. As it stands (and for the foreseeable future) VAR can only work if we allow for more stop / starts in the play. And with this the loss of the immediacy in the celebration of goals, penalty saves etc. Some will argue that this is a price worth paying for even greater decision making accuracy. I would beg to differ
 
Nij said:
If the technology for GLT or VAR OS had existed a century ago, we wouldn't even been having this discussion.
Someone else like me would be saying it about more advanced technology and someone else like you would be calling their comments a joke because there's no way they could compare quantum simulation to traditional video review that had been around for decades.

VAR as a concept is no more complicated than having ARs is. Just one more person watching the game with input on the decision. That football resisted the change and acted as if there wasn't an issue for so long is not a point in its favour, either.
Click to expand...
Nothing you have just said addresses my point, which is that GLT, AAR's & VAR did not come about through some kind of natural and gradual outgrowth from the use of linesmen, given that their use was something that had remained unchanged for nearly a century and a half.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top