I hate VAR, and think it is bad for the game…but I’m a realist and it’s inevitable. My “manifesto” for a better VAR would be as follows:
1. Learn from the pilots
Lots of versions in play now. FIFA should refuse permissions for associations to use it next season and use the full year to evaluate the various pilots of it and come up with one definitive version, based on the best of what the evaluation of the pilots suggest. Going forward, Associations must use that, or not use VAR at all.
2. Access
My preference would be that it is only called into play when the Ref asks for it. We shouldn’t have people whispering in referees’ ears. They are in charge of the game.
If not, the only time when VAR should proactively get involved is to ask a question to clarify what a ref saw, rather than suggest a decision is wrong (see 3 and 4 below).
3. Be transparent and keep things focussed
The Schalke stuff (monitor broken) was crazy, and this shouldn’t be allowed to happen. Just accept that you need to do without VAR for that game.
The Refs and VAR team need to be miked as they are in all other sports which use this tech, so we can hear specifically what is going on.
Let’s keep things as tight as possible in terms of reviews. This creates the parameters by which VAR should operate which helps players and fans understand it, and mitigates against VAR going looking for things.
We could go to the lengths that Rugby does (“is there any reason I can’t award a goal”) but I worry about that a bit. Football is more fluid, and it would cause big delays in terms of looking back over prolonged periods of time. Our derby goal against the Rags this year was a long passage of play and we don’t want to look at “phases” in detail, it will take too long and ruin the flow of games.
4. Get it to support referees, not undermine them
This was supposedly a big driver of VAR – get tech to help refs out. I think it is undermining them now tho.
Way to tackle this is to have a “refs call” and, in cases where there are very fine margins (milometers for offsides, subjective views as to whether there is a foul or not), we should be supporting referees and accepting that humans aren’t perfect. I don’t want a VAR which says “disallow that goal because the striker’s big toe might have been offside if our camera angle and lines on the video are right”. All this stuff about microchips in shirts and boots and stuff – total red herring.
The Ref should stay in control at all times.
As an example, in the case of a goal following a clear offside, the VAR team could legitimately say “You gave onside but the video shows the striker appears to be offside, do you want to view the footage?”. The Ref, and no-one else, gets to decide, and we hear their explanation for whether they decide to review or not.
As a further example, if a ref gives a pen and the guy has not been touched and dived then VAR should rightly try and clear this up, but in a way which emphasies that the ref is in charge. Eg, “Did you think there was contact there Ref, as there may not have been?”. Ref then gets chance to see for themselves and decide whether their decision was right. Equally, if a player appears to have fouled someone but the ref plays on then VAR could check whether the Ref saw it. If a Ref says “yes I saw contact between 2 players and I was alright with that” then the Ref’s view should prevail.
What we don’t want is subjectivity like “you gave a foul there but we disagree”. We shouldn’t be replacing the subjective view of one person with anothers. If we want to do that, then get rid of Refs and do it all through a booth.
I hate VAR, and think it is bad for the game…but I’m a realist and it’s inevitable. My “manifesto” for a better VAR would be as follows:
1. Learn from the pilots
Lots of versions in play now. FIFA should refuse permissions for associations to use it next season and use the full year to evaluate the various pilots of it and come up with one definitive version, based on the best of what the evaluation of the pilots suggest. Going forward, Associations must use that, or not use VAR at all.
2. Access
My preference would be that it is only called into play when the Ref asks for it. We shouldn’t have people whispering in referees’ ears. They are in charge of the game.
If not, the only time when VAR should proactively get involved is to ask a question to clarify what a ref saw, rather than suggest a decision is wrong (see 3 and 4 below).
3. Be transparent and keep things focussed
The Schalke stuff (monitor broken) was crazy, and this shouldn’t be allowed to happen. Just accept that you need to do without VAR for that game.
The Refs and VAR team need to be miked as they are in all other sports which use this tech, so we can hear specifically what is going on.
Let’s keep things as tight as possible in terms of reviews. This creates the parameters by which VAR should operate which helps players and fans understand it, and mitigates against VAR going looking for things.
We could go to the lengths that Rugby does (“is there any reason I can’t award a goal”) but I worry about that a bit. Football is more fluid, and it would cause big delays in terms of looking back over prolonged periods of time. Our derby goal against the Rags this year was a long passage of play and we don’t want to look at “phases” in detail, it will take too long and ruin the flow of games.
4. Get it to support referees, not undermine them
This was supposedly a big driver of VAR – get tech to help refs out. I think it is undermining them now tho.
Way to tackle this is to have a “refs call” and, in cases where there are very fine margins (milometers for offsides, subjective views as to whether there is a foul or not), we should be supporting referees and accepting that humans aren’t perfect. I don’t want a VAR which says “disallow that goal because the striker’s big toe might have been offside if our camera angle and lines on the video are right”. All this stuff about microchips in shirts and boots and stuff – total red herring.
The Ref should stay in control at all times.
As an example, in the case of a goal following a clear offside, the VAR team could legitimately say “You gave onside but the video shows the striker appears to be offside, do you want to view the footage?”. The Ref, and no-one else, gets to decide, and we hear their explanation for whether they decide to review or not.
As a further example, if a ref gives a pen and the guy has not been touched and dived then VAR should rightly try and clear this up, but in a way which emphasies that the ref is in charge. Eg, “Did you think there was contact there Ref, as there may not have been?”. Ref then gets chance to see for themselves and decide whether their decision was right. Equally, if a player appears to have fouled someone but the ref plays on then VAR could check whether the Ref saw it. If a Ref says “yes I saw contact between 2 players and I was alright with that” then the Ref’s view should prevail.
What we don’t want is subjectivity like “you gave a foul there but we disagree”. We shouldn’t be replacing the subjective view of one person with anothers. If we want to do that, then get rid of Refs and do it all through a booth.
Excellent post...just dont hold yer breath waiting for an answer..Principle 5 of the Var handbook states that the original decision given by the ref will not be changed unless the video review clearly shows that the decision was clearly wrong.
How can the penalty decision last night be justified then? Last night's penalty decision was subjective and not clearly correct?
I think the problem is the 'clear and obvious error' rule isn't being followed. If you can't see pretty quickly that the referee or linesman got it wrong, then you should go with the original decision. Take Otamendi's handball last week. If the referee gave a penalty and VAR backed him, I wouldn't have had a problem. But there was no way that was an obvious enough error to overrule the ref. But then they're encouraging officials to not make decisions if they're in doubt and rely on VAR to mop it up afterwards.VAR taking far, far too long.
there should be a time limit for review. If its so close its hard to call, give the benefit of the doubt to the attacking side.
It feels like, can we disallow a goal ? I only really watch us so might be the same for everyone.VAR taking far, far too long.
there should be a time limit for review. If its so close its hard to call, give the benefit of the doubt to the attacking side.
I think the problem is the 'clear and obvious error' rule isn't being followed. If you can't see pretty quickly that the referee or linesman got it wrong, then you should go with the original decision. Take Otamendi's handball last week. If the referee gave a penalty and VAR backed him, I wouldn't have had a problem. But there was no way that was an obvious enough error to overrule the ref. But then they're encouraging officials to not make decisions if they're in doubt and rely on VAR to mop it up afterwards.
Agreed. The offside checks today were a bit much, you could tell at first glance that even if they were off it would have been by mm. They should be able to get those checks finished between the ball hitting the net and getting back to the centre circle.VAR taking far, far too long.
there should be a time limit for review. If its so close its hard to call, give the benefit of the doubt to the attacking side.
They need to start showing it on the screen and micing the refs up to keep the crowd informed.It’s utter shit when your at the ground. Farcical. Thank god for city Wi-fi and blue moon to let us know whether it’s a goal or not
Lad behind us got a text that Sterling was onside for his goal at least 30 seconds before ref gave it
They gotta speed it up
Joke that he checked Phil's goal
8 Var reviews.
7 goals
6 subs
2 added minutes