There were three Tottenham players in the box when he connected; that's it surely? I think that's a free out now (could well be wrong) - but if that is what it is, then it was so blatant it didn't really need checking the VAR.
Printable View
There were three Tottenham players in the box when he connected; that's it surely? I think that's a free out now (could well be wrong) - but if that is what it is, then it was so blatant it didn't really need checking the VAR.
I agree with you in general Stu, that VAR will see examination of decisions at a more atomic level, and it will be (on occasion, maybe plenty of occasions) a pain in the arse. If it helps to get more decisions right, I'm in favour, but I know we just disagree on the importance of that.
What I also wonder about is what the definition of a 'clear and obvious' mistake is, and how that can ever be defined really.
I've mentioned before that, unlike rugby, where almost all of the reviews are for things which can be examined objectively, in football, it's looking at what are subjective decisions. Not only is it a question of whether something is a foul or not, which is subjective in itself, it's also a question on whether a referee made a clear and obvious mistake by awarding/not awarding a free kick, which is another layer of subjectivity. This subjectivity will make it much much more contentious.
He booked Son for unsporting behaviour.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Encroachment by attacking players should be punished by retaking a successful penalty, not a booking and a free-kick. Read the article I linked to, it is quite informative.
Arguably "Clear and obvious" is something that can really only be defined after the event. The Mata decision is not really clear and obvious - but that's in hindsight. In that instance, I guess the ref just had a hunch Mata might have been offside and decided to double-check. Once the review is called for, I don't think a player can be deemed offside, but not by enough that it matters.
OK; that doesn't seem to make any sense. The article's confusing, but in a good kind of way. (Although - grrr at "infringements on PKs"...)Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
Incidentally, when does encroachment become a foul? When it happens or when the ball is played? That'd alter the timeline the article talks about.
Yeah, with offside, they are simply looking for offside/not offside, it is not a question of clear and obvious error or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
VAR has been unanimously approved for Russia by IFAB.
Happened upon an example of VAR in action just now, in a Kansas City/Seattle MLS game. Ref awards a penalty to Seattle for handball, on the advice of the linesman. Even a quick replay shows this is wrong (the ball hits the defenders elbow close to the body as he slides to block a low cross) and the biggest delay to proceedings is the ref deciding whether or not to go to VAR. When he does, it takes maybe 20 seconds or so to determine no penalty should be awarded. Further delays to the restart of play comes from Seattle complaining.
All as we've seen before - from a "What went wrong" perspective, I would say the ref should have allowed to refer to VAR immediately instead of awarding a penalty then humming and hawing for a while - but I was struck by the crowd reaction. It must be because it's the States, but the atmosphere wasn't dead, as they were chanting for VAR, and a huge roar when the ref changed the decision, followed by "*******" chants at the complaining Seattle players. Familiarity with video referrals obviously helps.
Stu will love this:
http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/43791511
Quote:
A penalty was awarded after players had already left the pitch for half-time in Mainz's Bundesliga win over relegation rivals Freiburg on Monday.
Referee Guido Winkmann called both sides back from the dressing room after consulting the video assistant referee (VAR) system and penalising Freiburg for handball.
Yes. That's clearly idiotic.
I'll allow that it's a refereeing issue rather than a VAR issue per se
I wonder if the GD situation there might have influenced the ref's decision? Either way, there should obviously be a prohibition against using VAR after half-time or full-time has been called by the ref. Use it or don't, but don't pick both options one after the other.
Watched that match on BT Sport last night. The ref blew for half time more or less immediately after the handball situation with no indication that there might be a VAR case. Players headed towards the tunnel, and BT went into their commercial break - only to come back after two or three commercials when the players were coming back onto the pitch for the penalty.
Normally I'm all for VAR, but this situation was just crazy.
Who actually called for the VAR?
Seems the VAR made the call.
Was it the right call at least?
It was. Handball with an outstretched arm that didn't look accidential.
VAR can say something to the ref, but it's the ref who actually makes the call to use it. Why it took so long in this case is bad form. I really do think the razor-tight nature of the relegation battle played a part, as there are three teams on 30 points with only a few games left, with Freiburg in the drop-zone by -9 GD from Mainz (now).
But you can no more let than come into a decision - even your mind, as a ref - than Michael Oliver could allow Juve's great comeback sway his decision to award Barca a penalty.
To me, this is analogous to the ref giving a corner, and then changing his mind to give a penalty. It's always said that a ref can't change his mind. Now he can. Will players be harassing referees down the tunnel now?
(And again, I think this is a refereeing issue, not a straight VAR issue. The ref has messed up here; it's different to play being fragmented by repeated VAR referrals)
Yeah, I'd agree, it would be similar to a referee being alerted by a linesman that there had actually been a foul.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
The fact that it was VAR probably meant it took long enough for the players to have left the pitch though.
With the World Cup on the horizon, VAR's use in the FA Cup Final gave me cause for optimism: a few penalty calls and an offside goal where the ref briefly consulted VAR via earpiece and was satisfied with the decision, no need for lengthier consideration or an off-field review. I think that's the optimal use of the system, and the "flow" of the game wasn't effected.
The issue is that there are officials at the World Cup who won't have used VAR in an actual match before, and I think that's inevitably going to get messy.