VAR Discussion

[NeverFeltBetter]

Rather than fill up the tournament thread, thought we should talk VAR in the World Cup here.

First incident of note this morning. Leaving aside the correctness or incorrectness of the decision - I think the trip constituted "careless" under the LotG definition myself, but theres a larger question about consistency that's worth asking - I'm more struck by the "clear and obvious" question. What constitutes "clear and obvious"? Clear and obvious to the official in the booth?

Also, just as I am typing, a trip in the Argentina/Iceland game. Should be a penalty, a yellow for diving instead. Did VAR not note the incorrectness, or did the Ref overrule without review?

[pineapple stu]

I saw somewhere that the ref in the France game signalled for a VAR at the time of the penalty, but had to wait until the next break in place to review it. (I don't know if that's true or not; just what I read). In that case, the difference with the Iceland game must be that the ref decided there was definitely no penalty, even though it was a clearer foul than the France one.

[NeverFeltBetter]

Regards that incident, the RTE panel had a good discussion, with Hamann, no fan of VAR, calling for the VAR official to be given the power to instigate a review/make a decision themselves, something that I think is inevitable, but will be strongly resisted by officials. He also pointed out, quite rightly, that it's irresponsible to have officials who have never used the system in competitive matches given charge of matches here.

I also agreed with Whelan's summation in-match: the ref thought his own view was more than good enough to judge the incident, but more importantly was not inclined to give Argentina another penalty.

[NeverFeltBetter]

Another no call just now for the Swiss equaliser, pretty clear shove in the back from the Zuber to lose his marker. Only excuse that springs to mind is if a Brazilian player was doing the same off camera and it was a six of one situation.

[pineapple stu]

Curious call in the Egypt v Russia game. Free given on the edge of the box - and then overruled to a penalty, without any need for the ref to consult with the screen.

I didn't know that was possible. I've said before I don't mind the idea of a TV ref watching and advising the ref via headpiece of anything he's missed.

[osarusan]

Curious call in the Egypt v Russia game. Free given on the edge of the box - and then overruled to a penalty, without any need for the ref to consult with the screen.

I didn't know that was possible. I've said before I don't mind the idea of a TV ref watching and advising the ref via headpiece of anything he's missed.

Maybe because it was not a question of whether there was a foul or not, but simply a question of where it was?

[pineapple stu]

But isn't that the referee's decision to make too? The foul may have started outside the box and continued inside, so the ref needs to decide if it's a free or a penalty. I don't see it's that different to the video refs telling the real ref he's missed an obvious foul, but I thought he had to check it and give the decision himself

[micls]

But isn't that the referee's decision to make too? The foul may have started outside the box and continued inside, so the ref needs to decide if it's a free or a penalty. I don't see it's that different to the video refs telling the real ref he's missed an obvious foul, but I thought he had to check it and give the decision himself

If it continued inside, it's a penalty.

Ref may just have asked them 'Did it continue into the box'.

[NeverFeltBetter]

Reviewing the IFAB rules on VAR (emphasis mine):

"Once the review is initiated, the referee has the option to:
• make a decision based only on the information received from the VAR or
• review the footage directly before making a final decision (on-field review – OFR)

OFRs will be mainly for ‘subjective’ decisions or to assist match control or to ‘sell’ a decision. An OFR should not be needed for factual decisions such as the position of an offence or player (e.g. offside), point of contact on the body for handball or a foul, ball out of play etc.

Unless I'm misunderstanding, this means the on-pitch ref has the sole authority to decide whether he will leave the field to review an incident himself, and it specifically isn't required if the only question is the position of a foul (ie, inside or outside the box: the VAR has authority to determine this as it not subjective, according to IFAB)

[mypost]

The on field ref has the discretion to review an incident on the pitch, once he has signalled that a review is underway. It's not mandatory.

"Clear and obvious" was and is, a formula of words to justify that everything be checked. So everything is checked, and all major decisions on the pitch at VAR games, are provisional until the VAR confirms it. While it may take a bit longer to confirm it, the alternative is years of controversy and resentment. Brussels 81, Brussels 97, Paris 09, just three of many examples where we were done by bad refereeing errors which defined/decided our qualifying campaigns.

So I'm fully supportive of VAR, I've wanted it since the year dot, it is the future of refereeing, and in general, it's working very well at the current WC. TV viewers are told what is happening, fans in stadiums know what is happening, and reviews are faster than the naysayers predicted.

All officials know the laws of the game inside out, and apply them based on what they see at the time. Now they have a back up option to bail them out, if they get a call clearly wrong. It's not necessary for them to have used the system in their own leagues prior to the WC. They have all been fully briefed on how to use the system, and they all have a common language, which is obviously English. So there's no communication issues between them.

A number of games with VAR decisions have been discussed here. The only thing that matters is "was the right decision made"? That is what it's for. There may be millions of cash on the line, a promotion/relegation spot, a cup final decision etc, so we need to have the right decision. The EPL and UEFA don't have the bottle yet to bring it in the way others have, but they're only delaying the inevitable. The days of players getting away with stuff they shouldn't are coming to an end, and that can only be good for football.

[osarusan]

Another VAR penalty today, given for Australia after a handball. Ref initially waved it away, but moments later went off to view it and awarded a penalty. It was a header that hit a defender's arm almost straight away - I suppose the question was whether the arm was in an unnatural position or not.

[NeverFeltBetter]

I'm finding the primary issue now is less whether VAR is getting things right, and more what its missing. A glaring spotlight is on the issue of shirt-pulling in the penalty area, something that is practically a routine part of the sport when it came to set-pieces, but can longer viewed as acceptable with referrals possible. Not five minutes ago there is another instance, where a Danish attacker was clearly pulled to the ground inside the area by an Aussie defender with an arm full of his jersey. Until VAR starts calling them, or until refs start to listen, it will continue to grate.

[osarusan]

Not five minutes ago there is another instance, where a Danish attacker was clearly pulled to the ground inside the area by an Aussie defender with an arm full of his jersey. Until VAR starts calling them, or until refs start to listen, it will continue to grate.

I must have missed that.

I said long before the world cup that there is always enough going on with every corner for loads of decisions to be made either way.

I wonder if something like shirt-holding from a corner only becomes a clear and obvious error when it clearly prevented an attempt on goal (which may have been the case here, I missed it).

[mypost]

I'm finding the primary issue now is less whether VAR is getting things right, and more what its missing. A glaring spotlight is on the issue of shirt-pulling in the penalty area, something that is practically a routine part of the sport when it came to set-pieces, but can longer viewed as acceptable with referrals possible. Not five minutes ago there is another instance, where a Danish attacker was clearly pulled to the ground inside the area by an Aussie defender with an arm full of his jersey. Until VAR starts calling them, or until refs start to listen, it will continue to grate.

It was never a routine part of the sport, it was and is a foul, which can and often should result in a penalty awarded. Once the refs do that, that will put a stop to it. Indeed corners are often taking longer than usual now, for the ref to remind players what can happen.

But you have to find the English commentators reactions to the incidents last weekend hilarious. The Brazil v Switzerland incidents were not fouls in their opinion. But the similiar incidents in their own game v Tunisia were widely seen as stonewall penalties, that prove that VAR is rubbish and useless.

VAR has worked very well so far in general. Even in the most questionable decisions, a valid case can be made for why the VAR decision was given. It has already overturned a yellow card for mistaken identity. Without the system around, injustices would still be happening almost every single game. And the less injustices there are, the fairer the game will be.

[OwlsFan]

I agree VAR is far better than no VAR. It does bring with it though players surrounding the ref looking for a VAR referral while in the old days protesting a decision was 99% a waste of time. Kevin Doyle said that in the USA if you make a VAR signal to a ref you immediately get a yellow card. That might deter it a bit.

But for Blatter, we could have VAR a while back and it would have spotted Henry's handball and we would have had to endure losing the penalty shoot-out instead

[NeverFeltBetter]

A player calling for a VAR referral is already supposed to be an automatic yellow.

[micls]

A player calling for a VAR referral is already supposed to be an automatic yellow.

I don't think so. The rule says 'excessive' gesturing. Not just saying it once.

It sets out that any player "entering the referee review area (RRA)" or "excessively using the 'review' (TV screen) signal" must be booked, rubber-stamping a proposal from January's IFAB meeting.

[NeverFeltBetter]

Interesting night for VAR. Even with Liam Brady and Darragh Moloney crying conspiracy (embarrassing stuff), thought the only wrong one was the penalty for Iran, ironically given all their complaining, and even that was just down to interpretation.

The bigger issue was a ref letting players push him around. There might have been more than one red for dissent tonight.

[osarusan]

The bigger issue was a ref letting players push him around.

I thought that it was more the case that his video assistants took an eternity (in football terms) to get him to review the footage, and left him just standing there in the middle of moaning players.

As an aside, have we seen a ref stick to his original decision yet after being invited to view footage by the assistants? I thought that ref might do it tonight for the late penalty claim, but he did change his mind and give it (wrongly in my opinion).

[NeverFeltBetter]

Quite possible, but there was no end to players and coaches crowding around for every incident. A few more yellows or a red might have sorted that out.

I think someone got in Moloney's ear and got him to row back a bit. Maybe a producer was worried about a suit! Or perhaps that's my own mad conspiracy.