Video technology (VAR) in football


#41

So then we’ll have a review that takes two minutes and then the team who loses the review will whine to the official for two minutes after that as well.

Look at the NfL and their reviews. I mostly stopped watching american football because of it. The baseball playoffs this season were almost unwatchable because of reviews, only reason I watched was because the LA Dodgers played. The gamed lasted about 4 1/2 hours.


#42

Why? If it takes 2 minutes it’s because it’s unclear, so give up after 20-30 and let the refs decision stand.

If it’s something as clear cut as whether someone is half a yard onside or offside when they score a goal, it will take 10 seconds and it’ll add zero time because players spend 30 seconds running about hugging each other after a goal. For more debateable offsides, it’s normally clear 90% of the time if your aim is to give the benefit of the doubt to the forward.

How many times in a game is an offside goal scored, an onside goal incorrectly ruled offside (and as I said, these two things are likely to add zero time anyway), a questionable penalty is given, a red card tackle goes unpunished or a red card is incorrectly given? In your average game I’d say there were probably 2 of these events.

Do you remember all the fucking about that used to happen when a goal was scored where the ball crossed the line by 1 inch? Both sides convinced it was / wasn’t a goal. Now that everyone knows that the ref is 100% right because of goal line technology, there is no issue and nobody complains. If it’s decided that the video referee is the ultimate authority and their decision always stands then there’s nothing to whine about, or at least no reason to do your moaning at the referee. All the video referee is doing is making the same decision again but with more evidence.


#43

Oh hey.


#44

Video ref rules out goal in the France-Spain game.


#45

The second Spain goal was initially called off and then given afterwards too

I’m still not a fan of offside calls in regards to technology as these decisions are very selective but I guess we’ll just have to see where it goes.


#46

We couldn’t abuse our beloved referees anymore, then. Apart from joke, they badly need help after making mistakes after mistakes.


#47

Well the fact that two major decisions were initially incorrect probably means the fundamental issue is the quality of officiating.

I’ll say it now, they need to find a much more efficient way of implementing that. That was dire to watch.


#48

at long last a football match not dogged by officials incapable of keeping up with the modern game.

whats not to love.


#49

Completely changed the course of the match. With the dire refereeing it would have been 1-1 instead of 0-2. So clearly video technology is a winner here. But they were 2 straight forward decisions, what happens if it’s more complicated? Will there be a time limit? All in all though it was a success.

Bad news for Ibra and Man United :grin:


#50

Used to stop an illegal goal standing and a legal goal wrongly being disallowed. 0-2 could have been 1-1 just from officiating. Imagine if that was a WC final and Spain lost on pens?

I don’t understand how anyone could be against it tbh. Even if it’s slow, if it’s for a major game changing decision then I’d rather the right outcome be reached. Even if leagues are slow on the uptake, when we get to international knockout tournaments when one decision in a game means you’re out and two years of work is undone, I’m happy to wait for a decision.


#51

I’m definitely in support of it. I just think there needs to be a more efficient way of implementing it. I mean how long were France celebrating for before the decision was overturned?

And I’m also not against it a challenge system, not that dissimilar to tennis.


#52

It’s not only the reviews that make American sports games a lot longer than supposed playing time. Two extra breaks, becuase of 4 quarters, the time-outs etc. I think you guys even got time outs especially for commercial breaks.


#53

i would liek a challenge system

where a captain has the final say to appeal a decision - it gets reviewed - its either overturned or the decision stands - u get 2 referrals each half - if the decision stands you lose the referral - like they do in cricket

it would show leadership amount a team also teams would blow there challenges/referrals and that would teach them to use it at cruital points in a game

also i think having a system in place would educate fans as lots of fans dont seem to understand the laws of the game


#54

In general I am in favour of it. However I do feel that the standard of refereeing and linesman will go down because of it. They will just call things knowing that they don’t have as much pressure on them because it can be overturned.

That said the standard in the main has been poor this season in the premiership anyway. So I guess getting to the correct decision is fairer for everyone.


#55

The sport is headed that way. It starts with this and then it moves on from there.


#56

the premier league standard is much better then the lower leagues

i watch national league football and league 2 and the refs are shocking - think they will benefit more then anyone


#57

Many issues DRS has to clear up for it to have any chance of being adapted in a suitable way for football.

I think it’s possible, but it’ll serve up major contradictions,

e.g.

  • no review for a free kick award which could result in a goal

  • no review or continuation of play allowed for an attacking team when an incorrect offside call is made (play must be stopped) - yet a goal conceded can be reviewed

Those are big problems, because the solutions to them (i.e. allowing play to continue after the offside call is made/having reviews for a free kick award) would involve changing the dynamics of the sport itself. Given that’s not a viable or desirable option, we would have to accept some glaringly unfair aspects of a review system.

Overall it can’t be a perfect system and won’t be completely fair in all manners. But it would still cut out a lot of the decisively wrong decisions that get made now.

Given the fast-paced nature of the game, the only times a review could realistically take place without ridiculously disrupting the flow of the game imo is to challenge a “goal given”, “goal disallowed” and possibly a penalty decision. No other decisions being available for a video referee make any practical sense (including free kicks near the box). There’s always a large enough delay between a goal scored and a restart, or between when a penalty’s been given and taken - which is crucial for a system to fit into the game as seamlessly as possible.

But once the governing bodies get past what can be reviewed, they have to determine a bunch of other stuff too. For example what to look for and how far back they should be allowed to go in their replays to identify any situation (e.g. offside, out of play, foul in the build up etc) where a goal can be disallowed or penalty not given. Number of reviews available (imo every goal and penalty should be reviewed) have to be determined too.

A workable system can be achieved, but no matter how it’s implemented it’s probably going to be complex and there will be a lot to clarify with a lot of hot talking points.


#58

I’d be celebrating

That aside, the major issue with this was always the implementation and with further testing we’ll likely come across problems too.


#59

This thing can’t come soon enough.
I had enough of incompetent refs.


#60

You don’t think a video ref couldn’t have sustained that decision?