There's something to be said for only allowing the ref to watch replays in real time for incidents where the VAR team think he didn't see something, as opposed to seeing something and making an error, which can rely on slow mo. Because for things like Handball, slow mo can be deceiving in terms of reaction times.
VAR - Not the hero we want, the one we need
- Thread starter Pavl3n
- Start date
There's something to be said for only allowing the ref to watch replays in real time for incidents where the VAR team think he didn't see something, as opposed to seeing something and making an error, which can rely on slow mo. Because for things like Handball, slow mo can be deceiving in terms of reaction times.
So I keep hearing
Yup. Exactly what I thought
Totally agree about slow mo totally changing the view of incidents, I don’t like it.
Drove back during half time from a friend, Dutch referee Bas Nijhuis said on the radio he wouldn't give a penalty for that in a million years.
Like people said, it's simply open to interpretation and could've gone either way. Fact that the ref looked 6 times before deciding is all telling.
Like people said, it's simply open to interpretation and could've gone either way. Fact that the ref looked 6 times before deciding is all telling.
He has a few different factors to look at though. The pace of the ball is one, which should certainly be viewed in normal speed. The arm position is a seperate factor though and one better assessed in slow-mo. It's either in an unnatural position or it isn't, the pace of the ball doesn't change that consideration as it's a seperate factor he's looking at.
If you are looking for a reason to give the penalty theres enough in it to justify it.
Theres very definitely hand to ball movement, whether the guy does it deliberately or not is open to debate.
Theres very definitely hand to ball movement, whether the guy does it deliberately or not is open to debate.
The referee didn't see the incident in real time. Whichever decision he made would have been the wrong decision because he was making it without any observations. The VAR system gave him these observations which allowed him to come to an informed decision.
Problem wasnt var there.
Problem was inconsistent and unclear interpretation of handball which is case anyway.
Problem was inconsistent and unclear interpretation of handball which is case anyway.
Or, worse. From a fairly poor set of replays his brain starts filling in the gaps and the full picture he gets from that, isn't what actually happened.
A few problems surfacing today. VAR as a tool to resolve clear and obvious errors. Didn’t happen there. The use of slow motion replays which distort the level of intent. The interpretation of unnatural positions in freeze frames.
Aye. You have to use your arms for leverage when jumping and it looks like Perisic’s arms were on the downward swing there. Certainly nothing unnatural about the arm action.
Agree with every point you make there
Nah, bad reffing performance. Occam's razor and all that shit.
I still have a big concern over the replays that ref on the pitch see... I just don't think they get the best view off incidents at all
I am hoping that if VAR becomes omnipresent that there is a gradual smoothing of decisions. Too many soft ones(pens) given in this tournament for me, innocuous contact that instinctively does not feel like a foul, the pulling/grappling game that England exploited so well early in the tournament from set pieces as well.
Oh yea things were so much better before VAR, zero improvement 
How var didn't see pogba in offside? Dive from griezmann? Don't understand it
Think VAR has been decent but tweaking is required, Shearer was bang on about clear and obvious errors and s someone posted up top, don't let them have slow mo's s that can often makes things look distorted
Refs need more training on using var and interpreting it, particularly use of slow mo.
Also why doesn’t var step in for eg griez dive?
Also why doesn’t var step in for eg griez dive?
VAR's effectiveness on everything other than handball is 100% I think. It's effectiveness on handball is 50/50. The rules of handball need clearing up and referees need common sense.
Of all the criticisms that were laid out against VAR, one of the ones most commonly repeated was “its gonna ruin the emotion of scoring a goal”.
I haven’t seen a single instance of that this WC.
I haven’t seen a single instance of that this WC.
Never a penalty, still it's not VAR's fault the ref doesn't know the rules of the game
Because at the moment it's not used for free kick decisions. Obviously the fact this free kick resulted in a goal is an issue (because it is used to confirm goals were scored fairly), but I guess they'll have to work that out.
I thought it was a dead certain penalty when I saw the replay. I was quite surprised to hear that every pundit and most fans thought it wasn’t. The ball is coming in from a corner and players have enough time to get their hands out of the way. It looked like Perisic even made a slight movement with his hands towards the ball. I thought the ref made the right call there.
How does he have enough time between the header and it hitting his hand?
No, he wasn't.
This infographic from the BBC lays it out. If the referee requests to review an incident it doesn't need to be a clear and obvious error. That only applies if the VAR panel want to tell the referee to stop the game.
Howard Webb post game made a good point. Shouldn't have been used as it wasn't a clear and obvious mistake in the first place. The question they ask in the VAR room is "Did the referee get the decision wrong", not "did he get the decision right". That means if it's a subjective call, they don't interfere. This one was subjective, on first viewing in real time, ref didn't give a pen. Getting something wrong isn't the same as not being right, as there's a pretty large grey area between the two. So in this case, they shouldn't have interfered. You can see arguments both ways, but it's one of those that if in real time the ref gives it, VAR can't overturn, and if he doesn't give it, then they shouldn't interfere.
See above post. What Webb said only applies if the VAR team tell the referee something is wrong. If he asks them himself, it doesn't need to be a clear and obvious mistake. Looked to me like he asked them for clarification without any prompt.
True, we're not sure if he asked them or if he was told to check.
VAR ruined the 2018 final and stopped an unlikely winner taking the crown.
No way on this earth did Perisic know anything about that handball. Total disgrace of a call and totally changed the pattern of the second half.
No way on this earth did Perisic know anything about that handball. Total disgrace of a call and totally changed the pattern of the second half.
See the post above yours which argues otherwise.
If your interpretation is correct though then the "clear and obvious" standard was abandoned long ago as other decisions this subjective have been repeatedly referred to referees. For example, I think Cedric Soares was punished for an even harsher handball earlier in the tournament, as was Denmark's Poulsen?
Whatever else it might have been, the use of VAR here and the referee's decision itself were both consistent with other incidents in the tournament.
It's not my interpretation, it's what Howard Webb was saying and he's played a pretty big role in introducing the technology (and is in charge in its introduction in the MLS). So I'd say he's as informed as anybody on the topic of how it's supposed to be used.
But how would he know that he’s missed something and to ask them?
It was the French appeal that made the ref question his decision with VAR panel?
He might have thought he saw something but not being sure enough to give it, or the reaction might have helped, no one knows but him. Ultimately though, he reviewed it and it was clearly a penalty, so the technology worked.
I like the idea of VAR and for the most part think it has been used sufficiently in this World Cup, but there have been a few occasions where the referee has still produced the wrong verdict on the back of VAR, which is worrying.
Also, I think the frequency of penalties will increase and a penalty every game or two will become the norm in football if VAR is widely adopted. Not saying that's necessarily a bad thing, but it's going to impact the game I think.
Also, I think the frequency of penalties will increase and a penalty every game or two will become the norm in football if VAR is widely adopted. Not saying that's necessarily a bad thing, but it's going to impact the game I think.
Um who are you to rate ‘emotion’ & if it’s been lost or not? Please just speak for yourself as It has for me especially with goals from corners or maybe a mm offside in a build up. Basically only 30 yard screamers I feel can celebrate properly without fear that var will find a reason to disallow it.
It wasn’t ‘clearly a penalty’ at all. Not even close. Probably a 50/50 at best. Ball was travelling so fast -which the slow mo VAR replays make that situation look worse than it is- which is another debate.
It was said that it would affect players celebrations (which it has not) as well as the emotions of the fans in the stadium (which it visibly did not).
If it’s not affecting the majority of people, maybe you’re the one handling it wrong? Just a thought.
Clearly it's not a clear penalty given the amount of controversy it's caused. In fact, there's far more people (and notable people) that are saying it wasn't a pen. Read from 3 former refs that they think it wasn't a pen and that VAR shouldn't have been used at all. And then the ref had to stare at the same replays over and over and over again, and then leaves then comes back. He clearly wasn't sure, but gave his call at the end (which is what VAR is there to help to do), but it's a very questionable call. And VAR shouldn't be used for questionable calls.
I'm all for VAR, but there are some situations that it really doesn't help. This was one, as they can cherry pick certain angles that help the case for very subjective handball rules to make it look far worse then what it really is and in normal speed. If the ref has to stare at the situation for as long as this ref did, then it's clearly 50/50. Shouldn't take more then 2 looks at it to make your mind up, any more and you're arguing with yourself.
For me, it's a marginal decision - that hasn't been given. The VAR process gets them looking at it - a lot of times & it does look different slowed down, as people have said. Then you've got the penalty getting given possibly because it is harder not to give it because of evidence that is possibly a bit iffy - the slowed down stuff.
I think it's too much of a jump. And it's the VAR process taking a marginal decision & making it into a penalty. Because it wasn't originally given.
It's not so terrible that Croatia have been totally done over but too much benefit accumulates to the attacking side once the slo-mo comes out & is why the decision is made.
I think it's too much of a jump. And it's the VAR process taking a marginal decision & making it into a penalty. Because it wasn't originally given.
It's not so terrible that Croatia have been totally done over but too much benefit accumulates to the attacking side once the slo-mo comes out & is why the decision is made.
Players may or may not feel their emotions have changed slightly as var could still rule it out. But I’m talking from a fan perspective & it definitely isn’t just me that thinks that way thanks.
How can it not affect you? You do know var checks every goal right? It has to on some level cause some sort of doubt to your mind to the validity of a goal? If not then that just doesn’t make sense as now there’s a real chance the ‘goal’ could be taken away where it wasn’t before.