Should VAR go to a challenge based system?

[Skills]

2 challenges per team per game.

You lose a challenge if you get it wrong.

Off-sides are still the more difficult one to manage until they're fully automated, but you still instruct the linesman to not put the flag up until the play is over (i.e. chance has been scored or missed). And then the team can challenge the offside call in that scenario.

Would that also encourage more honesty from players too? If you dive and convince your team to use a challenge, you're damaging your own teams prospects?

They can crowding the refs and just harass their own coaching staff/captains instead to challenge calls.

 

[duffer]

I'd accept this but with 1 caveat, the game must continue while the challenge is being checked and the only involvement the on pitch ref has is to relay the VAR decision to everyone.

Otherwise it'll be abused for timewasting/breaking momentum.

 

[ItDoesntEvenMata]

Yes with certain conditions and narrow remit

It needs to be preceded by automated offsides and probably hawkeye equivalents on all the touchlines so that things like throw-ins, the ball going out etc are automatically called.

Challenges shouldn't be a team challenging that another player has committed an act of violent conduct - that should be done independently by VAR otherwise you'll get teams provoking and looking to get players sent off with their challenge.

Should be reserved for things like handballs, penalties, fouls (but not the card) etc

 

[SilentWitness]

No. I don't understand why people would be for this. The refs have shown this year that they sometimes get 5+ decisions wrong in a game, why do people want to increase the artificial nature of football!?

 

[Ahmer Baig]

2 challenges per team per game.

You lose a challenge if you get it wrong.

Off-sides are still the more difficult one to manage until they're fully automated, but you still instruct the linesman to not put the flag up until the play is over (i.e. chance has been scored or missed). And then the team can challenge the offside call in that scenario.

Would that also encourage more honesty from players too? If you dive and convince your team to use a challenge, you're damaging your own teams prospects?

They can crowding the refs and just harass their own coaching staff/captains instead to challenge calls.

Like cricket DRS review 2 per team.

 

[Di Maria's angel]

Yes.

 

[EireRed_GS]

thats decent idea, so many reviews per team each game.

Ive always said there needs to be a time limit on them also. If they have to spend ages looking for a fault to give/not give a decision... then its not a 'clear and obvious mistake' (as per the rules)

 

[Skills]

Yes with certain conditions and narrow remit

It needs to be preceded by automated offsides and probably hawkeye equivalents on all the touchlines so that things like throw-ins, the ball going out etc are automatically called.

Challenges shouldn't be a team challenging that another player has committed an act of violent conduct - that should be done independently by VAR otherwise you'll get teams provoking and looking to get players sent off with their challenge.

Should be reserved for things like handballs, penalties, fouls (but not the card) etc

Sounds like good shit to me.

 

[crossy1686]

No, it's a farce as it is. Let's not add another flawed system to something that's being implemented incorrectly in the first place. Just hire competent people to run it and hire referee's who don't let their ego get in the way of questioning their on field decision, or allow VAR to overrule the ref.

 

[Damien]

Should have had it in from the start - tennis, rugby, cricket (apparently) have all perfected it got it to the point where the controversies/complaints are at a minimum rather than a weekly occurrence. Should have the interaction between the ref and VAR broadcast too so everyone knows what the decision was and more importantly how they reached it.

I think offsides should be exempt from challenges - they're moving to a semi automated system which works fine in the CL... if the ref and linesmen let it do its job rather than blowing up early.

 

[Vidyoyo]

It's almost certainly worth a try given how it works in other sports. Making challenges would be another tactical part of the game.

The only problem is that teams would still moan if they decided not to challenge - say if it's early in the game - and the media spent all week talking about how bad a call the on-pitch ref made.

No, it's a farce as it is. Let's not add another flawed system to something that's being implemented incorrectly in the first place. Just hire competent people to run it and hire referee's who don't let their ego get in the way of questioning their on field decision, or allow VAR to overrule the ref.

Yeah. Ideally you want people making decisions based on fair judgment but football has an issue with integrity and I'm not convinced 'getting the right' decision is considered as important as The Drama™ a lot of the time.

Until that changes I don't think VAR becomes much of a success.

 

[ReddyMcRedface]

I don't think so.

To me VAR should be very simple. Offsides are done with the European system, it takes seconds and isn't as open to interpretation of the Premier League's drawn lines. The only complication is making sure you have the correct video frame for the timing of the pass.

Red cards and penalties should be solely the responsibility of the referee, the VAR themself should be there as a pure technical aid. The referee when seeing a foul in real time should have the option to stop the game, say he didn't have the best view and immediately go to the screen and make his decision from there. You don't need the VAR spending 2 minutes looking themselves and then telling the referee.

This might mean off the ball incidents are still missed but it seems far more efficient and straight forward than the current system.

 

[TsuWave]

No because refs make egregious mistakes more than twice per game

They should just remove that clear and obvious nonsensical wording and just review every major incident (goals/red cards/offside calls) more efficiently

 

[Zlatan 7]

No, whether you’re calling for a check or waiting for for var to make a decision as it is now you’ll still get the contentious outcomes, like the recent Gordon pen incident

 

[FootballHQ]

Yes.

Two per half.

Team loses a challenge if it's deemed frivolous just to waste time.

Can't appeal anything on halfway line like a wrongly called throw in.

With regards the week just gone Newcastle could appeal the Gordon penalty, same for Brighton when Adingra got kneed in the box. Also Man. United could query Evans getting blocked before the Hall shot.

That's the only way VAR can be improved now on these shores given the way it's been implemented in last five years.

 

[Zlatan 7]

Yes.

Two per half.

Team loses a challenge if it's deemed frivolous just to waste time.

Can't appeal anything on halfway line like a wrongly called throw in.

With regards the week just gone Newcastle could appeal the Gordon penalty, same for Brighton when Adingra got kneed in the box. Also Man. United could query Evans getting blocked before the Hall shot.

That's the only way VAR can be improved now on these shores given the way it's been implemented in last five years.

So they flag var to take a look at the Gordon penalty (just like var already looked at it) and it’s still not given (as it wasn’t). What then.

 

[Annihilate Now!]

Just get rid of "Clear and Obvious"

I'd rather have two/three refs sharing their opinions on an incident and coming to a conclusion together then one trying to second guess what the other is thinking/seeing.

 

[Bertie Wooster]

Should have had it in from the start - tennis, rugby, cricket (apparently) have all perfected it. Should have the interaction between the ref and VAR broadcast too so everyone knows what the decision was and more importantly how they reached it.

I think offsides should be exempt from challenges - they're moving to a semi automated system which works fine in the CL... if the ref and linesmen let it do its job rather than blowing up early.

It depends what you mean by 'perfected' it in Cricket?

I've seen / heard a lot of complaints about VAR that same incidents can reach different conclusions depending on the original onfield decision - so if the ref initially gave a soft pen, VAR won't see enough to overturn; But if another doesn't give similar, VAR again won't see enough to suggest a penalty, etc.

Well, that's pretty much exactly how Cricket works. If the umpire gave it out, and the ball is shown to be just clipping the wicket, then it stays as out. If the umpire gave it not out, and its again shown to be just clipping the wicket, then it stays with umpires call as not out. So the same situation can be out or not out depending on the onfield decision. Just like the penalty inconsistencies that get people annoyed in Football.

Cricket for many years of technology also spent absolutely ages analysing close ups of bats or feet to see if parts were grounded just on or just behind the line when looking at potential run outs or stumpings. These were often subjective in the end, as it was such fine margins. The same with whether a catch was cleanly caught or whether the ball touched the ground at some point. These would go on for ages and would never be 100% proven either way, just ended with a subjective call from the officials.

Cricket also has plenty of situations where we can all see that a mistake was made - the player was wrongly given out or not out - but because he or the fielding team don't appeal it then the wrong decision isn't corrected by technology. That's accepted in Cricket, and just seen as the players mistake for not using an appeal. In Football, I am 100% sure there'll be many, many instances where the media / social media go absolutely mad because a mistake was made, everyone can see it, the technology is there to correct it - 'so why are we just letting the mistake stand!? What a BS system!'

So there's 'flaws' / things to find fault with in Cricket. It's just that an acceptable level of accuarcy is accepted, without a demand for 100% consistency and accuracy otherwise all hell breaks loose. Football is different. It's so tribal, and gets so much media coverage, that every 'potential controversy' is sought out and highlighted.

 

[Skills]

Yes.

Two per half.

Team loses a challenge if it's deemed frivolous just to waste time.

Can't appeal anything on halfway line like a wrongly called throw in.

With regards the week just gone Newcastle could appeal the Gordon penalty, same for Brighton when Adingra got kneed in the box. Also Man. United could query Evans getting blocked before the Hall shot.

That's the only way VAR can be improved now on these shores given the way it's been implemented in last five years.

Two per half is too many imo. And you only lose the challenge if you get it wrong.

The other part of it should be, that during the challenge the VAR referee should have to talk through his logic on the decision as per the rules of the game. And that should be aired on TV and around the ground.

 

[OmarUnited4ever]

This is complicating the game way more than it should, but, perhaps, we can have something like a post-game challenge: -

• Challenge a VAR decision that resulted in a goal or disallowed a goal only (Red Cards, Yellow cards, and other decisions are not to be challenged)
• only 3 challenges per-season for each team (to avoid high number of challenges every week).
• No Counter Challenge (challenging a challenge that was won by a team).
• When a Challenge is accepted, goal is then disallowed or allowed, and the result is adjusted post-game (for e.g., if it was 0-0 and a goal is disallowed, challenge and if challenge is won, you get a goal and consequently win the game/get 3 pts).

The current VAR is having issues and adding in-game challenges will make it worse.

 

[Zlatan 7]

Two per half is too many imo. And you only lose the challenge if you get it wrong.

The other part of it should be, that during the challenge the VAR referee should have to talk through his logic on the decision as per the rules of the game. And that should be aired on TV and around the ground.

Again, if Newcastle flagged that Gordon foul, var then didn’t give it as a pen, and then Newcastle lost their second appeal because they got the Gordon one wrong there’d be fecking carnage. Football is far too subjective and grey for this to work.

 

[Skills]

It depends what you mean by 'perfected' it in Cricket?

I've seen / heard a lot of complaints about VAR that same incidents can reach different conclusions depending on the original onfield decision - so if the ref initially gave a soft pen, VAR won't see enough to overturn; But if another doesn't give similar, VAR again won't see enough to suggest a penalty, etc.

The problem in cricket comes from ball tracking and the LBW rule. That's unique to cricket and doesn't apply in football and most other sports - at least at the same level of frequency.

I always think it's a bit of a cop out anyway - I think they know the number of LBWs given will shoot right up if they relied solely on ball tracking (they already have with current DRS), and umpires calls been kept to try and balance that out.

 

[ItDoesntEvenMata]

This is complicating the game way more than it should, but, perhaps, we can have something like a post-game challenge: -

• Challenge a VAR decision that resulted in a goal or disallowed a goal only (Red Cards, Yellow cards, and other decisions are not to be challenged)
• only 3 challenges per-season for each team (to avoid high number of challenges every week).
• No Counter Challenge (challenging a challenge that was won by a team).
• When a Challenge is accepted, goal is then disallowed or allowed, and the result is adjusted post-game (for e.g., if it was 0-0 and a goal is disallowed, challenge and if challenge is won, you get a goal and consequently win the game/get 3 pts).

The current VAR is having issues and adding in-game challenges will make it worse.

Absolutely daft idea to start chalking off goals and adjusting results post-game. A game is irreversably different when a call is made, even with something like a wrongly given throw in.

Retrospectively challenging and getting a goal back that may have been disallowed in the 10 minute and adjusting the result is ludricrous.

The only caveat to that is things like the Diaz one against Spurs where I almost felt the call was so clear and obviously wrong that they could have given Liverpool the points but not taken any off Spurs. That would have in some way been 'fair' but obviously impossible to do.

 

[saivet]

Not really a fan of a challenge based system. It could become complicated and tactical and I think it generates new problems. I'd consider limiting VAR to offsides relating to penalties, goals or red card. It would need to be semi automated to minimise unnecessary time delays.

 

[bstb3]

Who would decide the challenge though? The current VAR setup? They are the ones sometimes getting it wrong now - either to avoid undermining their mate in the middle or because they mess it up themselves. It would still be the same situation, only with a little less frequency. Complaints would still be had about the VAR getting the challenge wrong, bias etc. The only real difference would be forcing an intervention but without a change in who runs the VAR and to what guidelines on 're-refereeing' then I can't see it having much of an impact.

The issue with VAR is the officials and how they have chosen to implement it because they didn't want it. The same officials implementing something else they don't want will have the same outcome.

 

[Bertie Wooster]

Not really a fan of a challenge based system. It could become complicated and tactical and I think it generates new problems. I'd consider limiting VAR to offsides relating to penalties, goals or red card. It would need to be semi automated to minimise unnecessary time delays.

I agree with this really.

Football laws are too subjective for VAR to be expected to prove beyond any doubt many of the calls. There'll always be debates and different interpretations.

And introducing a challenge based system leads to the opportunity for tactical use, and as most of the decisions are subjective then it still leaves us with the same issue of many people seeing the same things differently. It also means incorrect decisions that aren't challenged (due to a fear of wasting one / no player spotting it clearly enough) go uncorrected when they easily could be.

With so many subjective laws, the only real chance for technology to be consistent is with line calls for offsides and goal line technology. Just limit it to that, where its going to be a lot more accuate, and stick with the onfield officials for everything subjective. There'll still be the amount of 'mistakes' / debate as there always was pre-VAR, we'll just cut down on the lengthy stoppages while the subjective calls are analysed.

 

[redshaw]

Not keen on a challenge system but depends on what for.

I feel it would be a nonsense to use a VAR challenge to get a oppo player sent off through a slow mo and crowd pressure, like some weird goading thing on the ref, probably have a lot more "OFF OFF OFF" chants.

 

[OmarUnited4ever]

Absolutely daft idea to start chalking off goals and adjusting results post-game. A game is irreversably different when a call is made, even with something like a wrongly given throw in.

Retrospectively challenging and getting a goal back that may have been disallowed in the 10 minute and adjusting the result is ludricrous.

The only caveat to that is things like the Diaz one against Spurs where I almost felt the call was so clear and obviously wrong that they could have given Liverpool the points but not taken any off Spurs. That would have in some way been 'fair' but obviously impossible to do.

My idea is about ensuring the game flow is not impacted by challenging during the game (as per the idea from the OP), Post Game decisions is not the norm obviously but at least the game flows and will not be blighted by VAR reviews and challenges (again on the hypothetical challenge-based system).

 

[Bertie Wooster]

My idea is about ensuring the game flow is not impacted by challenging during the game (as per the idea from the OP), Post Game decisions is not the norm obviously but at least the game flows and will not be blighted by VAR reviews and challenges (again on the hypothetical challenge-based system).

But it's far worse that you watch every game and can't even be sure at the end of them whether that will actually be the final result!

It's bad enough that you can't really immediately celebrate a goal without also having the thought that it might still be disallowed moments later. But its far worse if at the end of every match you're still waiting hours / days? to find out if there's going to be a successful challenge that changes the result!

 

[RedRocket9908]

No, a challenge based system would be rudiculous

 

[Damien]

It depends what you mean by 'perfected' it in Cricket?

I've never watched cricket, hence the "apparently" in brackets - was just going off the earlier comment in thread which mentioned it in cricket. Thanks for the correction.

 

[Nickholas]

We need some young geeky people that aren't ex referees..people that are good at gaming and technology and unbiased to operate the VAR system, the pictures(stills) that are used for offsides should be super sharp, there is no reason for them not to be. Also they should just judge the offside by the feet, that will stop them making mistakes or choosing where to draw the line.. There should be nothing to complicated with VAR it's just the people operating it.

 

[Changeisgood]

Not for me. That seems like a nightmare to try to administer.

Think VAR will improve over time. It has some ways to go but for me it has gotten better. Still wish more common sense and some expediency would be applied at times..

 

[saivet]

Should have had it in from the start - tennis, rugby, cricket (apparently) have all perfected it. Should have the interaction between the ref and VAR broadcast too so everyone knows what the decision was and more importantly how they reached it.

I think offsides should be exempt from challenges - they're moving to a semi automated system which works fine in the CL... if the ref and linesmen let it do its job rather than blowing up early.

As a tennis fan - I don't think they have perfected it at all and they are moving towards automatic line calls and moving away from the challenge system. Tennis is a sport where the challenge system is for very black and white decisions, was the ball in or was it out. Tennis has still had problems with officiating for the more subjective areas of the game and even some of the more clear cut issues such as double bounces, time violations and touching the net.

 

[MegadrivePerson]

This is complicating the game way more than it should, but, perhaps, we can have something like a post-game challenge: -

• When a Challenge is accepted, goal is then disallowed or allowed, and the result is adjusted post-game (for e.g., if it was 0-0 and a goal is disallowed, challenge and if challenge is won, you get a goal and consequently win the game/get 3 pts).

The current VAR is having issues and adding in-game challenges will make it worse.

Madness!

Altering the result of a game after it has finished is completely wrong for so many reasons!

 

[Tarrou]

It makes zero sense honestly. Then you're just adding more variance into and already broken system.

So if there are two (or however many is decided) mistakes against you in a game you're just shit out of luck?

 

[FootballHQ]

So they flag var to take a look at the Gordon penalty (just like var already looked at it) and it’s still not given (as it wasn’t). What then.

From what I saw they seemed to be slowing the replay just to see if Casemiro had won the ball. He did but Gordon was already falling so in that scenario Newcastle would appeal with "We feel Gordon has been deliberately tripped by Amrabat as he entered the box so focus on that rather than Casemiro." Then it gets given or not.

Same you can appeal with "Johnny Evans has been deliberately blocked on the edge of the box and he would've closed down Hall's shot otherwise." I think specific reasons from say the captain of the team appealing would give a bit more guidance to what is being looked like on VAR.

 

[Chipper]

Not for me, but that's because I've got to the point where I'd like to see most of it scrapped.

I haven't been happy with it for a long time but never really thought that deeply about it. My opinion was that instead of decisions given by one incompetent person, they're now given by him plus more incompetent people on the VAR.

Come to realise that regardless of competence there's a big issue in the laws of the game that I just don't think lend itself well to VAR.

You could make everyone in the world read the laws of the game twice daily and people are still going to disagree if something was or wasn't a foul, handball or red card. They're ambiguous and open for interpretation. I don't believe that re-writing them over and over again in an attempt to achieve clarification could ever reach a point where there's no controversey over different people having different opinions. Not unless they fundamentally changed how football is actually played.

As such we have subjective rules, referees giving their subjective decison of them, VAR officials giving their subjective take, and with 'clear obvious' being subjective over that too as different people will have different intepretations over just how clear and how obvious different situations are.

Would rather just bin most of it off. Keep offsides particularly as we're going semi automated and perhaps one day fully automated, keep goal line technology and by all means extend it to see if a ball crossed the line for a goal kick or throw in before a cross came in. Keep replays to decide if a foul was in or out of the box but not if it was actually foul. Use it for the rare times a ref might send the wrong player off for mistaken identity. Scrap the rest of it, it's never going to satisfy everyone, and with delays in game on top of still having all these arguments it's not worth it. The same controversial moments would still be there with a challenge system.

 

[Withnail]

A challenge based system just seems likes it can never work satisfactorily to me. If you only have one or two and you don't have access to replays to make a decision in a short space of time it puts a lot of pressure on the manager.

You'll just end up in a situation where you use it at the wrong time, too early, or you'll let something go because you didn't think it was as egregious in real time to save it for later in case there's a stronger shout later on.

I just don't see the logic in it. And besides if they don't reform the system and get rid of the clear and obvious high bar you'll just get all of the same problems we have now. You'll just have less opportunities for the slim chance a bad decision will be overturned.

 

[Malons]

It wouldn't work. A team leading 1-0 in the 86th minute would simply use all their challenges in quick succession, slowing the game down, breaking up momentum for the team pushing for the goal and just make the whole thing farcical.

Not to mention the absurdity of the ref missing an obvious incident, the video ref seeing it and no action being taken because the team who was aggrieved by the incident has no challenges left. If VAR can still intervene in the scenario then it's just the current situation but pointless additional challenges and that would make no sense either.

So whether it's VAR is still used but managers can request additional challenges, or if the challenges are for VAR to relook at decisions they've already made in the game, or whether VAR can only intervene once there's a challenge from a team - then all three are utterly ridiculous in their own, special way.

It's like the 'sin bin' argument. People just randomly pluck things from other sports with no other logic than..."it works in southern league amateur archery..". without actually thinking about the impact it'll have on football. Arguably that's what got us here to begin with. Works in other sports, all we need to consider. VAR turned out a great success with that mindset.

Challenges would just produce a further layer of nonsense to ruin the spectacle of the game.