VAR - Not the hero we want, the one we need

[Cloud7]

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.

It just doesn’t. If the goal gets ruled out it gets ruled out, in the same way I would see a goal scored and celebrate only to realize after that the linesman raised the flag. It hasn’t affected me in any way, and none of the people who I normally watch/talk football with have experienced any delayed emotions or uncertainty either. You just go with it, celebrate as if you’re sure it scored, if it gets disallowed then oh well.

Did any fans in Russia have their celebrations delayed? Or did they always celebrate as soon as it scored, regardless of what VAR said after?

 

[Trizy]

VAR in short was a success. The only penalty that was very, very, very harsh was Iran vs Portugal. But that's not VAR's fault, it's ultimately up to the ref.

Just make it faster by not having the ref to review it himself. A panel of 4-5 referees should be able to call it among themselves and quickly at that.

 

[evil_geko]

VAR saved the day with that obvious Perisic handball penalty, the good that VAR brings far outweighs the supposed bad, I really hope it is here to stay.

 

[awop]

As expected VAR was overall a major success in this World Cup, it saved a lot of bad calls at important moments.
Also as expected there was a few iffy calls on which nobody agrees but that should make FIFA rephrase or re-establish the rules in a clearer way.
It's going to be bittersweet to jump back to the Premier League/Champion's League and think "what if" when an obvious error is made
Only one last year without it hopefully...

 

[fallengt]

From this angle it's clear pen. You must have agenda to say the otherwise


The handball rule is a bit vague and it was a fecking World cup final. All Refs should take time to make correct decision and he did.

 

[montpelier]

From this angle it's clear pen. You must have agenda to say the otherwise


The handball rule is a bit vague and it was a fecking World cup final. All Refs should take time to make correct decision and he did.

I've been doing exactly that, tbh. But you could equally say that being conveniently totally convinced it's a penalty & that VAR is therefore completely fantastic is doing exactly the same. By using the camera angle & the slowed-down video clip where it looks most like a penalty for example?

Ref struggles not to give it based on that though, I must admit.

 

[11101]

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.

I get your point that the referee took time to decide but he did make the call in the end, and he's hardly going to rush the decision in the biggest match of his career. Referees are issued guidance on the rules and they have been consistently giving these handball/ball to hand penalties all tournament, so its obviously something that FIFA is telling them to do. Former referees are commenting based on when they were active referees i.e things have clearly changed.

 

[Rafaeldagold]

Never a penalty, still it's not VAR's fault the ref doesn't know the rules of the game

I agree in the sense that everyone said var would be so amazing, yet if you still have incompetent officials like the one today who drastically influenced a game by falling for a dive & giving a penalty which was soft in the extreme, then it doesn’t matter how good var is. Oh and even with var we still got a huge injustice with Griezmanns dive.

But var is at fault as I’m pretty certain the Ref gave that penalty on the basis of slow motion var replays which make the incident look a 1000 time’s worse as that ball was travelling so fast & never should have been a tool in basing an important decision on. Why are refs making decisions on slow motion replays for any decision?
Isn’t it just distorting the events of a game?

 

[Viral United]

It was penalty,
It was corner kick, Perisic had enough time to make sure his hand didn't touch the ball.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

From this angle it's clear pen. You must have agenda to say the otherwise


The handball rule is a bit vague and it was a fecking World cup final. All Refs should take time to make correct decision and he did.

Yeah, that was the angle that convinced me. Definitely handball.

 

[Thunderhead]

From this angle it's clear pen. You must have agenda to say the otherwise


The handball rule is a bit vague and it was a fecking World cup final. All Refs should take time to make correct decision and he did.

for me I think he's expecting the attacker to get the flick on and then it just hits his hand, it's not a clear pen for me

 

[Judas]

I went into the world cup pretty anti-VAR, but its pretty much won me over to the point where it feels like a step backwards that we won't have it in the PL next season. Yes it still had its moments that made me question it, but overall, it did its job.

 

[Mb194dc]

for me I think he's expecting the attacker to get the flick on and then it just hits his hand, it's not a clear pen for me

By the refeees guidelines for handball it's a clear penalty, I think. Referee has to give it.

Var in the world cup worked well for the most part. The best implementation yet I think. For me it still needs more testing and experimentation though at lower levels. It has been rushed in to use and can still be improved.

I hope we'll see it in the league once it's ready. Clearly in England there is a movement against it and the PL don't want to use it.

 

[minoo-utd]

In any case, it corrects a lot of bad decisions. And hopefully the premier league has it sooner, cause lots of bad wrong stupid decisions are made every week.

 

[RW2]

VAR in short was a success. The only penalty that was very, very, very harsh was Iran vs Portugal. But that's not VAR's fault, it's ultimately up to the ref.

Just make it faster by not having the ref to review it himself. A panel of 4-5 referees should be able to call it among themselves and quickly at that.

VAR was introduced into the Bundesliga last season and this was how it worked up to Xmas, and it was far better. If the referee awarded a penalty he then checked in his earpiece with the VAR referees who made the final decision and then conveyed it back to him. No running to the side of the pitch for a TV.

But then it all changed after Xmas to match what went on in the WC with a pitchside TV.

This ends up being completely time wasting as there's three decisions to be made: the decision to go to VAR, the decision to be made by VAR as to whether the referee should award or disallow something and the decision (followed by a long walk over) by the referee.

 

[RW2]

Also about VAR.

The referee, Pitana, went to VAR because the French players demanded it but he didn't go to VAR on France's first goal (where Pogba was offside) because the Croatians never appealed for offside.

Yesterday's match officials screwed up big time.

No way was that a penalty and no way should the first goal have stood.

 

[Zlatan 7]

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.

Being honest here, I’ve had no invested passion in this World Cup bar the odd bet creating some tension and honestly after every goal had gone in, especially from crosses and corners I’ve had the thought in my head ‘is this going to stand’ and I’ve been waiting for the refs whistle to go for a check, admittedly it hasn’t happened often but the thought is still there waiting for it to happen.

If I’m passionately following a team maybe I’d still go bonkers with celebration when a goal goes in, I havnt had to experience it yet with VAR in use (hopefully never will), I just know as a neutral I’m always question whether goal will stand now.

Croatians really felt the blunt end of VAR yesterday unfortunately for them.

 

[Judas]

Also about VAR.

The referee, Pitana, went to VAR because the French players demanded it but he didn't go to VAR on France's first goal (where Pogba was offside) because the Croatians never appealed for offside.

Yesterday's match officials screwed up big time.

No way was that a penalty and no way should the first goal have stood.

Wrong on both things. Both incidents would have been checked, no matter of appealing makes any difference.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

How anyone thinks that’s a handball yesterday just blows my mind. Have any of you ever played football? The lengths that some people will go to just to defend VAR is just baffling, that was a shocking call on the biggest stage of them all and I just don’t see how that is in the spirit of the game.

 

[Mb194dc]

How anyone thinks that’s a handball yesterday just blows my mind. Have any of you ever played football? The lengths that some people will go to just to defend VAR is just baffling, that was a shocking call on the biggest stage of them all and I just don’t see how that is in the spirit of the game.

It's clearly a handball as defined in the laws of the game and by the directions the referees are given to apply them. The only way not to give it is for the referee to ignore the laws of the game and the directions referees are given to apply them for handball. I can see the argument that it's harsh as it's a world cup final and he may not actually see the ball. You could also argue the rules need to be changed to give the referee more leeway. That is a huge can of worms too though.

What surprises me (or not) is the huge amount of criticism of VAR coming from the English media. It seems they've been turned in to the mouthpiece of the premier league which I believe is dead set against it's introduction.

 

[El Zoido]

Also about VAR.

The referee, Pitana, went to VAR because the French players demanded it but he didn't go to VAR on France's first goal (where Pogba was offside) because the Croatians never appealed for offside.

Yesterday's match officials screwed up big time.

No way was that a penalty and no way should the first goal have stood.

The only thing wrong with the first goal was Griezmann diving for the free kick. Ref was conned but it’s not a VAR decision.

Pogba was not offside. Had it gone to VAR, it still would have been given. The error here is that it should have been second checked by VAR, but I believe this one is on the linesman (had he raised his flag, they would have checked it).

For the penalty, the referee did not go to VAR because of the French players protesting, he was instructed in his earpiece by his assistants that there was a decision he needed to look at.

 

[Annihilate Now!]

It's clearly a handball as defined in the laws of the game and by the directions the referees are given to apply them. The only way not to give it is for the referee to ignore the laws of the game and the directions referees are given to apply them for handball. I can see the argument that it's harsh as it's a world cup final and he may not actually see the ball. You could also argue the rules need to be changed to give the referee more leeway. That is a huge can of worms too though.

What surprises me (or not) is the huge amount of criticism of VAR coming from the English media. It seems they've been turned in to the mouthpiece of the premier league which I believe is dead set against it's introduction.

No it isn't,

 

[Momochiru]

It still amazes me how most of the anti-VAR folks keep pointing at certain "wrong" decisions to prove their point that VAR doesn't work. Weather the decision is wrong or right has nothing to do with VAR - it's the referee's interpretation of the rules of the game. VAR only gives the ref the opportunity to review something and make a more informed call. At the end of the day when VAR is involved it is always the "right" decision, because that is how the ref and his team interpret the rules - the fact that you and a bunch of pundits disagree with his decision is a completely different matter. Obviously there are some bad refs, who make bad decisions - VAR or no VAR. There will always be bad decisions in football, VAR is only reducing them, for example if a good ref makes normally 97% right calls, VAR could help him make 98%, if a bad ref makes normally 80% right calls, VAR could help him make 85%. I've been a ref in lower leagues for 16 years and know first had how difficult is to see everything on the pitch when the game is so fast paced, it's practically impossible. There have been hundreds of cases when I wished I had the opportunity to review a situation before making a call. It's something that every referee would fully appreciate.

The only reasonable complaint against VAR is that it slows down the game, but that's something that I'm willing to accept, given the huge benefits and the relatively small delays.

 

[bleedred]

There have been few occasions in bundesliga, when yellows have been turned to red based on slow motion replays, which make the tackle look infinitesimally worse.

Also I think it’s time for a poll on this here, with possibly 3 or 4 options to see where people stand on this. Mods?

 

[Annihilate Now!]

It still amazes me how most of the anti-VAR folks keep pointing at certain "wrong" decisions to prove their point that VAR doesn't work. Weather the decision is wrong or right has nothing to do with VAR - it's the referee's interpretation of the rules of the game. VAR only gives the ref the opportunity to review something and make a more informed call. At the end of the day when VAR is involved it is always the "right" decision, because that is how the ref and his team interpret the rules - the fact that you and a bunch of pundits disagree with his decision is a completely different matter. Obviously there are some bad refs, who make bad decisions - VAR or no VAR. There will always be bad decisions in football, VAR is only reducing them, for example if a good ref makes normally 97% right calls, VAR could help him make 98%, if a bad ref makes normally 80% right calls, VAR could help him make 85%. I've been a ref in lower leagues for 16 years and know first had how difficult is to see everything on the pitch when the game is so fast paced, it's practically impossible. There have been hundreds of cases when I wished I had the opportunity to review a situation before making a call. It's something that every referee would fully appreciate.

The only reasonable complaint against VAR is that it slows down the game, but that's something that I'm willing to accept, given the huge benefits and the relatively small delays.

Thats a bit generous.... I could also level the fact that VAR emphasis slow motion replays (and as we all know, things can look a lot different/worse in slow motion), whether or not the ref on the side of the pitch is getting to watch the best replays/angles (I'm not convinced he is), the fact that you have VAR asking the ref to review incidents when it clearly isn't neccesary, the fact that people like Clattenburg reckon that "when the referee is called over, he thinks he must have missed something so he is more likely to overturn the decision." (which isn't how it should be)...

so yeah, there's a fair few "reasonable" complaints other then just simply slowing down the game.

 

[Momochiru]

Thats a bit generous.... I could also level the fact that VAR emphasis slow motion replays (and as we all know, things can look a lot different/worse in slow motion), whether or not the ref on the side of the pitch is getting to watch the best replays/angles (I'm not convinced he is), the fact that you have VAR asking the ref to review incidents when it clearly isn't neccesary, the fact that people like Clattenburg reckon that "when the referee is called over, he thinks he must have missed something so he is more likely to overturn the decision." (which isn't how it should be)...

so yeah, there's a fair few "reasonable" complaints other then just simply slowing down the game.

I disagree with these points. The claim that something looks worse in slow motion and that's why we shouldn't use slow motion is frankly ridiculous.

Clattenburg's claim is also pretty ridiculous - the ref works together with the whole team of other refs (assistants, 4th officials, VAR) and there are many situations during the game when his team is advising him regarding his decision. Sometimes he will change his derision, sometimes he wouldn't. The main motivation of the ref is to make the right call, so that after the game the media doesn't crucify him for his bad decision. Referee's careers have been ruined by a single bad call in a high profile game, so he will always try to make the right call. Having more time to think, review, discuss with the team and compose himself is only helping him make the right call.

 

[Zlatan 7]

The only thing wrong with the first goal was Griezmann diving for the free kick. Ref was conned but it’s not a VAR decision.

Pogba was not offside. Had it gone to VAR, it still would have been given. The error here is that it should have been second checked by VAR, but I believe this one is on the linesman (had he raised his flag, they would have checked it).

For the penalty, the referee did not go to VAR because of the French players protesting, he was instructed in his earpiece by his assistants that there was a decision he needed to look at.

Well there needs to be clarification with regard to this as I’ve seen people defending VAR in this thread and confidently stating the ref went to the VAR for advice on this one.

So which is it because you can’t both be right?

Edit to add... if you are right, then I also thought they only ear pieced the ref if it was a clear and obvious mistake. Was that handball really a clear mistake from the ref? I don’t think it was and neither did he the amount of times he had to see the replay.

 

[Annihilate Now!]

I disagree with these points. The claim that something looks worse in slow motion and that's why we shouldn't use slow motion is frankly ridiculous.

Clattenburg's claim is also pretty ridiculous - the ref works together with the whole team of other refs (assistants, 4th officials, VAR) and there are many situations during the game when his team is advising him regarding his decision. Sometimes he will change his derision, sometimes he wouldn't. The main motivation of the ref is to make the right call, so that after the game the media doesn't crucify him for his bad decision. Referee's careers have been ruined by a single bad call in a high profile game, so he will always try to make the right call. Having more time to think, review, discuss with the team and compose himself is only helping him make the right call.

That's not what the claim is... the claim is that a lot of things look worse in slow motion (like yesterdays handball) and thus a real-time replay is much more beneficial... which it doesn't seem like the ref was looking at yesterday. Again, this links back to the quality of replay the referee gets to see.

Not sure how you can say a claim by an actual referee, who probably interacts with referee's constantly and would be far more aware of their likely behaviour/mindset, is ridiculous... he probably has a far better understanding of such things then you or I. Plus we've actually seen that the majority of times that the ref has gone to review a decision, he changes his mind - even when its the wrong thing to do.

 

[11101]

Well there needs to be clarification with regard to this as I’ve seen people defending VAR in this thread and confidently stating the ref went to the VAR for advice on this one.

So which is it because you can’t both be right?

Unless FIFA come out and say it none of us will ever know. My assumption is he saw how convinced the French were and as play was stopped asked the VAR guys if there was anything in it. When Giroud first runs over you can see him speaking into his microphone and then there's quite a wait before they respond and say he needs to go and look. If they had initiated it why would there have been such a delay before they told him to go and look for himself?

 

[sullydnl]

To my mind the key point about both the handball and the use of VAR yesterday is that it is entirely consistent with the way other handballs have been treated in tournament.

That suggest that whatever we think about either the decision or the decision making process, this is the way FIFA actually want it applied. Which makes it difficult to criticise either the referees or VAR, I think.

Imo the main problem with VAR in this tournament has been the lack of communication and explanation after these decisions. This was a key decision in a World Cup final, we shouldn't be left trying to puzzle out the logic behind it ourselves.

 

[Momochiru]

That's not what the claim is... the claim is that a lot of things look worse in slow motion (like yesterdays handball) and thus a real-time replay is much more beneficial... which it doesn't seem like the ref was looking at yesterday. Again, this links back to the quality of replay the referee gets to see.

Not sure how you can say a claim by an actual referee, who probably interacts with referee's constantly and would be far more aware of their likely behaviour/mindset, is ridiculous... he probably has a far better understanding of such things then you or I. Plus we've actually seen that the majority of times that the ref has gone to review a decision, he changes his mind - even when its the wrong thing to do.

I'd be surprised if the ref doesn't have access to both slow motion and normal speed replays. If that's not the case, it should be changed. VAR is in it's infancy and many small details like this will get ironed out after a few years.

Regarding Clattenburg - he was and still is a huge attention whore. I wouldn't be surprised if he makes controversial comments like these just to get the spotlight on himself.

 

[LazyRed-Ninja]

Why not give teams two options to use the VAR- like they do in tennis with the hawk eye system? If you get it right, you still have two options, if you get it wrong, you have one less. Or something along those lines.

 

[Zlatan 7]

Unless FIFA come out and say it none of us will ever know. My assumption is he saw how convinced the French were and as play was stopped asked the VAR guys if there was anything in it. When Giroud first runs over you can see him speaking into his microphone and then there's quite a wait before they respond and say he needs to go and look. If they had initiated it why would there have been such a delay before they told him to go and look for himself?

That was my exact take on it too but was told I was wrong.
I was pointing out that it’s obviously going to encourage crowding the ref and they’re already having enough trouble to stop that as it is. It’s basicaly telling the players to crowd the ref because if they don’t the ref will assume he made the correct call and it doesn’t need checking, crowd him and he doubts it, checks it and then the iffiness of him watching certain replays comes into it (that’s another argument) which I think is what happened yesterday regarding a fifty fifty call.

 

[SSSSnake]

I'm all for it. The suspense added to the thrill of the decision being made. Wouldn't be surprised if they include it for the 2019/2020 season.

 

[montpelier]

Sorry, but slow motion replay watching to make a decision still seems to be fairly well involved with the VAR system to me.

 

[do.ob]

Unless FIFA come out and say it none of us will ever know. My assumption is he saw how convinced the French were and as play was stopped asked the VAR guys if there was anything in it. When Giroud first runs over you can see him speaking into his microphone and then there's quite a wait before they respond and say he needs to go and look. If they had initiated it why would there have been such a delay before they told him to go and look for himself?

You understand that VAR reviews in real time and not just after the ref prompts them to? A little delay could be explained by VAR themselves asking for a bit to figure out an incident, because once the play resumes the opportunity for intervention is gone and the original call stands.

 

[adexkola]

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.

It was a bullshit point.

 

[Revan]

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.

It is not every pundit, it is mostly English ones. Which might be because the rule is subject to interpretation (like fouls for example) and different leagues interpret them differently. Usually, Spanish and Latin American countries are a bit more Conservative to it (aka, more prone to give pens). Also, the fact that there have been similar pens awarded in this World Cup makes me believe that FIFA directed refs to give penalties in these circumstances.

 

[Revan]

Not even a Jedi could react that quickly.

Have you ever played basketball?

 

[Rado_N]

Have you ever played basketball?

Yea I used to play for my school.