I am finding weird this 'you need to be a Jedi to have those reflexes'. When I used to play basketball very often I have stolen balls (and other players stolen it from me) with much higher speed than that.
VAR - Not the hero we want, the one we need
- Thread starter Pavl3n
- Start date
Because we're talking about fractions of a second for him to react to the ball passing the defender. His arm was already doing what it was doing because of the jump. Anyway we're going round in circles.
Or maybe because the premier league doesn't have it. It appears they doesn't want it as they think it will reduce variance and make it less entertaining? So English / Sky pundits, Keys, Clattenburg etc are trying to discredit it at every opportunity..
Pressure to introduce it will be huge though as it's use improves as it has done this world cup.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Heard this on the radio today and I for one look forward to it. VAR worked very well at the world cup. Obviously there are a few things that need tweaking but it has the potential to be a game changer.
Things I'd change personally:
1. Have a team of 5 TMO's (uneven number so there is no 50/50s)
2. Have the TMO's make the call after the ref ask for VAR. Saves so much time not having the ref to go off the pitch.
3. Give them a 30-60 second limit to make the call.
4. Card any player who askes for VAR. Send any manager who requests it to the stands. Just cut out the bullshit from the players basically.
The PL should have VAR next season.
How does it make sense to implement it from QF only rather than from the beginning of knock-out rounds?
Strange one. Could open themselves up to criticism if there's a major dodgy decision in the ro16. Not that they'll care that much.
These are key for me. Take the responsibility away from a single referee ie a single point of failure. If 5 fully qualified referees agree on something it's probably correct.
I also think a manager should be allowed a set number of VAR requests per game, say 3.
Im not fan of VAR in its current form but no one outside the officials should have anything to do with VAR, certainly not managers.
I would implement it everywhere as soon as possible but just for offsides only at the start. It's a black and white decision, no controversy, no subjectivity, eliminates those mistakes.
Then in the future find a way to better bring it in for penalties, but something like of the ref has to watch the reviews for more then 2 replays then not to give it as it's too close to call.
Then in the future find a way to better bring it in for penalties, but something like of the ref has to watch the reviews for more then 2 replays then not to give it as it's too close to call.
If VAR decisions are completely in the hands of the ref then nothing changes.
Subconscious bias by the ref (pressure from players, fans etc) may influence not only the decision to not give a foul/pen/offside, but also the decision to defer to VAR. If you put it in his hands alone, then much less changes than a system where ref decides but teams get challenges as well. See the Mitrovic decision during the WC. Held back by two opponents and somehow he suffers a foul. If the ref doesn't give a foul there and then, like Brych did, decides not to go to VAR, then nothing's changed.
Have the video ref then seperate and ref the game in real time, if he sees something he notifies the ref. Giving 3 calls is just gimmicky.
I don't see how introducing VAR only in the later stages of a tournament would make sense.
Also, a challenge system would (or perhaps more accurately should) be pointless. As it was in the WC VAR officials were supposed to check every incident and make reccomendations for reviews accordingly. If they decide something isn't an offence or isn't worth reviewing then they're hardly going to change their mind just because a manager asks them to look at it once more. It's not like they've missed the incident, they've just interpreted it differently.
To my mind the most important change would be for us to get some sort of explanation for the decisions made. It could be something published post-game (like a summary of checks, reviews and calls the VAR team made throughout the game with a quick explanation for each decision) or perhaps more logically simply allowing us to hear the communication between the VAR team and the referee.
If you're going to introduce something like VAR which in theory should have a massive impact on the game then I think it makes sense to educate the audience about the rationale behind the decisions. Otherwise we're left trying to figure out what exactly happened ourselves, which will hardly make it easier for fans to embrace the changes.
Also, a challenge system would (or perhaps more accurately should) be pointless. As it was in the WC VAR officials were supposed to check every incident and make reccomendations for reviews accordingly. If they decide something isn't an offence or isn't worth reviewing then they're hardly going to change their mind just because a manager asks them to look at it once more. It's not like they've missed the incident, they've just interpreted it differently.
To my mind the most important change would be for us to get some sort of explanation for the decisions made. It could be something published post-game (like a summary of checks, reviews and calls the VAR team made throughout the game with a quick explanation for each decision) or perhaps more logically simply allowing us to hear the communication between the VAR team and the referee.
If you're going to introduce something like VAR which in theory should have a massive impact on the game then I think it makes sense to educate the audience about the rationale behind the decisions. Otherwise we're left trying to figure out what exactly happened ourselves, which will hardly make it easier for fans to embrace the changes.
Agree with most of this.
It’s also far too slow at the moment, and whilst it’s frustrating watching at home, it’s even worse if you are at the stadium, you have no clue what’s going on.
Unfortunately showing the incidents on a big screen is a no no, as there would be riots in the stands, as let’s be honest a big % of football fans are brainless morons. There isint even a screen at OT or Anfield.
I didn’t read the earlier comments, so don’t know what tournaments you reference - I suppose only having VAR in the latter stages saves money. Also if it’s the likes of the league cup or FA Cup, when you have a lower league team, it may be difficult/ impossible at their ground.
I was just referring to the tweet above saying that UEFA are considering introducing VAR for the quarter-finals on in the Champions League.
I would have thought that pretty much any team who makes it to the group stages of the CL would be able to host VAR? Maybe I'm wrong though.
It makes sense not to start it from the first rounds. There is just too many matches in the first rounds of the CL and not everybody of the referees are used to VAR.
We have a similar regulation in the German Cup where VAR is not used in the first rounds.
We have a similar regulation in the German Cup where VAR is not used in the first rounds.
What ref's hear during VAR.
Crazy how chaotic it all sounds. I'd always imagined it would be a couple of guys giving calm advice from the background.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Crazy how chaotic it all sounds. I'd always imagined it would be a couple of guys giving calm advice from the background.
That is surrealWhat ref's hear during VAR.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Crazy how chaotic it all sounds. I'd always imagined it would be a couple of guys giving calm advice from the background.
It would be great to have that played after every game where there's a contentious decision. It would get us halfway there to have the referees answer their decisions.
What’s going on there!? I watched it twice and can make out the ref clearly at the end and hear young asking a question but that’s all.
Who the hell is DOGSO?
Who’s shouting oh no, not now?
And did the ref say “miss me Paul”?
It’s sounds so hectic
Who the hell is DOGSO?
Who’s shouting oh no, not now?
And did the ref say “miss me Paul”?
It’s sounds so hectic
DOGSO = Denial of Goal Scoring Opportunity
I don't see why the challenge system shouldn't be implemented. This ridiculous notion that the manager and players can't ask anything of the referee seems to apply to football and England only.
Ah ok, that makes more sense, I've seen it bracket that in the video now too on another watch.
So the Chelsea players words are yellow, ref white. So someone on chelseas team is shouting dogso before there is even a hint of any contact in the box and that's why the ref is replying "not now, not now"
They're probably running along side or just behind already hounding the ref for a call.
Less chaotic now I'm making more sense of who is shouting what.
Edit: then again, is it the linesman worded in yellow? If so that's chaotic as hell again and theres no need for him to be shouting that while the ref is running and watching play.
It's mostly just the referee speaking to the players, VAR barely feature. Still pretty damn hectic though.
It would be immensely irritating to have the players harping at you in the middle of all that.
It would be immensely irritating to have the players harping at you in the middle of all that.
It's actually the linesman in yellow - he's shouting DOGSO to make sure Oliver is aware that there is no covering defender - especially as Oliver was well up the pitch during the buildup of the incident. Pink is the VAR official.
Yea thanks I’ve made that much out now. Still, I don’t think there’s any need for the linesman to be shouting that, players were nowhere near each other at that time, seems Oliver didn’t want him shouting at that time either
There is for the fact the ref can only watch the two players in case of a foul and the linesman is watching the surroundings. I think he's shouting it so the ref knows whats at stake and how the decision should play. Had a red been given that'd be on the linesman and not ref. All in all I thought it played out quite well, ref was correct and VAR backed that up.
I see what you’re saying but I just can’t see why the lino couldn’t tell the ref that after the ref blew his whistle IF there was a foul. Like you said the ref was watching the two players, and that’s all he needed to know and see at the time.
nothing major anyway, I just found it strange. I agree it was handled well other than that, not much to go wrong there anyway though
I think it's quite common for officials to be speaking as a prospect of DOGSO (for example) develops - that way, they are essentially making the decision as the play develops rather than a foul happening and them suddenly having to try and take a snapshot of the incident to see if there was a covering defender for instance.
Some audio was released 5 or so years ago of Howard Webb refereeing a match in Europe with an Additional Assistant Referee and it was surprising how much the officials talked to each other - as a cross came in for instance Webb would say to his Additional Assistant something like 'You take the far post, I've got the near'.
I guess it helps them to improve their decision making and teamwork by communicating so readily, and plus it must be quite a lonely job!
Some might say it's chaotic but I think that's to be expected when you've got people running at pace and there's thousands of people at the stadium plus players/managers/fans shouting at you. I was actually impressed with how in control Oliver seemed of the situation - he immediately made the correct decision that it was a foul but only a yellow card and articulated that to the players calmly and clearly.
I remember Maritn Keown on the BBC on the day asking why it wasn't a red card - releasing audio such as this would certainly help to clarify the situation (or of course the pundits could just learn the laws!)
Some audio was released 5 or so years ago of Howard Webb refereeing a match in Europe with an Additional Assistant Referee and it was surprising how much the officials talked to each other - as a cross came in for instance Webb would say to his Additional Assistant something like 'You take the far post, I've got the near'.
I guess it helps them to improve their decision making and teamwork by communicating so readily, and plus it must be quite a lonely job!
Some might say it's chaotic but I think that's to be expected when you've got people running at pace and there's thousands of people at the stadium plus players/managers/fans shouting at you. I was actually impressed with how in control Oliver seemed of the situation - he immediately made the correct decision that it was a foul but only a yellow card and articulated that to the players calmly and clearly.
I remember Maritn Keown on the BBC on the day asking why it wasn't a red card - releasing audio such as this would certainly help to clarify the situation (or of course the pundits could just learn the laws!)
http://www.skysports.com/football/n...would-top-premier-league-if-var-had-been-used
Interesting from Skysports... well not really but pretty obvious for anyone who watched the Wolves City game but was VAR in the league City would be top.
Interesting from Skysports... well not really but pretty obvious for anyone who watched the Wolves City game but was VAR in the league City would be top.
It is not actual use of VAR though but more trials is a good thing. It looks a bit reactive and panicky. We can all thank Moss & friends i guess...
Let's hope City and Arsenal get goals chalked off.
VAR made games much more tense for me & entertaining rather than breaking the flow of games. If a limit was given it would be great
City scored against Wolves after Sterling diving so, no they wouldn't. Again, Silva kick himself so it's not a penalty. 1:1 was most realistic result.
Eh.. you have no clue how VAR works do you. It wouldn't be used on the Sterling free so yes, that's a goal. The Wolves goal would be completely ruled out too. The Silva pen was not given and I agreed at the time but its shown clearly on the replay that despite him messing up he's clearly fouled before the ball goes dead.
The decisions in that game have been analysed to death, the general consensus is no goal for Wolves, goal for City and a pen.
Two days in a row teams are punished by poor decisions that would have easily been spotted by VAR.
I just don't get it. Every other big league has it implemented. The Premier League are fecking idiots. Yes, VAR isn't perfect. But if it even wipes out 90% of the weekly mistakes and idiocy of the PL officials, it's worth it.
Hopefully we have it next season, can't carry on in the dark ages for much longer. Never thought I'd be pleading for VAR either, but here we are.
VAR would have seen Ramos sent off and Sterling's 'penalty' chalked off in the Champions League this week as well. Those two blunders were what VAR was brought in to solve.
In the Champions League we have to wait until the quarter final stage for clearly incorrect decisions to be corrected.
In the Champions League we have to wait until the quarter final stage for clearly incorrect decisions to be corrected.