Video Assistant Referee or V.A.R

[since-1969]

Would have made a difference on Saturday! 

[drfchound]

You are not wrong there.

[since-1969]

Is it meant help referees or root out the bad once  !

[drfchound]

Is it meant help referees or rout out the bad once  !

?

[since-1969]

If refs are getting away with continually making inaccurate discussions VAR should expose them because of its continual use through games .

[DonnyBazR0ver]

I think we'd all agree that refs need help. It make them better referees and take some pressure off them.

[selby]

  It would help enormously if assistant referees,took part in the game and gave decisions other than when the ball goes out of play, like they used to do.
  I am convinced that some top referees tell them to leave the penalty areas to them.

[Highland Rover]

Surely it will be only as good as the camera coverage allows , can't see it reaching the lower leagues for years ( if at all )

[drfchound]

I think we'd all agree that refs need help. It make them better referees and take some pressure off them.

Agreed.
Many of them do need help, especially in the lower divisions.

[since-1969]

Lower leagues are luck to get a decent ref , technology is never coming to the arms pit leagues .

[Donnywolf]

I think we'd all agree that refs need help. It make them better referees and take some pressure off them.

... and (yes I know yawn yawn here I go again) why not have a Ref in each half so they don't have to keep up with fit young Players for 90 + minutes.

They would have a much better (though not a guaranteed) view of things and maybe get more decisions right.

[idler]

Imagine the outcry if you had a great ref in one half and a very poor one in the other.

[DonnyBazR0ver]

"We only get shit refs this end!"

[anne honemous]

It's an upgrade from goal line technology, but it doesn't help the flow of a game at all.

I can't remember which team it was last season that had a penalty appeal turned down, only for the other team to counter attack and score. The referee then used VAR and gave a penalty - two minutes or so after the original incident.

By the time chaos and protests from both sets of players had finished, it was 5 or 6 minutes later.

Not for me.

[ravenrover]

but Woolmer wouldn't have bothered asking for a review, he didn't get get a right decision wrong did he at least in Rochdales eyes

[bigdonnybob]

It was very noticable that, prior to the start of the game on Saturday, in the warm up, one of Rochdales coaching staff had a long and very animated conversation with the referee and his assistants.

[drfchound]

It was very noticable that, prior to the start of the game on Saturday, in the warm up, one of Rochdales coaching staff had a long and very animated conversation with the referee and his assistants.

Maybe asking what he wanted to eat on the coach ride home.

[Bristol Red Rover]

It's an upgrade from goal line technology, but it doesn't help the flow of a game at all.

I can't remember which team it was last season that had a penalty appeal turned down, only for the other team to counter attack and score. The referee then used VAR and gave a penalty - two minutes or so after the original incident.

By the time chaos and protests from both sets of players had finished, it was 5 or 6 minutes later.

Not for me.

It worked well tonight - Chelsea's pen appeal. Play went on for a while afterwards. Then around a mins wait for a decision holding up the corner. VAR neatly backed up the original decision. Stress taken out of the game.

BUT, I'd rather have the controversy hanging. The VAR decision killed that edge of the game for me, too sanitised.

[POD]

It's an upgrade from goal line technology, but it doesn't help the flow of a game at all.

I can't remember which team it was last season that had a penalty appeal turned down, only for the other team to counter attack and score. The referee then used VAR and gave a penalty - two minutes or so after the original incident.

By the time chaos and protests from both sets of players had finished, it was 5 or 6 minutes later.

Not for me.

It worked well tonight - Chelsea's pen appeal. Play went on for a while afterwards. Then around a mins wait for a decision holding up the corner. VAR neatly backed up the original decision. Stress taken out of the game.

BUT, I'd rather have the controversy hanging. The VAR decision killed that edge of the game for me, too sanitised.

The problem for me was waiting for the ball to go out of play in order to allow the VAR system to review the incident.  It took over a minute of Chelsea attacking until they eventually forced a corner.  What would have happened if they had scored in that period?  If the VAR had decided that it should have been a penalty, would the goal have been chalked off and the penalty given.  Would an advantage apply?
Even worse, what if Arsenal had gone up the other end and scored? 
What would have happened if that Arsenal goal had been the last kick of the game.  We could have the farcical situation of an Arsenal 1-0 win turning into a 1-0 defeat. 
All hypothetical I know, but as VAR becomes more common we are going to get these situations where the ball doesn't go out of play for several minutes.  Could we have sendings off rescinded, because play has been brought back for a penalty to be given?
All issues which I think need to be addressed before they happen for real!!

[anne honemous]

It's an upgrade from goal line technology, but it doesn't help the flow of a game at all.

I can't remember which team it was last season that had a penalty appeal turned down, only for the other team to counter attack and score. The referee then used VAR and gave a penalty - two minutes or so after the original incident.

By the time chaos and protests from both sets of players had finished, it was 5 or 6 minutes later.

Not for me.

It worked well tonight - Chelsea's pen appeal. Play went on for a while afterwards. Then around a mins wait for a decision holding up the corner. VAR neatly backed up the original decision. Stress taken out of the game.

BUT, I'd rather have the controversy hanging. The VAR decision killed that edge of the game for me, too sanitised.

The problem for me was waiting for the ball to go out of play in order to allow the VAR system to review the incident.  It took over a minute of Chelsea attacking until they eventually forced a corner.  What would have happened if they had scored in that period?  If the VAR had decided that it should have been a penalty, would the goal have been chalked off and the penalty given.  Would an advantage apply?
Even worse, what if Arsenal had gone up the other end and scored? 
What would have happened if that Arsenal goal had been the last kick of the game.  We could have the farcical situation of an Arsenal 1-0 win turning into a 1-0 defeat. 
All hypothetical I know, but as VAR becomes more common we are going to get these situations where the ball doesn't go out of play for several minutes.  Could we have sendings off rescinded, because play has been brought back for a penalty to be given?
All issues which I think need to be addressed before they happen for real!!

This is what happened in Holland and why it doesn't work.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9Z_dXhrPQU

[Bentley Bullet]

Rugby league eat your heart out!

[DonnyBazR0ver]

It does work. Was it a penalty?

Sure, they may need to look at how they review the decision and the time taken but if justice is served then that's the whole point.

[Superspy]

It does work. Was it a penalty?

Sure, they may need to look at how they review the decision and the time taken but if justice is served then that's the whole point.

Completely agree. For me that's actually an example of it working perfectly. It's a different type of drama in the game of course, but at least the right decision is achieved. What's the most fair result in that kind of situation, Feyenoord having a goal chalked off they should never have been in a position to score, or Vitesse not getting a penalty because refs are blind?

[Mustapha-Dump]

It's an upgrade from goal line technology, but it doesn't help the flow of a game at all.

I can't remember which team it was last season that had a penalty appeal turned down, only for the other team to counter attack and score. The referee then used VAR and gave a penalty - two minutes or so after the original incident.

By the time chaos and protests from both sets of players had finished, it was 5 or 6 minutes later.

Not for me.

It worked well tonight - Chelsea's pen appeal. Play went on for a while afterwards. Then around a mins wait for a decision holding up the corner. VAR neatly backed up the original decision. Stress taken out of the game.

BUT, I'd rather have the controversy hanging. The VAR decision killed that edge of the game for me, too sanitised.

The problem for me was waiting for the ball to go out of play in order to allow the VAR system to review the incident.  It took over a minute of Chelsea attacking until they eventually forced a corner.  What would have happened if they had scored in that period?  If the VAR had decided that it should have been a penalty, would the goal have been chalked off and the penalty given.  Would an advantage apply?
Even worse, what if Arsenal had gone up the other end and scored? 
What would have happened if that Arsenal goal had been the last kick of the game.  We could have the farcical situation of an Arsenal 1-0 win turning into a 1-0 defeat. 
All hypothetical I know, but as VAR becomes more common we are going to get these situations where the ball doesn't go out of play for several minutes.  Could we have sendings off rescinded, because play has been brought back for a penalty to be given?
All issues which I think need to be addressed before they happen for real!!

This is what happened in Holland and why it doesn't work.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9Z_dXhrPQU

Of course it works, it was a penalty, without VAR they would’ve been wrongfully 2-0 down.

[anne honemous]

It's an upgrade from goal line technology, but it doesn't help the flow of a game at all.

I can't remember which team it was last season that had a penalty appeal turned down, only for the other team to counter attack and score. The referee then used VAR and gave a penalty - two minutes or so after the original incident.

By the time chaos and protests from both sets of players had finished, it was 5 or 6 minutes later.

Not for me.

It worked well tonight - Chelsea's pen appeal. Play went on for a while afterwards. Then around a mins wait for a decision holding up the corner. VAR neatly backed up the original decision. Stress taken out of the game.

BUT, I'd rather have the controversy hanging. The VAR decision killed that edge of the game for me, too sanitised.

The problem for me was waiting for the ball to go out of play in order to allow the VAR system to review the incident.  It took over a minute of Chelsea attacking until they eventually forced a corner.  What would have happened if they had scored in that period?  If the VAR had decided that it should have been a penalty, would the goal have been chalked off and the penalty given.  Would an advantage apply?
Even worse, what if Arsenal had gone up the other end and scored? 
What would have happened if that Arsenal goal had been the last kick of the game.  We could have the farcical situation of an Arsenal 1-0 win turning into a 1-0 defeat. 
All hypothetical I know, but as VAR becomes more common we are going to get these situations where the ball doesn't go out of play for several minutes.  Could we have sendings off rescinded, because play has been brought back for a penalty to be given?
All issues which I think need to be addressed before they happen for real!!

This is what happened in Holland and why it doesn't work.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9Z_dXhrPQU

Of course it works, it was a penalty, without VAR they would’ve been wrongfully 2-0 down.

It takes nearly two minutes to reach the decision from the incident happening, then by the time the furore/protests have finished, it's about five minutes before the penalty is actually taken.

Until it's done within 30 seconds or so, it's going to be difficult to take to.

I also think it needs the video referee to come out, after a contentious incident, and explain why he's reached that decision. If not, there's always going to be debate and controversy around decisions and it'll be subjective.

[Bristol Red Rover]

I think if play goes on then in the case of a penalty or goal decision not given then that play going on should count too. Otherwise it should be ref blows whistle to stop play as soon as it's decided to go to VAR, not at the next stoppage of play.

The truth here is that the reviewing is going on during that time before play is stopped, otherwise the pause breaks up the game too much.

[Mustapha-Dump]

If the protests made it 5 minutes until the penalty was taken then that says to me it’ll speed up when people stop moaning about it. For me it doesn’t matter how long it takes as long as the correct decision is reached.

[Bristol Red Rover]

No, the correct decision is to have a game of football not an episode of freakin Judge Judy.

[anne honemous]

I'm skeptical about it and after this year's World Cup, my belief is there'll be as much talk of how VAR slowed down certain games as there'll be about the actual competition itself.

That's obviously assuming the decision making process stays the same and referees still spend 20-30 seconds, if not longer, looking at monitors during games.

What VAR will do, IMO, is eradicate the stonewall decisions which officials get wrong (such as Lampard's 'goal' against Germany, wrong offside decisions or the wrong player getting carded for whatever), but it won't clear up everything.

The decisions which already split opinion anyway - such as was there enough contact for a player to go down under a challenge, will remain subjective - and what happens then if the referee thinks one thing, but the video referee thinks another?

In the long term it's a good thing but at the moment the product seems a million miles away from being fine tuned so it doesn't cause long delays.

[DonnyBazR0ver]

In that example in the vid. The VAR could have been straight on the penalty incident while play was going on. As soon as he sees it was a pen, he tells the ref to stop play and go back to award the penalty. That would be better than waiting for the next natural stoppage.