The Bundesliga and Serie A already use it I think? Has the World Cup for 2018 definitively said they are using it?

I'm massively in favour of this system, but there are still plenty of issues around it that I think could be hugely improved on.

- The length of time taken to come to a definite decision. This needs to be as quick as possible. Whether that involves the VAR himself making the decision (which will probably never happen), a screen in the stadium showing the replay would speed things up hugely (again the football authorities probably don't want this to ever happen as the fans will get too excited lets say ).  I'm not a fan at all of the small screen on the side of the pitch, I've seen them do that in a Serie A game a couple of months ago as well. It seems to takes too long to sort it out this way.

- What exactly falls under the remit of the VAR. If there's a foul on the pitch that is a clear red, but the ref on the pitch only issues a yellow or misses it altogether, is the VAR allowed step in? 

- the offside scenario is a massive plus here. It needs to be more of a black and white scenario in the rules around offsides. At least this will help as to see a replay allows better interpretation of interference etc and also obviously the clear offside line itself.

- the challenges scenario. Should managers have a certain amount of challenges in a game? Not too sure about that one myself, if a team is getting shafted by an incompetent ref 10 times in a game should they only be only to challenge him 3 times or something?

Massively in favour of this myself. Really hope it becomes common place at all top levels of the game. Really hope they smooth it out in time as well though and fans barely notice it most of the time. 

Why Denis! Why   

Imo, there is no real reason to be against VAR. Blatters auld nonsense about everyone wanting to talk about referees and decisions that went against/for your team was exactly that, nonsense. People want to talk about football, not referees. 

 

I don't think teams should get more than 1 referral, max 1 per half, and not for it to be carried over to 2nd half if not used. mistakes are made by not only officials, but by players too, so to put such severe pressure on refs to get every decision correct isn't going to work. there is no way to eradicate mistakes completely, and to add multiple stoppages to the game will turn it into NFL.

limiting the amount of referrals a team gets gives it more value and therefore keep the use of the referral to meaningful times.

 

other sports - cricket, rugby, tennis, field hockey. all of these have working solutions to VAR which could be adapted in some sort of way. I think the two most likely to help is rugby and field hockey. both of these sports use an additional video ref. unfortunately, in rugby, it is used excessively (refs can't make big decisions by themselves anymore). field hockey, it seems to be used infrequently and only at major tournaments, but each team either gets 1 referral per match/half. if decision is upheld, referral is lost, but referral is kept if decision was wrong

 

Breaking news, this is already in place. 

For example on Saturday - Craig Pawson was the on-field referee, Andre Marriner was the VAR ref. And the pair of em still f**ked it up.

 

It should be restricted to penalty decisions, and disallowed goals, with maybe the potential to extend it to bad tackles that aren't properly punished. If the situation is black or white, it should be resolved within seconds. The only delay should be on decisions falling into the grey area. In this case there is a stoppage in play, the ref goes to the sideline to review and communicate with the VAR and then their decision is relayed on the big screen.

 

Players and goalkeepers will have to be instructed to play until the ball goes dead even when the offside flag goes up though.  

On Alihaus points about referrals etc. and other sports use. I think there's a lot in rugbys way of using it now that is good. There is regular chat back and forth between VAR and on field which helps imo. The long wait for definitive decisions in rugby around tries etc, is embarrassing though and half the time seems to be done almost for the fans, so the excitement builds for the fans on the big screen in stadiums.

One of the big ones for me is, will linesmen now be told to err on the side of caution and not put the flag up unless 100 percent certain a player is offside. This should be the case as obviously once the whistle goes when the flag goes up, there's no way of getting that chance back. That seems small, but they are huge interpretations of the system in the grand scheme of things.

I think if you are going to go to the trouble of doing that, you might as well include plenty of other decisions. Issues around red cards, offsides, penalties etc. It's just a case of not stopping for 3-4 minutes every time that the decision has to be made.

That aimed at me  Did I not say exactly what you said in your post? As in they got the decisions right, but the delays were comical. This forum is mental 

You don't need VAR for that, Stevie Wonder would of been able to make them decisions for himself.

But the problem with so many of these decisions  is interpretation. For example, I don't think that the penalty decision was correct in the Liverpool game and it seems opinions are divided, even just on here.

While I agree with there being interpretation involved in refereeing, most stuff is black and white imo. If VAR was involved in City Cardiff and dangerous play was within it's remit, there are hardly any refs who don't give a red for the foul on Sane. It's a blatant red and if things like that can be punished more you'll see less of them in the game. I don't think just because interpretation of the rules is involved in making such decisions, that a VAR system won't help.

But I think that would come under the remit of what I previously mentioned. A fourth official with a monitor spots a blatant red-card, the referee doesn't. A simple word in his ear solves everything. In this instance there wouldn't even be a stoppage of play, just a simple change in card colour and the matter is resolved.

 

unfortunately, I was in the French alps making use of the snow conditions on Saturday, and not watching the west brom cup! but if that's the case, then it comes down to interpretation. two lads might have different opinions at the time and so can lead to delays. however, if the onus is on the video ref only, it should be quicker

 

no way would that work!! would cause far more issues such as video ref having a bet on a red card to happen etc.

 

Hardly a sham or pointless

Sure stick him in Siberia then! He does bugger all in the stands! It is the same thing, once the two can communicate.

What's stopping the main referee having a bet on same?

So just have a spare official in attendance, put the fourth official in an ivory tower and the job is a good 'un.

 

Yeah true. I think there's more to it than that. They have to check substitutes coming on in case one of them forgets he's packin when entering the field of play 

True, very rarely happens though. That was originally why they were there wasn't it, without all the other bits added to their remit. Now their main role seems to be to smile at high profile managers as they take abuse after abuse on the touchline from managers.

 

same reason a player not two footing and getting a red...your argument is weak. the fact that players and referees have to make split second decisions. a video ref watching replays on a monitor has much more time on his hands to overhaul the original decision

And his decision will be scrutinised far more. If we are basing the whole thing on the argument that you might get the odd dodgy official then there really isn't much debate.

Regarding the fourth official,  I merely suggested him as he has a monitor and, when the ball is in play at least, is merely watching the game. It doesn't matter if it is a fourth official or he is called the ultimate umpire, all you need is a way for him to communicate to the referee and rectify blatant errors. At the moment VAR is being terribly managed  and affecting the spectacle.

Just seen it. There's no way you can give a penalty for that. I think there are huge issues around handball decisions in football. I actually think its the worst area in terms of refereeing decisions in football. They definitely just make it up as they go along.

 

 

seriously?? you've had some clanger comments, this one being another. letter of the law is stated yes, but each persons interpretation of the laws is different and that's what refereeing decisions comes down to.

for instance, west brom peno vs arsenal in the last couple of mins around new years. given as handball against calum chambers, which 99/100 just isn't given.

You are contradicting yourself.

 

The Law (12) does NOT say that handball is handball, it must be DELIBERATE to warrant action being taken by the referee.

 

That doesn't even make any sense you thick f**k

As a defender, you have no other choice to do this to avoid giving away a free or a penalty. "Conning the ref" 

How do you feel about this VAR decision?

Was in work, but was following it on twitter, and I saw the incident. Apparently it was given as offside, but if anything it looks as though Alex Sandro was fouled

Another step in the corporate sanitisation of football and it will end up massively disrupting every game it's used in.

It will still be used for the league and FA cup.

 

I think that's the right decision. It needs more investment and proper testing before rolling it out.

 

It will be interesting to see how it goes at the world cup. You'd hope FIFA are using the best technology available.

The clubs should have no vote imo on it. This is a tool for referees, so that the right decision is given. So it should be their call as to whether it is used or not. 

FIFA say VAR has a 98.9% rate for getting the right decision, and therefore it is now approved by the IFAB. So it works, and the other major leagues are prepared to go with it for next season. The EPL have decided that they want a safe haven for cheats, divers, and refereeing errors to thrive, when they finally got the chance to stamp it out for good.

What? Of course they should have a say, they're the ones involved in the matches, the ones providing the entertainment, the ones who it effects the most. An utterly bizarre and ludicrous thing to say. 

Instead, diving will still win penalties and get players sent off, handballs will go unpunished, teams will get goals they shouldn't and vice versa, and referees will still be held responsible for why teams don't get the results they want. So it should be up to referees when VAR is implemented. 

What I’ve seen on TV looks crap.

If you watch the 100m final they can tell you exactly who crossed the line 1st, 2nd, 3rd etc and it’s all very clear in 3D.

What I’ve seen on TV with the football is funny lines across a pitch that are unclear and from one angle only.

I’ve seen offside decisions being made and people are still unclear afterwards.

With the rugby you can see the replay from different angles.

Maybe all this is available but they don’t show it on TV.

Thought this particular post would be worth a bump after hearing about this farce in Germany last night:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/43791511" rel="nofollow - http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/43791511

 

As you say, nothing wrong with the technology being used - the problem atm is how it's being used.  The world cup could be some craic at this rate.

 

I'd imagine others would have let it stand.

 

The video ref should be viewing it on his screen, making the call and communicating the decision through an earpiece to the referee on the pitch, like they do in the rugby.

 

It all seems very inconsistent and made up as it goes along, so far.

 

 

Which one!?!

Even as somebody with WHU sympathies, all three goals were rightly chalked off.

Arnautovic coming back from offside and letting the ball go through his legs.

He actually tried to flick it.

He was blocking the keepers view who would have saved the shot as it wasn't that hard but was put off by Arnautovic's attempted deflection.

I actually think that was the best decision of the lot, as there is a degree of interpretation which is created with the "interfering with play" concept, and goals like that have been given.

If a penalty should be given, it will be given, thus rendering the rest of the move useless. 

This is the future of officiating, where the right decision is always made, not sometimes made, as is currently the case. Even on the 50-50 calls, a valid case can usually be made for why the VAR came to it's final decision. 

There will be a time at this WC when a VAR will be needed to send a team through and knock a team out. So if it takes 5 minutes to reach the correct decision, so be it.

I don't know if it's just me, but I've noticed that diving has been effectively wiped out when watching VAR games. And that can only benefit football.

 

 

well, if you get the referral correct, then you keep your original one to use again. 3 per team, if all used, could potentially add an extra 30 mins to a game (exaggerating it saying 5 min per referral, but it's happened regularly)!

Not convinced that if you gave managers or team captain say, that ability, that it wouldn't be used cynically to say, disrupt a game if a team is mounting a comeback in injury time etc.

The current process is awful. Technology is obviously there but its implementation so far smacks of wanting it to fail.

The ref stopped the game about 30 seconds after he initially turned down the Russians penalty appeal. The opposition had barely crossed the halfway line. VAR said it was not a penalty, so the game restarted with a drop ball.

The referral idea sounds great. Unfortunately it won't be used in the spirit intended, but used as a dark arts tactic, often near the end of games. By waiting all that time to use it, it will mean earlier decisions will be wrong, which defeats the purpose of VAR. 

This is for the benefit of officials, to ensure that the laws of the game are correctly applied, and that there is fair play. Players and teams try to influence and intimidate referees enough as it is, without using VAR to do it as well.

 

I thought it should be like the red flag in NFL. Say a manager has 3 a match. If he challenges and it is wrong then he loses a sub, if it's right he just uses up one challenge? Makes it more likely that the manager goes with the refs decision if he is unsure too?

At the end of the day football is entertainment for the fans.

The decisions need to be made within 2 mins imo.

Anything around 5 mins is way to long.

Hopefully diving is wiped out but it’s still happening with VAR.

I’d have no problem with a red card for a deliberate dive.

We still talk about Paris 09, Brussels 81, Sofia 77, to mention three of many injustices we've endured down the years. That's just our team, let alone the rest. VAR Is designed to put a stop to all that. Better to wait a bit of time to get the right decision, than be still talking about the (consequences of the) wrong one decades later.

 

Agreed, it doesn't take that long for people watching on tv to find out if it was the correct decision or not so the same should apply to the officials.

 

 

you can say that, but that's a waste of a referral in order to relieve pressure for a couple of minutes. considering the fact that VAR will only be used around goal scoring opportunities/incidents, then I can't see how it can be used cynically, especially if a team is in a backs-against-the-wall situation and protecting a lead or holding on for a draw

 

 

also, if you have 3 referrals per team, then yes, it gives the potential to use tactically. but one referral per team removes that aspect

 

Have it like rugby's VAR, not tennis.

 

 

At the WC, decisions are taking nearer to 2 minutes than 5. Some of them are resolved in less than a minute, from the review called to the decision given, including the ref going to watch it. Fans and broadcasters in the stadiums know what's happening. While diving is practically non existent. 

All the earlier criticisms have been addressed, but we can't have it in the EPL or EC next season though. It takes longer to take goalkicks ffs. 

Where it is though there seems to be a serious reluctance to book anyone. Victor Moses got away with about 4 and hes just one of many examples.

The standard of reffing has been on a whole quite high and easy to see why no premiership ref got the gig. Imagine Mike Dean on the world stage with VAR. He'd be in his element