Video Review set to be introduced in MLS competition beginning August 5 MLSsoccer Get ready for VR coming August 5th. Drew Fisher should have been red cared by himself last night MLS to implement Video Review league-wide beginning Aug. 5: https://t.co/aznLbnNM5F pic.twitter.com/xTXDEKj92c— Major League Soccer (@MLS) July 20, 2017
Great. Now I have to figure out where the review booth is at Children's Mercy Park so I can flip it off when they rule against SKC. I miss the old days where the guy screen got us was on the field in front of us.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/20/sports/soccer/mls-replay-video-assistant-referee-var.html Made it sound like the CR has the option of either just taking the VARs advice or looking at it for himself. Certainly the latter must be slower.
I am all for trying this out but completely against the CR stopping the game to go over and look at the monitor NFL style. That is going to seriously slow the game game. I think the only way it can work and not seriously damage the flow of the game is the CR just taking what the VAR says as final. I am very worried about the amount of time this is going to take.
Yeah, they say it has averaged 1m13s. That's a lot of time (originally, it was advertised as taking only 40s, a more reasonable time period not that much longer than the original stoppage would have been), and they really need to work to get it down. The Confed Cup already showed us that nobody's going to like that moment when a ball goes in the goal and we have to hang in limbo for 1:13 before we find out if we can celebrate.
I'm sure that there were people in the 60's that said the same thing when they first started allowing substitutions. I'm also pretty sure that VAR will be the least of your complaints if the IFAB implement some of the changes to the game they are discussing.
I see why people say that but don't we already have cases such as this already? The NYCFC/TFC game other night had a goal scored by TFC at 48:55 that ended up being ruled no goal at 50:03, that is 1:08 total. When it happens now we don't say "the ref just needs to let this go and get on with the game", we praise them for making sure that the decision was as correct as they could make it. The VAR process is effectively the same as the process we have now except that the CR can actually see what happened in slow motion instead of having to rely on someone who may have had a better angle but still saw the event happen at full speed.
Sure but right now it happens like that once every 10 games. With VAR it could happen every goal. Massive difference and if you can't see that then I am sorry.
So your argument is "hey people complain about nothing in the past so we should just let them slow the game down more and more and more"? Also that pdf you linked to reads like it is written by a 10 year old. Very poor document.
90% of the goals (rough estimate, no stats behind it) are still going to be clearly goal or no-goal. Lets not pretend that your basic clearly onside through ball that is scored is suddenly going to cause a 75 second delay while everyone confirms its a goal.
No stats behind mine either but I will guess it is going to be less than 90%. I guess we will see. I hope you are right.
I'm just waiting for the first time they completely botch it ala Mexico-New Zealand at the Confed Cup.
The thing I am personally frustrated in is it is much more focused on disallowing goals. I feel legitimate goals get disallowed more often than illegitimate goals get allowed. It seems like var is likely going to end up resulting in even less goals.
If the decision is the correct decision I don't see the issue in terms of being concerned about the number of goals scored. If you don't like other aspects around VAR, fine. But if you are bitching about there being less goals scored because VAR is getting things correct.... Not sure what to tell you. Unless you are concerned about plays being called dead incorrectly which prevents a scoring chance... Let's hope referees hold their whistle a little longer I guess.
Bitching is a bit strong. Your points are valid. I was mainly saying I was hoping var would equally allow incorrectly disallowed goals as much as the other way around but it doesn't sound like it will. It appears to mainly focused on correcting goals allowed that shouldn't have been. I was hoping it would equal out. From my years of watching soccer I feel more often goals get disallowed when they shouldn't have than the other way around. No stats to back that up.
I think it's a good point. Referees have been trained for years to keep the flag down on the closest on/offside decisions because it's impossible for a human eye to be sure. This resulted in more goals being scored, many of which would theoretically be disallowed via VAR if they were actually inches offside. The Law is black and white, but our vision isn't so it really is a significant change of philosophy.
I just hope we don't see goals called back for an offside of 6mm or whatever. This was never the spirit of that rule. The Confed Cup showed us how to mess it up.
Let's start the debate and post examples as the weeks go on My glass is half-empty - VAR is it will take away goals as goals can be stricken but they cannot be added - A goal is scored after a referee erroneously whistles can't be reviewed - Referees and linesmen may delay calls and wait for the replay instead - Celebrations will be muted as players wait for the VAR - Players may restart play immediately after a doubtful call to discourage the ref from reviewing it - Local broadcasts of MLS games will probably have fewer angles than nationally broadcast games - If a player is given a second red card for dissent it can't be reviewed, even if the first card was issued in error - After a goal defenders may crowd referees encouraging them to go back 2 or 3 minutes to an earlier incident Thanks to Soccer America for putting these issues into my head, along with some more positive ones