News: VAR Experiment (video referees 2016-2018)

Discussion in 'Referee' started by feyenoordsoccerfan, May 22, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. sulfur

    sulfur Member+

    Oct 22, 2007
    Ontario, Canada
  2. It's always a wait and see if links internationally work.
     
  3. Thezzaruz

    Thezzaruz Member+

    Jun 20, 2011
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Sweden
    Sometimes you just have to wonder, "why on earth did he put his arm there?" but even so, handling would be an undeserved call there.
     
  4. The ref after the match said the system saved him.
     
  5. lemma

    lemma Member

    Jul 19, 2011
    I make it look like I don't want this to work, which isn't true. I would be happy if it actually did work.

    Note that in this case, a 100% easy reversal took two full minutes from the moment the whistle was blown to the moment the reversal of the decision was announced. This included a moment where the referee had to tell someone to piss off. The reversal mercifully didn't result in any argument - possibly because the team knew they got a fortunate call to begin with.

    In a more contentious scenario, because it was the referee himself doing the re-refereeing, there will be disputes after the review, "automatic caution" or not, as the the culture of the sport is so steeped in disrespect. The world is not an American courtroom TV drama where the perp gets let go on a technicality and everyone just up and respects an independent judiciary.

    This was by far the best-case scenario. Two minutes.

    So I'm not convinced the referee himself re-refereeing on a tablet at the side of the field can ultimately be the end game here. Outsourcing to a re-refereeing booth might be the only way to minimize delay and prevent the inevitable post-review riot.
     
    MassachusettsRef repped this.
  6. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    On top of what @lemma said regarding process, am I alone in believing this reversal isn't as clear-cut, based on what the IFAB has said, as we all probably would like it be?

    The defender raises his arm in a way that shows he's about to deliberately handle the ball by raising said arm toward it in a pretty clear manner. The attacker then executes a dangerous high kick where he fouls that opponent. From the three replays available, I would guess the attacker kicks the ball and his opponent just before the ball and the defender's arm come in contact with each other. But there's no way I would swear to it based on those three replays. The first replay makes it seem like the attacker made contact first, the second one is more debatable and suggests handling could have happened right before a foul, and the third one seems useless because you're looking through the defender's body and can't see the point of contact. All in all, if I had to quantify my certainty, I'd say I'm 60% sure the attacker fouled the defender before the defender handles. But if someone showed me a still frame from another angle that showed the ball contacting the defender's arm before the attacker committed a foul, I would not be shocked. At all.

    I bring this up because of the words in the VAR protocol, which I will post again here: http://static-3eb8.kxcdn.com/documents/216/VAR_Protocol Summary_v1.0.pdf

    The title page says
    And Principle #5 (of 12) says
    They're pretty heavy on the "clearlys," as you can clearly see.

    I think most would agree that a foul on the attacker is the correct call if you're making it the first time you see things, even if you concede it is a close decision. But that's not the standard when using the VAR. The decision needs to be "clearly wrong" and video review has to "clearly show" that it was clearly wrong. Was that standard really met here? There's a big difference between giving referees a second chance to make a judgment decision and giving them the opportunity to correct clear errors. VAR is supposed to do the latter. I think this possibly crosses the line into the former.
     
  7. I can see your point, but the referee was signalled by the VAR he was wrong and because it was a big decision to revoke it, he decided to have a look himself. He later said his initial call was wong and the system saved him.
     
    akindc repped this.
  8. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
  9. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Also just realized we had two very similar in-depth threads on this, which for some reason have been active at different times. I merged them and renamed the thread, so all VAR experiment discussion can go here.
     
    IASocFan repped this.
  10. Thug Mentality

    May 30, 2011
    Schlager and MassachusettsRef repped this.
  11. RefGil

    RefGil Member

    Dec 10, 2010
    So I watched it twice, which meant I got the slow motion back and forth several times. I still don't know what the VAR thinks he saw.
     
  12. Eastshire

    Eastshire Member+

    Apr 13, 2012
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    The defender on the outside accidentally clips the leg of the attacker on the outside (who did not get the ball) causing it to hit his other leg and trip.

    I suppose it fits the definition of a careless foul but it's got to be the softest penalty in the history of the game.
     
  13. RefGil

    RefGil Member

    Dec 10, 2010
    No, it fits the definition of "trifling". It had zero impact on the play, and it didn't rise to the level of misconduct.
     
  14. tomek75

    tomek75 Member+

    Aug 13, 2012
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Actually, I don't think it's a clip on the ankle, I think that he's holding the attacker. Watch it again, I almost missed it. And I agree, it's trifling.
     
  15. RefGil

    RefGil Member

    Dec 10, 2010
    Yuo're referring to the attacker on the left, who has no play on the ball, right? The little arm pull as he's entering the PA? Only if he is prevented from getting to the ball. Which he wasn't.

    Going back to the point of the thread, while it only takes the ref a few seconds to actually review the video and make a decision, the whole process seems to take a long time to change from a perfectly good decision to one that is at least marginal. Is that really what we want?
     
  16. chwmy

    chwmy Member+

    Feb 27, 2010
    I had a super brief conversation with a ref who attended the pro preseason camp in January.

    I was told the general opinion towards VAR was positive. I don't know if they knew Webb was coming, and who knows how it will be implemented, but it is seen as a way to prevent conspicuous, memorable, and embarrassing errors.

    Those type of errors can truly haunt a top ref. If VAR means someone who has devoted their lives to the craft and has reached the pinnacle does not have their career tainted by such a thing, I'm for it. Maybe MLS can avoid the horribly clumsy implementations that we already have so many examples of.
     
    akindc repped this.
  17. chwmy

    chwmy Member+

    Feb 27, 2010
    http://www.foxsports.com/soccer/sto...r-video-replay-for-slapping-a-defender-021917

    Two minutes to upgrade the yellow to red, play had already been stopped.

    I'm a little amazed that the ref has a standard LCD computer monitor and a mouse. It will be impossible to see anything outside in daylight, even under a canopy. A multi monitor setup (one to show which views are available and one to show the enlarged view the ref wants) with shuttle control in a light controlled booth on a standing desk would be less than $1000.

    Another thing that is weird is that we don't even look away from the field when conferring with an AR. Being off the field and not even looking at it at all for a minute or more just seems so wrong.
     
  18. JimEWrld

    JimEWrld Member

    Jun 20, 2012
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Is the MLS doing VAR testing during preseason or was the game just played under college rules? Incident starts at ~4:00 in the video. Hard to gauge timing since it was just a replay but the entire process seemed choppy.

     
  19. akindc

    akindc Member+

    Jun 22, 2006
    Washington, DC
  20. Thezzaruz

    Thezzaruz Member+

    Jun 20, 2011
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Sweden
    #222 Thezzaruz, Mar 29, 2017
    Last edited: Mar 29, 2017
    So they have tried the VAR system in a few European friendlies and France v Spain on Tuesday night was one of them and they had a few incidents. They use a system where the CR doesn't look at any footage but relies on comms with the VAR.

    Link to the BBC article
    Link to youtube highlights (in spanish)

    Both incidents involve offside. First being a goal called off due to both involved strikers being offside, the offence wasn't spotted by the AR but the VAR stepped in. The second was a goal that where the AR flags for offside but the VAR steps in and determines that the attacker was in fact onside (textbook case of 'level' might be more accurate ;)).

    So it seems that offside is definitely re-viewable on goals at least. It worked pretty well in-game but I guess that Deschamps and his players might not have been as sanguine about it if he/they had been on the loosing side of it in a competitive game.

    Edit:
    Thought I might add that the first incident took just about 1 minute from incident to decision, the second one took 40 seconds. Fairly decent I'd say.
     
  21. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    VAR worked well yesterday in Paris. I think this is the first example that shows it's workable and can get to the right result relatively quickly on offside decisions.

    With that said, there are still a few important points to consider:

    1) VAR works well here because you had as many camera angles as you do at a World Cup and you could be nearly 100% certain about the decision. As we've seen in USL and MLS preseason, the level at which that is possible is very, very small. Most domestic leagues won't have the VAR capability available at FIFA events. If the camera is in the wrong place on the Spain goal, there's no way you'd be able to determine the accuracy of this call.

    2) The offside decisions were relatively straightforward once seen on replay, which allowed this to operate relatively quickly. A big question will come when there is some doubt to the call. Will the VAR equate doubt with "call stands" or will they work to get the definitive answer, using up more time? It goes to the underlying question of flow or accuracy being paramount. When you can preserve both, like was done last night, wonderful. When they come in conflict, things become more difficult.

    3) Annulling the French goal was pretty easy, because the offside came from the phase of play immediately prior to the goal. So no worries there. But, to an extent, the referee crew got lucky on allowing the Spanish goal because the referee was slow with the whistle (so lucky he was slow or the referee was smart enough to be slow). By not whistling for the flag until the ball was in the back of the net, the referee allowed the VAR the opportunity to award the goal. In that regard, it was an ideal scenario for this. But it also shows how things could be affected going forward. Take the same situation, but let's say the shot is saved and another player scores the rebound. Or there is a scramble after the shot is saved and it eventually goes out for a corner kick. How long can the referee wait before accepting a doubtful flag, in the hopes of giving the VAR a second shot at the call? Or, how long will it be until ARs keep the flag down (either as a developed habit or due to new instruction) in an effort to cede the call to the VAR? The Spanish goal showed that procedures with offside will have to change pretty dramatically when close to goal if VAR becomes a permanently reality.
     
  22. RedStar91

    RedStar91 Member+

    Sep 7, 2011
    Club:
    FK Crvena Zvezda Beograd
    That was the smoothest I've seen it yet done and is the way, I think, should be done going forward for all decisions.

    The issue I've always had with reviewing offside is how far back do you go in the buildup to a goal to review it. Let's say an attacker comes back to receive the ball from an offsideposition and passes it back to his center back and 40 passes later and a minute later they score.
     

Share This Page