VAR in Review

Makklie (NED) was the referee. De Sousa (POR) was VAR. Both will likely be at WC18 Russia as VARs. Clattenburg has taken to simply importing foreign referees for all big matches. In fact, the fourth official is Al-Mirdasi, who is Saudi Arabia's representative for the WC himself.

The decision itself appears to be correct. Seems almost certain the entire ball had to be over the line at the point the defender made contact with it.

 

True on all counts. My understanding is that Clattenburg has increased the frequency to the point that Collina had to tell Clattenburg to give Al-Mirdasi some matches. I think Clattenburg got close to or at the point where there were no Saudi referees working first division matches.

 

Premier League officially voted to not have VAR next season. It joins the Champions League which will not use VARistas.

Bundesliga, La Liga, and Serie A will have it (or continue to have it) for next season.

 

VC against the ref is a big deal. I can see why a ref would want to see it himself before going down that route.

 

Not “would want.” “Has to.”

To my knowledge, Australia is the only location that’s operating under the protocol that the VAR can simply tell the CR that he’s missed VC or SFP. Everywhere else—particularly MLS—it’s only for factual decisions (ball out of play, penalty area location, offside position) that the referee can simply accept the VAR’s input. We will see where we end up after the WC, because this is always evolving. But for VC right now the referee has to go look (again, except in Australia).

And I’m sorry, but I look at those 4 minutes and I really ask if our sport is better because of VAR. I don’t see all that as an unqualified success. Yes, the penalty call is correct. But are those the types of misses that have haunted our game? And then I know we are all referees here and we should be firm against any action or aggression directed against us. But once he gives a yellow to #16 (presumably on advice of an AR or the FO) what is the argument to go back, look, and change that to VC? Someone saw it initially and deemed it dissent or disrepute. A bounced ball from 20 yards that causes no damage is ALWAYS VC? I get it. VC is preferred. But we just went from an understandably missed penalty to a PK a yellow and a send off, plus a 4 minute delay. Which option is more attractive to fans?

 

Not so much a fluke, as the protocols allow for this. But definitely change of preference since the initial implementation. PRO is quite clear that any subjective decisions require an OFR. To my knowledge, all countries except Australia are operating under that same principle now. Though I admittedly haven’t paid close enough attention to places like Portugal and South Korea to know if I’m 100% right on this.

 

There were two cautions before the second review. One for dissent and another, to a different player, for the ball. The ball incident was then changed to red. At least that’s how I saw it.

 

Here’s a good real life example of the consequences that the somewhat arbitrary nature of VAR protocols get us:

https://streamable.com/rodu8

This can’t be reviewed because it’s a second caution (not a straight red) and because it’s a DFK, not a penalty.

Now, let’s pretend this was in the penalty area but the referee wrongly thought it wasn’t. At that point, since the VAR would be able to say it was not, in fact, simulation... then the call could be reversed. I actually have no idea how the opposite situation would be handled (i.e., the referee places the IFK in the penalty area but the VAR has proof there was a foul outside the area).

The situation around simulation and the penalty area boundary is complicated. And when 2CTs are involved it’s going to lead to a lot of controversy.

 

It means there was 1736 checks which mostly happen without any interruption. They're the so called "silent checks". It does not mean there were 5 stoppages per game.

 

Pretty much. You can imagine a couple times a game a cross going in and an attacker or two puts their arm up for the "handball ref". VAR takes one look at it, sees it hits the chest and no one knows VAR even looked at it. Even if the VAR was 99% sure it wasn't a PK, they still look at it.

Same goes for a reckless tackle in the midfield. Even if you're 99% sure it was not SFP when watching live, the VAR can still take the 15 seconds while the ref is showing the caution and getting play ready to restart to take one look and confirm that all it as well.

When you take scenarios like that into account, it's pretty easy to get 5 to 8 checks per game without anyone knowing VAR did anything.

It's the silent checks that become more efficient with experience. It's generally why you only catch the ref holding up the game (finger to ear signal) a couple times per match in MLS compared to the five or six times in England. It's the silent checks in my opinion that caused too much of a delay in England during the trial period, which led to much of the backlash.