I don't agree with this from a laws perspective. The DOGSO penalty is a unique scenario that has been talked about, in many circles as being too punitive. But the other guidance on DOGSO has been, if anything, to broaden it by making it clear that the general direction of play had to be toward the goal, not a straight line by the player being fouled. The VAR change was tweaking what had just been introduced the year before--and frankly, it made a lot more sense to say doing it excessively was a caution as opposed to doing it at all. The tweaking of tactical handling might be the best example of a true change, but that was introduced because too many referees were mis-interpretting as meaning that all handling should be cautioned. And it was the 2016 changes that made hand to face preemptively a send-off. None of the core cautions have been removed--they just aren't given consistently.
TheRefOnline posted a snippet of an interview with Ricci post-retirement where he made some comments on the use of VAR here: https://theref.online/tim-vickery-riccis-retirement-is-refereeing-loss-but-debates-gain We see this play out on a regular basis in MLS, and even recently in Turkey with Cakir, never mind other places. I find absolutely none of this surprising in the slightest, and I think that this is something that we all overlook when we're discussing VAR stuff. As couch-VARs, we have the easy ability to look at an incident and make a (fairly quick) determination as to what the result SHOULD be. Just like when we're doing videotests in courses, tests, etc. We are a degree removed from being in the actual heat of the moment, and thus it becomes easier. We all know that when we're the referee in the middle of the field (or on a line, or as 4O, etc), making those final decisions isn't nearly as easy as doing it in the classroom. VAR is (not shockingly) just the same.
Sounds a lot like my brain when I'm 4O in a playoff game and the ref runs over and asks "What did you see?"
VAR possibly starting for Liga MX this fall: “En las jornadas 13 y 14 estará el VAR en todos los estadios, previo permiso de FIFA”: Arturo Brizio— Federación Mexicana de Fútbol (@FMF) August 20, 2018 Watching Liga MX may get very interesting. There's already an inordinate amount of time-wasting, gamesmanship, etc. in these games accompanying nearly any free kick.
VAR in use in the Eredivisie now for 7 matches and it's astonishing the players are so dumb to keep on committing fouls that would be unnoticed in the pre VAR times but now gets you a penalty for sure.
Couple incidents from France from the past weekend. The threshold for "clearly wrong" on SFP and VC seems to be lower in Ligue 1 than a lot of other places (with MLS re: VC possibly being an exception). https://streamable.com/n88ek https://streamable.com/a0siw
Wow, that first one looks like he called the foul, but went to review before making any decision on the color of the card.
Wow! Highlight package includes editing! This didn't happen. It's obvious this didn't happen. A review isn't initiated until 32:46. The foul was whistled at 31:22. You presume a referee waited 83 seconds to make a decision, ignoring the LOTG and all VAR protocols. I don't understand such a reaction. In case common sense wasn't enough to figure a yellow was initially shown by the referee but not included in the highlight, the commentator literally says "the decision has been changed" when the red card is shown.
I think there's a chance the IPC might overturn the VC swing. I would hope not, but there's a chance. No chance the SFP card gets overturned. I mean, it's a good or at least defensible red card in the pre-VAR days, regardless of the competition. He's straight leg, goes over the ball, and makes more than negligible contact. The real question is how VAR handles these in MLS if they're missed. I think there's little chance the SFP gets sent down and, if it is sent down, an even smaller chance it's acted upon with a red. Over the past few weeks--especially since the Marshall overturned card--we've seen the bar go higher for SFP via VAR. PRO has been stressing that the bar for SFP intervention is higher than VC intervention (and that makes sense). I think a VAR or CR in MLS would be likely to reason the level of force at the point of contact isn't high enough to determine it clearly wrong only to show a yellow. This would be one of those cases where maybe a red is preferred in a classroom setting, but not mandatory. So a yellow is deemed acceptable via VAR. One of the ironies of the VAR era is that after maybe 15 years of trying to establish more rigid black/white standards, the "clearly wrong" principle has actually opened up a much wider interpretation and application of the Laws on potential SFP tackles. On the VC swing, I'd be very curious to see what PRO thought. It's a deliberate swing, off-the-ball, directed at an opponent and it makes contact in the chest. A few years ago, this was a no-questions asked red card at all levels. It seems like in recent years, we're seeing more referees at the top work to justify yellow cards if the contact is not at or toward the head in situations like this. Again, this is ironic (though unrelated to VAR) because the instructions about contact to the head were meant to tie referee's hands in such situations, though not intended to suddenly lower the threshold for non-head contact. Anyway... if this only gets a yellow on the field, I think there's a chance an MLS VAR doesn't send this down (if it was missed altogether, that would be a different story). But I'm genuinely not sure.
KNVB has released a video of Kuipers and Makkelie on an SFP VAR intervention in an Ajax-Feyenoord game last week. For those that haven't been involved with VAR or heard some of the audio before, it's an interesting little window into how things work--even if it's all in Dutch. Of course, KNVB is releasing this because it's the absolute height of efficiency from two of the best (at refereeing and VARing) in the world. The inefficient cases can be much more interesting to listen to!
In this clip the discussion about a yellow card by VAR and ref, many saw as a red card. ARAG KNVB VAR moment: Terechte gele kaart voor Kali? | KNVB https://www.knvb.nl/nieuws/.../arag-knvb-var-moment-terechte-gele-kaart-voor-kali 6 nov. 2018 - Maar wat gebeurt er precies als de VAR daadwerkelijk in actie komt en wat zijn de ... Heraclied Kristoffer Peterson, waardoor de discussie ontstond of de overtreding niet ... ARAG KNVB VAR Moment: Gele kaart Anouar Kali.
UEFA refs training in KNVB centre: https://www.knvb.nl/nieuws/themas/a...-uefa-scheidsrechters-knvb-arag-replay-center
Premier league adopting VAR: https://bleacherreport.com/articles...ed-for-start-of-2019-20-premier-league-season
And UEFA looking to add to Champions League. . . https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/fo...hampions-league-knockout-stages-a3993686.html
French Ligue 1 example of an OFR turning a red card into a yellow card. Call me crazy, but I don't think this is what VAR is for. The red carded player accepted the decision and there were no protests. Using video to say "well, the violence wasn't quite as bad as I thought it was, so here's a yellow" doe not seem like the most sensible path: https://streamable.com/4i6b6
Perhaps the R initially went red because he thought the initial hand was to the face and went yellow because that was not correct?
I think that's exactly what happened. I would argue that if someone swings forcefully at an opponent in retaliation and "only" hits them just below the face, it's not clearly wrong to show a red card. Actually, I wouldn't argue that--I'm sure of it. My point here is that if we start getting into the frame by frame stuff like this, we are re-refereeing the match instead of simply correcting obvious mistakes.
Agree entirely with what you are saying regarding VAR. But I don't understand the basis of the decision. The swing itself warrants a red card even if it made no contact.
Seems to me it is more of a push than a swing. Opponent was hanging on him during play, and he retaliated by grabbing his opponents shirt with one hand and pushing his chest with the other, which rose up to his neck. This seems pretty orange to me. Hence why I think R was pushed to red by his belief that it was to the face (opponent is holding his nose . . .). I suspect he told the VAR that is why he went red, and that is why the VAR told him he might want to look. In that scenario, what was "clearly erroneous" is the factual belief that it was hand to face. IMHO, this could go either way--so I do agree that it is not the type of play that should be downgraded by VAR, even though I think I understand how it happened.
Because this topic rose back up to the top of the list, and because I haven't seen it discussed anywhere else, I just wanted to mention the fact that our dear ATL UTD benefited from critical VAR-disallowed goals in both legs of the conference final. Not controversial at all in either case, good calls, not to mention nice for my side, but both season-critical calls that would almost certainly not have been made without VAR. (Now you're going to tell me yes, it was discussed, and I even participated in the discussion, in which case – never mind.) And my wife and I are going to the match on Saturday! (Guess I should move that to Best Story...)
I read a story in the Athletic, (which you need a subscription to read, so I’m not providing a link) which reported that no decision has been made about VAR in WWC next summer. Several members of the USWNT are quoted as saying it is another case of FIFA having one set of priorities for the Men’s game and another lower set for the women’s game.
NY Times had similar article yesterday - noted that some ref trng VAR is being done currently, but no commitment to WWC has been made.