Video refereeing is a must next season

[st albans fox]

7 hours ago, WigstonWanderer said:

I should make it clear that there is very little experience to be had from the Aussie trial so far as I haven't seen anything reviewed bar the incident pointed out by filbertway a couple of pages back.

 

From what I have READ about the trial and the rules under which they operate, all penalty decisions would be reviewed by the VAR to see if the award was obviously wrong. In the case of AM first leg I would have thought that this would qualify as "obviously incorrect" as the incident was clearly outside the area, so would have been overturned.

 

It is explained here:

 

http://www.a-league.com.au/article/hyundai-a-league-vars-what-you-need-to-know/1a9mga9wyzjv013fpv57jhl3pd

 

Interestingly yesterday's Melbourne City/Perth Glory match included an incident where it wasn't clear whether the ball crossed the line or not for a goal, however it didn't seem to be referred to the VAR. No idea why not as according to the above link goal line tech is supposed to be available. Rather disappointing.

The VAR would have quickly reviewed it whilst the game continued and told the ref no need to change his original decision. 

 

And im one of the LCFC fans that doesn't want VAR, even if it meant AM didn't get that first leg pen. no one knows how the game may have panned out after that. Too simplistic to say would have been 0-0.

 

i need to see evidence that decisions will be much faster than happened France v Spain. I don't like the way it kills immediate emotional response to a fair proportion of goals. That's what we go to the game for isnt it ??  At the moment I can glance across for the linos flag whilst I'm jumping up and down. 

[Number 6]

10 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

i need to see evidence that decisions will be much faster than happened France v Spain. I don't like the way it kills immediate emotional response to a fair proportion of goals. That's what we go to the game for isnt it ??  At the moment I can glance across for the linos flag whilst I'm jumping up and down. 

This is actually the crux of it for me. I'd hate 60 seconds of confirming goals. Would have to see how many would be impacted but as said here, the emotion of a goal is the whole reason we go and watch the sport really.

 

Be a nightmare for any goal from a corner too. Surely quite often an infraction there if looking hard enough.

 

EDIT: I've been a bit naive here. Most matches watched by people in an armchair on their flatscreen. Probably why it'll get implemented.

[sylofox]

Just as a thought when this comes in will MOTD have a camera on the chap watching the screen? After all we need to be able to talk about his mistakes as well.

 

[st albans fox]

3 hours ago, Number 6 said:

This is actually the crux of it for me. I'd hate 60 seconds of confirming goals. Would have to see how many would be impacted but as said here, the emotion of a goal is the whole reason we go and watch the sport really.

 

Be a nightmare for any goal from a corner too. Surely quite often an infraction there if looking hard enough.

 

EDIT: I've been a bit naive here. Most matches watched by people in an armchair on their flatscreen. Probably why it'll get implemented.

One of the reasons that our league is so marketable is the full stadia and the atmosphere that creates. Once you pander solely to the armchair fan and ignore the paying punter completely you are on a slippery slope. 

 

 

[Redouane]

4 hours ago, Number 6 said:

This is actually the crux of it for me. I'd hate 60 seconds of confirming goals. Would have to see how many would be impacted but as said here, the emotion of a goal is the whole reason we go and watch the sport really.

 

Be a nightmare for any goal from a corner too. Surely quite often an infraction there if looking hard enough.

 

EDIT: I've been a bit naive here. Most matches watched by people in an armchair on their flatscreen. Probably why it'll get implemented.

I've seen this technology in against in the friendly of France vs Spain. There wasn't 60 seconds of delay. It was more like 15-20 seconds when there was a DOUBT. And obviously, these are the early stages of this technology so i'm sure they will get better and faster with time.

[Xen]

The main issue with this for me is that, whilst it could probably be used quite effectively after-the-fact (i.e. penalty awarded, red card given) etc., it's much, much harder to implement the other way.

 

For instance, player gets fouled in the box but ref doesn't stop play. There's no way for the correct decision to be awarded through video reffing. Stopping the game 'in case' is never going to happen, and if they review it while play continues then it could be 2-3 phases of play later by the time we get a decision. Could you imagine your team scoring a goal on a counter, only for it to be ruled out and play brought back to an earlier penalty for the opposite team?

 

I want it to work, I really do, but I just can't see it having the desired effect and not impacting the flow of a game and enjoyment for the fans.

 

Something does have to be done to stop the howlers, but I'm not sure this is it. Not sure what would work though - multiples refs like in hockey?

 

At the end of the day we just need (much) better refs.

[SCP1906]

In Portugal the 'Taça de Portugal' final (equivalent to FA Cup in England) this season will be the first official game with VAR.

 

The introduction of VAR is a major victory for Sporting Clube de Portugal President.

He was pushing for VAR - and some other measures to 'clean' football (ending of TPO was another measure) since he took the leadership of Sporting CP.

 

 

Unfortunately Sporting CP will not play in the final.

The benfica arse's will be there.. and the introduction of VAR, if really works, will be the end of their dominance in Portugal.

 

I hope from now on the football in Portugal will be better and not decided outside of the pitch.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[WigstonWanderer]

2 hours ago, Xen said:

The main issue with this for me is that, whilst it could probably be used quite effectively after-the-fact (i.e. penalty awarded, red card given) etc., it's much, much harder to implement the other way.

 

For instance, player gets fouled in the box but ref doesn't stop play. There's no way for the correct decision to be awarded through video reffing. Stopping the game 'in case' is never going to happen, and if they review it while play continues then it could be 2-3 phases of play later by the time we get a decision. Could you imagine your team scoring a goal on a counter, only for it to be ruled out and play brought back to an earlier penalty for the opposite team?

 

I want it to work, I really do, but I just can't see it having the desired effect and not impacting the flow of a game and enjoyment for the fans.

 

Something does have to be done to stop the howlers, but I'm not sure this is it. Not sure what would work though - multiples refs like in hockey?

 

At the end of the day we just need (much) better refs.

You raise some good points, but if it is only used to prevent penalties being wrongly awarded (as opposed to awarding penalties that should have been given), or preventing a red card being wrongly given (as opposed to doling one out when it wouldn't otherwise have been given), then I think it's an improvement on doing nothing.

 

I agree that it is much harder to implement "the other way", but I think we need to see what they come up with and how it works in practice. In Oz it hasn't had much impact up to now, but it's early days.

[st albans fox]

Howard Webb said on Saturday that if the play has moved on and a goal been scored at the other end then it's conceivable that the goal would be cancelled and a corrected decision made for what went on at the other end. 

 

Some of the scenarios may may seem far fetched. It depends how up in arms people are going to get when these do occur as will likely only be every few weeks. Imagine Jose being on the receiving end !!!!!

[WigstonWanderer]

2 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Howard Webb said on Saturday that if the play has moved on and a goal been scored at the other end then it's conceivable that the goal would be cancelled and a corrected decision made for what went on at the other end. 

 

Some of the scenarios may may seem far fetched. It depends how up in arms people are going to get when these do occur as will likely only be every few weeks. Imagine Jose being on the receiving end !!!!!

Delicious

 

[Number 6]

5 hours ago, Redouane said:

I've seen this technology in against in the friendly of France vs Spain. There wasn't 60 seconds of delay. It was more like 15-20 seconds when there was a DOUBT. And obviously, these are the early stages of this technology so i'm sure they will get better and faster with time.

You may be right about it improving but I'd  get your watch checked. Griezmann had celebrated and the France team had retreated to their half before it was ruled out.

[m4DD0gg]

Cant come soon enough.

[WigstonWanderer]

VAR played a big part in the A-League finals Sydney FC vs Perth match over the weekend. I'm not overly impressed with the decision to allow the second goal.

 

The scorer was not offside but the Perth defender was clearly impeded by a Sydney player who was definitely offside.

 

Not only is the Perth defender impeded by a player who shouldn't even be in that location, but it could be argued that it constitutes a separate offence of obstruction (though I appreciate that these aren't given much these days). IMO the VAR got it plain wrong according to the rules regarding interferring with play:

 

"Interfering with an opponent If an attacker interferes with an opponent by either preventing them from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent's line of vision or movements or making a gesture or movement which deceives or distracts an opponent, then they are offside."

 

Would the Perth defender have actually prevented the goal? We'll never know. From the replays it looks as if he might have done, or might have done enough to put off the scorer. The fact that there is any doubt at all means he was interfering with play. The only mitigating factor might be the original referee's decision. I am unclear on this. The commentator suggests that he originally awarded the goal, but I thought he disallowed it and that a free kick had actually been taken by Perth prior to involving the VAR. This is actually quite crucial as the VAR is only supposed to intervene if the ref made an obvious mistake.

 

In fairness Sydney did deserve to win the match, no question. There was a second VAR decision to allow Sydney's 3rd goal which was correct IMO.

 

Anyway, I'd be very interested in what others think.

[Foxhateram]

2 hours ago, WigstonWanderer said:

VAR played a big part in the A-League finals Sydney FC vs Perth match over the weekend. I'm not overly impressed with the decision to allow the second goal.

 

The scorer was not offside but the Perth defender was clearly impeded by a Sydney player who was definitely offside.

 

Not only is the Perth defender impeded by a player who shouldn't even be in that location, but it could be argued that it constitutes a separate offence of obstruction (though I appreciate that these aren't given much these days). IMO the VAR got it plain wrong according to the rules regarding interferring with play:

 

"Interfering with an opponent If an attacker interferes with an opponent by either preventing them from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent's line of vision or movements or making a gesture or movement which deceives or distracts an opponent, then they are offside."

 

Would the Perth defender have actually prevented the goal? We'll never know. From the replays it looks as if he might have done, or might have done enough to put off the scorer. The fact that there is any doubt at all means he was interfering with play. The only mitigating factor might be the original referee's decision. I am unclear on this. The commentator suggests that he originally awarded the goal, but I thought he disallowed it and that a free kick had actually been taken by Perth prior to involving the VAR. This is actually quite crucial as the VAR is only supposed to intervene if the ref made an obvious mistake.

 

In fairness Sydney did deserve to win the match, no question. There was a second VAR decision to allow Sydney's 3rd goal which was correct IMO.

 

Anyway, I'd be very interested in what others think.

Agreed here. The second goal clearly shouldn't stand. The attacker that was offside prevents the defender from getting the ball. As thus game shows, it becomes a real issue if the video ref doesn't get the decision right. 

 

I still think the game has too many variables and is too fast paced for it to work. As others have said also, it takes away the raw emotion of the game. It's not like rugby wheŕe the rules are pretty black and white, with regular stoppages in play being part of ongoing possesion. 

[SCP1906]

In Portugal the 'Taça de Portugal' final (equivalent to FA Cup in England) this season will be the first official game with VAR.

Next season all games in first/premier league in Portugal ('liga NOS') will have VAR.

Curious to see how it will work.

VAR action will be restricted to few actions. Offside's is one of the situations the VAR will not work.
I guess next season some teams (Sporting, FC Porto,..) will have a lot more players in offside...