VAR announcing decisions
- Thread starter Runner Ref
- Start date
They just don't get it
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
I think it looks like MLS handles reviews more professionally than EPL but…
#1 clip - the angles are bad IMHO, inconclusive, rerefereeing, they talk themselves into a decision.
#2 Ok, easy pen, ref could have been positioned better but tough one without var.
#3 J H Chr… EL WTF are the video team doing recommending a review based on those terrible angles. Ref quite rightly says do one.
All three cases highlight why fans don’t want VAR. All three onfield decisions fine in the real world. No benefit to video. Waste of time snd money.
So this is basically what Webb built. He had VAR from the beginning and developed a system where the VAR got involved more. His tune has changed so much since moving back to England. I still think the MLS model is best. We live in a world where professional refs have access to clips every week and get to see what the "ideal" decision is. Lower the standard for clear and obvious and let refs use the video instead of the idealized higher standard we see in the PL that is causing issues every week.
WiisardNic
Well-Known Member
Also being tested in Australia's A-League for this year's finals series (Starts this weekend, or next)
It adds literally nothing when compared to the graphic that gets put on the screen.
"Serious Foul Play" doesn't tell you what actually happened - for this to have even the slightest bit of value, the referee needs to be empowered to add some detail. For example, "Due to us identifying significant downward force with the studs on the back of the opponent's calf, this is considered Serious Foul Play and will be punished with a red card" for the first clip in this video.
Clearly they won't need to do an announcement for offside. The screens will display checking offside, then the restart of either goal or IDFK will communicate what happened.
onthebrink
Well-Known Member
I'm broadly in favour of this. I think communication needs to significantly improve, although I don't know if this goes far enough (and don't understand post about PL going against IFAB as IFAB have approved trials of this as we have seen in FIFA competitions and now other leagues.)
I seem to remember some previous cases where referees have sometimes added a bit of additional detail, especially for more complex cases, which I think is better than just saying 'it's Serious Foul Play so a red card'. But hard to judge from just a few examples.
I seem to remember some previous cases where referees have sometimes added a bit of additional detail, especially for more complex cases, which I think is better than just saying 'it's Serious Foul Play so a red card'. But hard to judge from just a few examples.
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
IMHO the announcement needs to be an option, not a mandate. Most of the time it is obvious—saying the final decision is a PK doesn’t say anything more than pointing at the spot and lining up for the PK. But on the quirky ones—which can be fouls in the APP, or even more so a PK review followed by an APP foul review like we saw recently, an announcement would add something.
What IFAB are against, and have said they will absolutely not permit, is the live broadcast of audio between the match officials and VAR. With some of the confusing, and sometimes just incorrect, audio we have on the mic'd up shows I can understand why this is the case.
I think they are OK with the referee explaining reasons before the restart as long as leagues ask for permission. But these need to be meaningful and impactful, and only when there has been a VAR intervention. People are only in the dark when there has been a VAR recommended review, for normal decisions this is no different to how football has been for centuries, fans have always been stood on the terraces baffled as to what the referee has just given so that isn't an issue that needs fixing.
What is said by the referee to the crowd needs to add benefit. During the WWC they just said things like penalty, foul by red 5, but we know it is a penalty as we can see that, and as the red 5 was the only defender anywhere near the attacker we know it was against her. Absolutely pointless just announcing something like that, it is just stating the obvious. It would need to cover the workings of the decision, e.g. red 5 carelessly tripped the attacker and whilst she got some contact on the ball she made contact with the attacker first. But that will take too long and I can never see them agreeing to that.
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
Was gonna say the same. No point in wasting time micing refs if they are going to say the same three words as on the screen. The fans are still not going to understand reckless, serious foul play, interfering etc.
I think more than anything else, like the live audio, they worry about the explanation being poor or incorrect in law. And the fact I think that's quite likely is mainly down to poorly written laws.
A Premier League official is very unlikely to say something incorrect in law. Although I appreciate they don't really have media training so could get flustered and potentially mix their words up.
The problem is more likely to be it just doesn't matter what they say. We've seen for years the likes of Walton, Clattenburg, Dean, etc, correctly explain decisions only for the pundits to shout over them to say they are wrong. Can't see referees explaining VAR decisions being any different.
Runner Ref
Member
Based on the select group officials I know, I wouldn't say law is their strong point!
I mean yeah, exactly that.