UEFA VAR reset

Good news, hopefully some good to come out of this, if they can agree?

Great, they'll subjectively alter their subjective threshold for C&O error intervention with respect to subjective on-field decisions
Objectively, have we ever heard this said before!?

Careful what you wish for.

I get the impression that Rosetti regards handballs as factual not subjective. Nearly any ball hitting the hand in the build up to a goal will be chalked off, any time the arm stops a shot on goal it will be penalized.

Anytime they have tried to fix the handball problem, it has gotten worse. Just saying.

A 'light touch', 'minimal intervention' VAR is certainly (IMO) better than the lengthy delay, overly forensic approach. However, it exacerbates the issue where 'sub-optimal' subjective on field decisions get "confirmed" by VAR leading to (even more) outrage that the "correct" decision wasn't reached, despite the access to technology. Damned if you do, damned if you don't ....

Nothing "good" will come of it.

When you're trying to apply laws and "rules" to a sport that culturally, is based on cheating, you're in a never-ending cycle of changes, tweaks and resets.

Russell Jones said:

A 'light touch', 'minimal intervention' VAR is certainly (IMO) better than the lengthy delay, overly forensic approach. However, it exacerbates the issue where 'sub-optimal' subjective on field decisions get "confirmed" by VAR leading to (even more) outrage that the "correct" decision wasn't reached, despite the access to technology. Damned if you do, damned if you don't ....

Click to expand...

I am pretty happy with what the original protocol was set out to achieve and more or less the process for it. But what is happening now is far from it. The motto was simple, minimum interference, maximum benefit. The problem is not VAR protocol, it is its implementation.

I dont mind the delay if needed to get the correct outcome, and the can also be not intervening. Similar with forensic examination. But they should be seldom needed and if they are, it means no intervention should be likely.

One of the things that bothers me most is on subjective decisions, is the replay speed of the first review by the referee is almost always slow motion.

The very worst thing about VAR..... hyperbole to one side for a change..... is that folk cannot accept the outcome of any decision with VAR in the background. Why didn't it get reviewed? Why wasn't the Referee sent to the screen? Why didn't the Ref get afforded a second look at that? Why did this one get reviewed, but that one didn't? And, the worst of all, when folk don't agree with VAR's intervention and final outcome
It simply all leads to nonsense. Like the AFCON final. But more routinely, conspiracy and suspicion. We can usually (and very very reluctantly and at some point in time long after the event) accept a refereeing mistake, but we can't accept any contentious KMD when VAR is a factor. And we never will. The culture simply cannot accommodate VAR and it never will. Coupled with the subjective nature of the game. It's an art, not a science and I can't see the dynamics of the game ever meeting any other description
Yes, we get more 'correct' decisions (from a purely neutral perspective), but neutral perspectives barely exist in football
Instead, what we gain is far outweighed by what we lose
The only form of VAR I can ever envisage being accepted, is GLT, ball in/out play and offside, but only if the tech can identify such things as offside position as quickly as it does will ball over the line. Otherwise, it's broken and cannot be fixed and I'll be saying the same thing for as long as they persevere, the same thing I've been saying since that first World Cup when the shambles first appeared on TV and FIFA embarked on their campaign of misleading everyone

Big Cat said:

The very worst thing about VAR..... hyperbole to one side for a change..... is that folk cannot accept the outcome of any decision with VAR in the background. Why didn't it get reviewed? Why wasn't the Referee sent to the screen? Why didn't the Ref get afforded a second look at that? Why did this one get reviewed, but that one didn't? And, the worst of all, when folk don't agree with VAR's intervention and final outcome
It simply all leads to nonsense. Like the AFCON final. But more routinely, conspiracy and suspicion. We can usually (and very very reluctantly and at some point in time long after the event) accept a refereeing mistake, but we can't accept any contentious KMD when VAR is a factor. And we never will. The culture simply cannot accommodate VAR and it never will. Coupled with the subjective nature of the game. It's an art, not a science and I can't see the dynamics of the game ever meeting any other description
Yes, we get more 'correct' decisions (from a purely neutral perspective), but neutral perspectives barely exist in football
Instead, what we gain is far outweighed by what we lose
The only form of VAR I can ever envisage being accepted, is GLT, ball in/out play and offside, but only if the tech can identify such things as offside position as quickly as it does will ball over the line. Otherwise, it's broken and cannot be fixed and I'll be saying the same thing for as long as they persevere, the same thing I've been saying since that first World Cup when the shambles first appeared on TV and FIFA embarked on their campaign of misleading everyone

Click to expand...

Thing is, people still dont accept offside as they go on about "its just a toe" or the 5cm allowance that Dale Johnson mentioned as if its literally fact and from PGMOL.
Its from a journalist who has said its from PGMOL.

The next argument is when do VAR know exactly when the ball was played, the previous frame he was onside etc...

I'd love to go down the route of each team gets 2 VAR checks a game, if they want to use them.
Because, then, the burden lies with the manager of the team and the supporters should then cast their complaints to them and not refs.
We go back to referees making calls as they see fit and not relying on VAR (as what the appearance looks) to bail them out. We can hopefully go back to a referee has made a mistake. It happens. Why didnt the manager challenge the call if it was so wrong?
Managers go in to press conferences and have moaned about a decision or two, but now, if they have the power to ask the ref to check (and it should be pitch ref checking screen if its subjective, and not the ones in the office as they're not on the pitch with the emotions and temperature of the match etc), then you should be questioning them.
This applies to both decisions for you, and against you (so if a penalty was awarded against you and you disagree, then ask for it to be reviewed).
Oh, and put a time limit of when you can review, not just when the ball leaves the pitch. If you cant decide to appeal in, say, 15 seconds, then clearly you don't think its an obvious error.

And finally, if you do make an appeal, no player is allowed near the touchline whilst checking.
The appeal isn't a time out to chat to the team.
You must also state exactly what you want checked (foul on x, handball in penalty area etc). Not just say I disagree with something. Go find it.

I do think despite the noise, VAR operates better in this country than others because at times it feels like sending a ref to the monitor is part of the theatre especially when I watch the Champions League games where it supposed to be best refs yet seemingly make alot of errors because they get sent to the screen so often.

However it will never be accepted and anything contentious will be flagged up and exaggerated upon.

One positive aspect of VAR it improves player behaviour as the ref can say they(VAR) is checking and if it remains then it seems to be accepted and the game moves on.

It will be interesting how UEFA moves forward with it, I really do think it be more of a positive if they move towards how the PL operates VAR.