A&H

1st Competitive UK VAR

I was with clients last night in the Crewe area, I've seen the goal highlights and the slightly dubious winner, was it used at all, any feedback??
 
The Referee Store
Nothing of note really happened at all in the game.

I’d gotten bored 10 minutes into the second half so didn’t see the handball.

It was, apparently, inconclusive from the camera angles available. Although apparently according to the bbc pundits the VAR didn’t check the view that they had used to show it wasn’t a hand ball.

So, it seems that they may have gotten that one right by luck.

I think we need a proper tasty derby game to really give it a good test.
 
Ok it's not an obvious mistake but only because the footage is inconclusive. This is a VAR fail for me. It could have been a handball. We don't know. VAR doesn't know based on the footage I have seen. Makes a nonsense of it. And this was a tame game in a half empty stadium that both teams seemed to play as if content to lose.

This is already going the same way as the shabby experience in Oz and the states;)

Why was it a fail? The VAR did review it as all goals are reviewed before play restarts. He decided that the ball didn't hit the arm, and even if it had then it would have been a massive push to class it as intentional, so he was right not to alert Andre Marriner to a potential problem. Subsequent replays by BT showed that there was definitely no handling, so I'm really struggling to see how it was a fail ...

- Correct decision reached
- Game not unnecessarily delayed
 
Why was it a fail? The VAR did review it as all goals are reviewed before play restarts. He decided that the ball didn't hit the arm, and even if it had then it would have been a massive push to class it as intentional, so he was right not to alert Andre Marriner to a potential problem. Subsequent replays by BT showed that there was definitely no handling, so I'm really struggling to see how it was a fail ...

- Correct decision reached
- Game not unnecessarily delayed
Have you got a link to those replays?

What I understood was that it was inconclusive at the time. And there was no explanation at the time.
 
I think certainly BT sport were itching for the sensationalism of actually getting the ref to review something
VAR was mentioned every two mins, with Graham Poll jumping in where apt
They wanted a decision where everything stopped and we all waited with baited breath

The fact the right call was made to look routine does not sell newspapers or indeed stir an interest in subscribers...
 
Have you got a link to those replays?

What I understood was that it was inconclusive at the time. And there was no explanation at the time.

Don't have a replay, but they showed it time and time again in the post match analysis and there was no touch. It did hit his knee which is what made it change direction.
 
Don't have a replay, but they showed it time and time again in the post match analysis and there was no touch. It did hit his knee which is what made it change direction.
That's weird because what I saw was that it was inconclusive and what I am reading in my choice of (online) newspaper is that it was inconclusive... ;)
 
That's weird because what I saw was that it was inconclusive and what I am reading in my choice of (online) newspaper is that it was inconclusive... ;)

If it is inconclusive then you can give it, therefore the out come was at least no worse than not having VAR.
 
Once this genie is out of the bottle you cant put it back....I think this will end in tears but here goes.....

I heard an interview today from ex ref saying the system is generally used one game in 3/4..... Knowing how the UK Leagues work and the pressure involved, I bet this is used 3-4 times per match and methodically pulled apart for weeks after....VAR-EXTRA Thoughts??
You can't possibly implement it any worse than in Australia. Driven so many people away from the game - and it's amazing just how biased it's made the referees look as well; I've never heard so many people utterly convinced the game is rigged.
It's basically doing the exact opposite of everything it's supposed to and is far, far worse than what anybody could have imagined.

I still think it CAN be done right. But it needs to be taken away from Australia. Like a sharp knife needs to be taken away from a young child.

EDIT: Of course tonight has another example. DOGSO outside the PA. Very easy red. Inexplicably (yet, given the standard down here, not surprisingly) a yellow card is given. Eventually the VAR is involved, ref goes over to the little screen, spends way longer than he needs to watching, changes it to a red.
Issues
- VAR shouldn't have been needed. Ref should be getting the decision right
- Process was way too long again
- After the debacle a few weeks ago where the VAR was unashamedly one-sided and made a number of wrong decisions (of course, so did the ref)....the FFA actually changed their rules to state that the VAR can't be involved in changing a yellow to a red. Which is exactly what happened here.

So, even when the VAR gets it right it still gets it wrong!!
 
Last edited:
It wasn't a success for the VAR if the VAR couldn't tell if there was a handball or not.
It depends what the VAR is supposed to do. My understanding is that they exist to prevent "obvious" mistakes, particularly with the TV viewers and after-match punditry in mind if we're being honest. If it's a borderline handball that can't be described as "clearly wrong" with the pictures that the TV channels have, not getting involved and therefore keeping the match flowing is the best possible outcome.
 
EDIT: Of course tonight has another example. DOGSO outside the PA. Very easy red. Inexplicably (yet, given the standard down here, not surprisingly) a yellow card is given. Eventually the VAR is involved, ref goes over to the little screen, spends way longer than he needs to watching, changes it to a red.
Issues
- VAR shouldn't have been needed. Ref should be getting the decision right
- Process was way too long again
- After the debacle a few weeks ago where the VAR was unashamedly one-sided and made a number of wrong decisions (of course, so did the ref)....the FFA actually changed their rules to state that the VAR can't be involved in changing a yellow to a red. Which is exactly what happened here.

So, even when the VAR gets it right it still gets it wrong!!

So which do you prefer
- end up with right decision reached through wrong process or
- follow the right process but end up with the wrong decision

Obviously the right process right decision is the ultimate goal but that is a bit too much to ask from A-League right now. I think there has been a vast improvement in VAR use in the last couple of weeks. Arzani dive was a good example. It looked like a dive but not an obvious error so VAR correctly didn't get involved. If this happened a few weeks ago they would have made a meal of it.

EDIT: just read an article that the rule of VAR not being involved in changing yellow to red only applies to SFP. The Williams incident was a SPA to DOGSO which is different.
 
Last edited:
On a side note, and related to the link to an article recently about the pressure refs were under with travel over the Xmas period, how many officials are PGMOL going to need to service VAR, taking in to account peak time of 3pm on a Saturday? Are they going to use recently retired EPL officials to man the screens for example? I did note from some video piece (could have been on BT ahead of the game) that the VAR themselves will be based in some room near Heathrow - so does this mean that one VAR will cover multiple games? Any one got any insight?
 
Mike Riley has said the VARs must be the same level as the match referee. So to me that rules out bringing back ex-referees, and that also means they are going to need a lot more SG1 officials.
 
Not like me to be different but I would have thought, Oliver, Taylor and Pawson would have been more appropriate shouts for referee with VAR as they are the ones who will be using it near weekly as time goes on, unless they chose Atkinson and Marriner for their undoubted experience. There WILL be a case where ref n park is confident about the decision yet VAR will say otherwise, so ref goes with VAR....who gets the dunt when its wrong?
 
VAR? I refused to use comms until I was forced to and when advised buzzer flags would be more appropriate than the straw sticks I was using, I purchased them yet strangley forgot to turn them on for nearly every game.

My post was not about me, it was a point in general. Ref on park is sure its no pen yet VAR intervenes and ref goes with VAR, it could either, be wrong, or at very least, a pen that the referee would not have punished without use of VAR.

Without reopening the rights and wrongs on the Fer kick, its a great example.
Am VAR, for sake of this post, am saying, stop game, red card Swansea 7
Ref has seen it but was going yellow

Am aware if there is a difference of opinion the ref will call it but surely all hell breaks loose when the tv man was right and told the ref so, yet he chose to go yellow

Next?
 
The process still allows for the ref to jog to the side of the pitch and look at a monitor. It looks ridiculous, but if there's any doubt in the VAR's head, it's his job to recommend the on-field ref takes a look, rather than recommending a straightforward change of decision.

As you say, I'm sure they'll still get it wrong sometimes, but it's important to remember that the VAR doesn't have to just recommend a decision, they can simply recommend a second look.
 
Back
Top