A&H

AAR's in the Euro's

GraemeS

GraemeS

RefChat Addict
Level 5 Referee
So, having had an elongated period to watch the AAR's in action, I'm wondering how many people on here think they've visibly and clearly improved the game? Regardless of if the concept is good or not, I'm not convinced they're being used right - and here's why:

* They don't have the means to "give" a decision, so only become a factor when they miss something that should seem obvious, like the Skrtel elbow vs Wales. Get rid of those stupid sticks and give them proper flags. And then encourage them to use them - by all means, come to a decision over voice comms before giving a signal, but the AAR should appear involved in the process of giving a penalty/corner/GK, rather than just looking like a passive observer.

* They undermine the creditability of the AR's by being on the same side as them. One of my long-time bugbears has been AR's that fail to give decisions for fouls that occur under their noses and by putting the AAR on the same side as them, it gives the AR's even less of a reason to stick their necks out and make a call. Move the AAR over the other side and generate a third angle on the box, rather than essentially duplicating the AR position - and re-empower the AR's in the process. It would also put someone in the perfect position to monitor balls in/out of play on that far side.

* And yet they manage to not help the AR's out at all. I see that AR's still have to do that stupid and unprofessional-looking sprint back into position after checking the GK has placed the ball correctly for a kick. Make it the AAR's job to come onto the pitch and ensure the ball is placed correctly and let the AR save his energy and take the correct position for the next phase of play.
 
The Referee Store
Yup
Flags yup
Koscielny's kick to the chest in the first game springs to mind
Opposite side yup
So the ref doesn't have to go right to the corner

Much more active. Clear signals. Right now it is totally pointless.
 
I've been really disappointed with their perceived (lack of) contribution in this tournament and I bet Collina isn't happy. Previously, I've been an 'apologist' for AARs, knowing that their contribution is valued by the referee and that use of the comms system hides their true worth. But they've missed too many big calls in this competition.

Re your three specific points. Yes to more obvious involvement, yes to monitoring GKs but no to switching sides. Apparently, referees preferred them there as it allowed them to keep their normal 'diagonal'. And it also frees up the AR to focus more on offsides, knowing that offences on 'his' side of the area should be covered by the AAR
 
I agree with everything that has been said. It has been a fundamental issue with AARs that their contribution is not apparent. I accept the argument of how they are in communication with referees but to the average fan in the stand the AAR seems to be doing very little.
 
I can't say I understand that logic particularly. It's dangerously close to absolving AR's from giving fouls at all - if they have no responsibility to give fouls in the box, how about the area between the box and the sideline? When do they "retake responsibility", and what's the benefit in creating that grey area where both assistants feel justified not giving a decision?

Obviously I've never been in a situation where AAR's are available to me, so I'm going on instinct here, but again, I'm surprised that referees feel it stops them using their standard movement patterns on the other side. All they would be doing is giving the exact opposite angle to the referee on any incident, which would seem to increase the officials chances of making a right decison. No reason at all for the referee to adjust his movement, apart from maybe saving him having to go right into corners.
 
In terms of flags -- Collina and UEFA put out a thing earlier this year with updated signalling by the AARs, whereby they're supposed to raise the stick to a 45 degree angle, pointed out onto the field of play to indicate a clear foul.

I saw one or two of those late Champions League, but nothing so far in the Euros.

In terms of the side of the field, my instinct is like @GraemeS , but having met a couple of refs who have used them, apparently the visual cue of having that match official on the other side of the field throws them off as they're doing that diagonal. The one agreed that conceptually they should be on that other side of the field, but practically, it distracts enough that it causes issue, unfortunately.
 
Although I agree with the OP the number of unrequired apostrophes in the post was quite distracting.
Whislt I'd never correct a one of typo as we all do it, GraemeS, I don't want to patronise, there are plenty of things I suck at, but you added TEN apostrophes by my count.
I'll go back to my lonely life now......
 
They did try with the AAR on the opposite side of the goal to the AR, but the referees complained bitterly as they were made to change their diagonal to compensate for this. And I do have some sympathy with this - when you have refereed for years with the same approach and got to the top of your game it is a big ask to completely change where you will be on the pitch at a given time.

I still can't see the point of the AARs to be honest, just use goal line technology and leaves fouls to the referee and assistant. But if we are going to keep them then they must be given flags that they can wave above them screaming "I gave that" ..!
 
RustyRef said:
They did try with the AAR on the opposite side of the goal to the AR, but the referees complained bitterly as they were made to change their diagonal to compensate for this. And I do have some sympathy with this - when you have refereed for years with the same approach and got to the top of your game it is a big ask to completely change where you will be on the pitch at a given time.

I still can't see the point of the AARs to be honest, just use goal line technology and leaves fouls to the referee and assistant. But if we are going to keep them then they must be given flags that they can wave above them screaming "I gave that" ..!
Click to expand...
I've got to say, I'm still a little baffled as to why the referees felt the need to change their diagonals? Even if that does cause momentary hesitation, surely that should only happen once or twice, before going back to their habitual patterns.

Or are you suggesting that they were instructed to change their diagonals for some reason and found this difficult to process?
 
GraemeS said:
I've got to say, I'm still a little baffled as to why the referees felt the need to change their diagonals? Even if that does cause momentary hesitation, surely that should only happen once or twice, before going back to their habitual patterns.

Or are you suggesting that they were instructed to change their diagonals for some reason and found this difficult to process?
Click to expand...

Yes, they were instructed to change their diagonal. The argument was there needed to be a triangle between the AR, AAR and referee. This meant that the referee needed to be on the right hand side of the penalty area when the ball was in there, as opposed to where they would be towards the left without the AAR. If the referee maintained his normal position and there was a challenge towards the right hand side of the area you would have the AR far closer to it than the Referee and AAR, and they didn't want that.
 
RustyRef said:
Yes, they were instructed to change their diagonal. The argument was there needed to be a triangle between the AR, AAR and referee. This meant that the referee needed to be on the right hand side of the penalty area when the ball was in there, as opposed to where they would be towards the left without the AAR. If the referee maintained his normal position and there was a challenge towards the right hand side of the area you would have the AR far closer to it than the Referee and AAR, and they didn't want that.
Click to expand...
That seems very strange to me - intuitively, I don't see any reason why the referee shouldn't just stick to his normal diagonal. You therefore get opposite angles on any tackle in almost any area of the pitch.
 
Hi
AAR days are numbered so I would not get too hung up on this. Technology will take over such as goal line technology and VARs.
Now I think AARs get unfair bad press. We do not know what instructions referees give to them. For instance if a ref says that I am looking at an incident I will ask for assistance only if I need it. Other then that don't get involved.
We look at an incident such as holding and I'm sure the refs sees them. Is he dependant on an AAR? Most games don't have AARs and we have all seen blatant fouls in full view of the ref and not given. I think it is not about seeing it yet rather the expectation of not giving a penalty. Soft fouls are given during play outfield yet blatant fouls in the penalty area are not. We have this nonsense of whistling to stop the restart, going in to speak to players and nothing changes. We don't tell player not to foul out the field so why at a restart. Because that is the silly instruction given by UEFA to refs.
The problem is that the game does not want to face up to this. Teams go ballistic when refs make big decisions at corners, free kicks so what happens. Refs cop out making the call
 
Hi
VARs are now under trial and I expect that they will work. The Dutch have been doing tests on this for some time and reports have been positive. Personally I see no problrm on big decisions. Had it been used in previous WCs the Lampard goal would have stood, Thierry Henry handball would have been seen. Etc.
We can't have a situation where half the world can see a decision is wrong and the match official cannot see that even through the advice of a senior retired referee at a video.
 
one said:
Not sure if this has been posted before but it seem appropriate her. Long video but it explains a lot. http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2iku17
Click to expand...
That's an interesting video, but I think it highlights some of the problems with the AAR's.

The video shows 3 incidents where the AAR has actually made a decision - but I guarantee no one other than the 5 match officials knew he was the one making that decision. It goes back to my original post - they should have flags and they should be encouraged to give visible signals if and when they make a decision, in order to aid their personal credibility and the credibility of the role in general. Unless you're really paying attention, it still just looks like the referee has made those 3 calls.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top