The Ref Stop

Fifa to take VAR off ifab?

The headline, and some of the ways it's being interpreted is a fairly serious mischaracterization of what is happening, as far as I can tell.

Pierluigi Collina explains it like this in the article below:
"IFAB as an organisation has the duty to govern the laws of football, including VAR and the protocol and regulations. Once the laws of the game are set, IFAB’s job is over," he said.

"It is then FIFA that deals with referees' education around the world supporting all the member associations."
Click to expand...

FIFA to take control of VAR and ensure it’s used the same across all competitions

What he's saying is correct, as far as I can tell. The IFAB establishes what the laws are but it's not their responsibility to look after its day-to-day implementation in the various different individual competitions all around the world.

Any further changes to the actual provisions contained in the VAR protocol (as with all other parts of the law) would still be up to the IFAB.
 
Last edited:
The Ref Stop
one said:
It will be interesting to see how this works out as far as the LOTG goes. Would they take it out of the LOTG into a seperate document or will FIFA dictate to IFAB what to put in the LOTG. The latter is a dangerous path.
Click to expand...
No - this does not change how the laws are authorised or who gets to change them. All FIFA will be in charge of (as mentioned in my previous post) is the implementation of the VAR protocol, not its contents.
 
Just a dogs dinner then
What a great day it would be for the game, the day the EPL drops VAR; if indeed they're allowed to do so
 
I’d said several times throughout the season I wouldn’t be surprised if the two models - EPL vs Bundesliga for example - were compared and a decision made on which was the more effective. Whichever was the preferred option would then be adopted throughout.

Perhaps I gave it a little too much credence as a “plan” or deliberate objective but the outcome is much the same.

You may now bow and worship me. Or just give this a “like” - I’m not that arrogant to insist on the former 😁
 
While EPL is certainly an outlier, it's not as if there are only two ways VARs are being used.

Common standards I'd like to see:
  • Ban use of lines for OS: if the VAR can't tell the AR was wrong without lines, it wasn't clear error, so the call on the field stands. (MLS gets this right, though I suspect it was more an economic decision than a philosophical one--but we don't get goals called back form the booth for an inch)
  • Better, consistent standards on OFRs
    • Dump the EPL silliness--the WC seemed to draw the right balance on when to use OFRs: judgment calls where the R may have been clearly incorrect
    • Discourage the use of OFR to sell calls (MLS overdoes this with OS)
 
socal lurker said:
While EPL is certainly an outlier, it's not as if there are only two ways VARs are being used.

Common standards I'd like to see:
  • Ban use of lines for OS: if the VAR can't tell the AR was wrong without lines, it wasn't clear error, so the call on the field stands. (MLS gets this right, though I suspect it was more an economic decision than a philosophical one--but we don't get goals called back form the booth for an inch)
  • Better, consistent standards on OFRs
    • Dump the EPL silliness--the WC seemed to draw the right balance on when to use OFRs: judgment calls where the R may have been clearly incorrect
    • Discourage the use of OFR to sell calls (MLS overdoes this with OS)
Click to expand...
I've said this before, but I don't think you can do a decent job of offside based on un-annotated camera shots. Angles can be very deceptive and I think will just lead to more controversy if you try to use the wrong camera angle to judge.

There's probably a middle-ground position - I've suggested before that lines could be overlaid every half-metre and then used to judge calls by eye with that little bit of help. But then you're trusting the guy in the booth to make a subjective call again....

The problem here isn't a VAR problem, it's that the law is not written well enough to match expectations. All VAR is doing is giving the (mostly) correct answer of what the law says should/shouldn't be offside. The problem is, people don't "expect" close calls to be given. You've literally said you like that goals aren't being called back for an inch - but under the laws, that player is therefore an inch offside and should be called as such. If you don't want those calls being made, you need to re-write the offside law, not expect VAR to work out what people "expect" on a case-by-case basis and then make inconsistent subjective calls to try and keep up.
 
GraemeS said:
I've said this before, but I don't think you can do a decent job of offside based on un-annotated camera shots. Angles can be very deceptive and I think will just lead to more controversy if you try to use the wrong camera angle to judge.
Click to expand...

And if you can't, then the call on the field stands. The big errors are the ones that you catch--which was supposedly the point of VAR when it started.
 
socal lurker said:
Certainly flaws, but I thought what was done well was the types of decision where OFR used.
Click to expand...
Not much point in reiterating my strong feelings (in detail) that VAR (since its inception) has done nothing other than spoil the game :(
I'm probably more polarised on the subject than any other member!
 
Big Cat said:
Not much point in reiterating my strong feelings (in detail) that VAR (since its inception) has done nothing other than spoil the game :(
I'm probably more polarised on the subject than any other member!
Click to expand...

Well, while I agree that the best way to "fix" VR would be to abolish it, we live here in the real world, where that just isn't going to happen. The genie is out of the bottle, and I can't imagine it ever getting back in.
 
I did publicly announce that the PGMOL would improve on VAR
I was wrong (doesn't happen very often)
 
socal lurker said:
And if you can't, then the call on the field stands. The big errors are the ones that you catch--which was supposedly the point of VAR when it started.
Click to expand...
Apologies, I may not have phrased that sentence as clearly as I could have done. It's entirely possible to look at a tilted camera angle and think that you can see a clear difference. It's just that because of the camera angles, you will often be wrong.

And let's not forget, if we take the line-drawing tech off the VAR, that's not going to stop the TV companies using it. So you end up with a situation where the VAR gets involved and is likely to make a wrong call based off a poor camera angle, the TV companies (and therefore papers, website etc) go crazy about the VAR getting it wrong and you're in a worse situation than you were pre-current-VAR.
Before, you could at least shrug your shoulders and blame human error.
Now, you can point at images and say "like it or not, we have a still picture with lines on that shows he was just offside".
Under your system: "Oh yeah, the tech was there but we chose not to use it and decided to just guess instead". Worst of all 3 options IMO.

But again, this doesn't go back to the crux of the post you partially quoted. VAR with or without line-drawing tech is still going to be asked to make close calls, and those close calls are going to be judged as "right" or "wrong" based on mm each way. And that's because that's what the current law demands. If you don't like that, you need to be asking why the law isn't written to more closely match what "feels" offside, not put it on a poor VAR in a TV studio to try and guess how much subjectivity is appropriate in each individual moment.
 
Last edited:
Kieran W said:
Can't wait for my CAR on a Sunday morning to flag every ball forward because it 'felt offside' :D
Click to expand...
I know it sounds stupid when phrased like that, but I'm not that one complaining about "armpit offsides". There's clearly a disconnect between what the law says is offside and what the majority of pundits, media and ex-players want to be considered offside - until that gap is closed, VAR hasn't got a chance of producing an "acceptable result".
 
GraemeS said:
I know it sounds stupid when phrased like that, but I'm not that one complaining about "armpit offsides". There's clearly a disconnect between what the law says is offside and what the majority of pundits, media and ex-players want to be considered offside - until that gap is closed, VAR hasn't got a chance of producing an "acceptable result".
Click to expand...

Totally agree. We're getting closer and closer to different laws between grassroots and the elite level
 
socal lurker said:
While EPL is certainly an outlier, it's not as if there are only two ways VARs are being used.

Common standards I'd like to see:
  • Ban use of lines for OS: if the VAR can't tell the AR was wrong without lines, it wasn't clear error, so the call on the field stands. (MLS gets this right, though I suspect it was more an economic decision than a philosophical one--but we don't get goals called back form the booth for an inch)
  • Better, consistent standards on OFRs
    • Dump the EPL silliness--the WC seemed to draw the right balance on when to use OFRs: judgment calls where the R may have been clearly incorrect
    • Discourage the use of OFR to sell calls (MLS overdoes this with OS)
Click to expand...
The OFR guidance HAS been changed (slightly) in the 20/21 laws, stating that OFR should be used for subjective decisions.
 
GraemeS said:
Apologies, I may not have phrased that sentence as clearly as I could have done. It's entirely possible to look at a tilted camera angle and think that you can see a clear difference. It's just that because of the camera angles, you will often be wrong.

And let's not forget, if we take the line-drawing tech off the VAR, that's not going to stop the TV companies using it. So you end up with a situation where the VAR gets involved and is likely to make a wrong call based off a poor camera angle, the TV companies (and therefore papers, website etc) go crazy about the VAR getting it wrong and you're in a worse situation than you were pre-current-VAR.
Before, you could at least shrug your shoulders and blame human error.
Now, you can point at images and say "like it or not, we have a still picture with lines on that shows he was just offside".
Under your system: "Oh yeah, the tech was there but we chose not to use it and decided to just guess instead". Worst of all 3 options IMO.

But again, this doesn't go back to the crux of the post you partially quoted. VAR with or without line-drawing tech is still going to be asked to make close calls, and those close calls are going to be judged as "right" or "wrong" based on mm each way. And that's because that's what the current law demands. If you don't like that, you need to be asking why the law isn't written to more closely match what "feels" offside, not put it on a poor VAR in a TV studio to try and guess how much subjectivity is appropriate in each individual moment.
Click to expand...

I understand the point you are making, but I disagree. MLS doesn't use lines, and I think that has been received better than the toenail OS calls by VAR elsewhere. I think it is being accepted as not clear error, so no reversals. And frankly, I think having OS actually be a clear error standard is better for other calls, too: it takes out the "well if you call OS by a toe nail, you should have been able to award that PK" argument, as everything is clear error.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top