Refereeing Decisions Explained

[RustyRef]

Been watching a bit of the rugby last night and today and noticed that whilst they seem much more efficient in using video review technology (TMO), it seems to be the official off the field/video operator conducting the final decision. That is something I’d like to avoid in football otherwise the on-field referee just gets demoted to some sort of human communication device.

But that isn't faultless, many people in rugby think that was a harsh yellow card for Curry, on account that a player launched himself through the air and landed on his head.

Almost everyone in rugby finds it laughable that it was upgraded to red by "the bunker". VAR in rugby has been often held up as the poster boy, but it is going through a torrid time at the moment.

 

[GraemeS]

The "bunker" is a brand new system and may well turn out to be flawed. But the fair comparison is with "standard" TMO, which is like a version of footballs VAR with all the stupid bits taken out.

 

[RustyRef]

The "bunker" is a brand new system and may well turn out to be flawed. But the fair comparison is with "standard" TMO, which is like a version of footballs VAR with all the stupid bits taken out.

I watch quite a lot of rugby though and their TMO still makes a lot of mistakes. Forward passes (leading to tries) missed, dangerous challenges missed, I really don't see it as a lot different to football. They are both good when it is black and white, but when subjective decisions come into play it becomes a lot more difficult and not everyone agrees with the outcome.

And that is the whole issue with video reviews in any sport. Tennis, was the ball in or out, easy. Cricket, was the ball hitting the wicket, fairly easy. Football, did the ball cross the line for a goal easy (if the tech works). But was a rugby challenge dangerous, obviously not easy as some bloke in the "bunker" gets 10 minutes to decide on it. That's no different to SFP in football, yet the VAR official gets nowhere near that amount of time to make a decision.

 

[GraemeS]

I watch quite a lot of rugby though and their TMO still makes a lot of mistakes. Forward passes (leading to tries) missed, dangerous challenges missed, I really don't see it as a lot different to football. They are both good when it is black and white, but when subjective decisions come into play it becomes a lot more difficult and not everyone agrees with the outcome.

And that is the whole issue with video reviews in any sport. Tennis, was the ball in or out, easy. Cricket, was the ball hitting the wicket, fairly easy. Football, did the ball cross the line for a goal easy (if the tech works). But was a rugby challenge dangerous, obviously not easy as some bloke in the "bunker" gets 10 minutes to decide on it. That's no different to SFP in football, yet the VAR official gets nowhere near that amount of time to make a decision.

OK, but if we accept that premise, it just makes the contrast in acceptance of VAR and TMO even more worth looking into. Both systems are rubbish, but TMO has existed for years and been broadly considered to make rugby better. VAR, not so much.

Different cultures? Maybe, but I think that works both ways. Rugby trusts its fans to see (and if you're at home, hear) the decision being made. You might not agree with it, but you rarely go away from a TMO intervention thinking "what has he seen there?". But trying to hide what the VAR has seen from fans is built into the system, so quite often it can be hard to understand what the VAR has subjectively seen.

In fact, I would go as far as saying that's part of why the bunker is a backwards step - because it moves away from that transparency and sense of understanding a decision that's made in the moment, and moves towards VAR's approach of "things happening in secret away from the pitch".

 

[Mac]

What struck me was that VAR communication was overall not structured, not standardized, not efficient and often confused, self contradictory or just wrong - and I’m talking about: “I’m going to show slo-mo first, no full speed, no, slo-mo” and then full speed plays first - without VAR having planned the second angle.

Compare this to an actual trained live broadcast director/editor, calling multiple cameras, for example, in live sport broadcasting, like football and the cueing, shot selection and cutting between cameras and between replays etc.

VAR is amateur hour. It’s light years from professional level (Gilette at least is self-structured and clear). This is a fundamental flaw with the protocol. Lunatics controlling the asylum stuff really. Without far better focused training this won’t change.

It seems like jobs for the boys. IMHO trained referees seem like the wrong people to be in control in the edit suite - and I think the VAR mic review really highlights that.

Instead of rotating the crop of Refs into the VAR studio as they haven't built up the technology skills they should go down the road of full time VAR refs and get that professional level of communication and edit skills making VAR review much faster and more accurate.

 

[RustyRef]

OK, but if we accept that premise, it just makes the contrast in acceptance of VAR and TMO even more worth looking into. Both systems are rubbish, but TMO has existed for years and been broadly considered to make rugby better. VAR, not so much.

Different cultures? Maybe, but I think that works both ways. Rugby trusts its fans to see (and if you're at home, hear) the decision being made. You might not agree with it, but you rarely go away from a TMO intervention thinking "what has he seen there?". But trying to hide what the VAR has seen from fans is built into the system, so quite often it can be hard to understand what the VAR has subjectively seen.

In fact, I would go as far as saying that's part of why the bunker is a backwards step - because it moves away from that transparency and sense of understanding a decision that's made in the moment, and moves towards VAR's approach of "things happening in secret away from the pitch".

In fairness, Webb has repeatedly said that he wants the VAR audio broadcast live, but IFAB / FIFA won't allow it. That absolutely has to be the next step, but even with that I very much doubt there would be the same level of understanding as there is in rugby.

 

[RustyRef]

Instead of rotating the crop of Refs into the VAR studio as they haven't built up the technology skills they should go down the road of full time VAR refs and get that professional level of communication and edit skills making VAR review much faster and more accurate.

They've almost tried that with Swarbrick, Dean and Mason and it didn't really work. Problem is I can't see any younger referees giving up their career to be a specialist VAR, so you're left with people at the end of their careers and perhaps their heart isn't really in it. Not even sure you could use lower ranking referees, I can't see many SG2 or even EFL referees at their prime wanting to give up refereeing to be VAR only.

 

[santa sangria]

They've almost tried that with Swarbrick, Dean and Mason and it didn't really work. Problem is I can't see any younger referees giving up their career to be a specialist VAR, so you're left with people at the end of their careers and perhaps their heart isn't really in it. Not even sure you could use lower ranking referees, I can't see many SG2 or even EFL referees at their prime wanting to give up refereeing to be VAR only.

Make me an offer!

 

[santa sangria]

Or as Nigel Tufnel once said:

”What are the hours?”

 

[SammyT5]

I can certainly see why in the long-term specialising as a VAR would be appealing to some. Allows them to have an extensive knowledge of the LotG without having to stay in peak physical condition. Opens the door for a lot of intelligent officials who wouldn’t ordinarily be able to or have the motivation to progress.

 

[RustyRef]

I can certainly see why in the long-term specialising as a VAR would be appealing to some. Allows them to have an extensive knowledge of the LotG without having to stay in peak physical condition. Opens the door for a lot of intelligent officials who wouldn’t ordinarily be able to or have the motivation to progress.

Don't think it would ever be accepted though that someone could be a VAR without having operated at the top level.

 

[santa sangria]

Jose Mourinho syndrome

 

[Mac]

They've almost tried that with Swarbrick, Dean and Mason and it didn't really work. Problem is I can't see any younger referees giving up their career to be a specialist VAR, so you're left with people at the end of their careers and perhaps their heart isn't really in it. Not even sure you could use lower ranking referees, I can't see many SG2 or even EFL referees at their prime wanting to give up refereeing to be VAR only.

They already have a career path where young referees give up being a referee for AR, wouldn't be impossible to introduce a third choice specialising into VAR.

 

[JamesL]

They already have a career path where young referees give up being a referee for AR, wouldn't be impossible to introduce a third choice specialising into VAR.

Having had many years to decide which they prefer/are better at/have best chance of progressing to higher level.

That's very different to specialising in something which you have no idea if you like/any good at and would probably require you to stop active refereeing.

 

[Viridis1886]

Could you go straight in as a VAR?

You can coach without having played. You can ref without having played. Could you VAR without having reffed?

I know there is likely to be a credibility hurdle, but as VAR is a 'process' is this as big a barrier?

We often discuss, and generally agree, that former players don't necessarily make the best refs, so could this also be the case that former refs don't always make the best VARs as it requires different skill sets.

 

[Mr Dean]

I can certainly see why in the long-term specialising as a VAR would be appealing to some. Allows them to have an extensive knowledge of the LotG without having to stay in peak physical condition. Opens the door for a lot of intelligent officials who wouldn’t ordinarily be able to or have the motivation to progress.

Could also open the door to disabled people (e.g. wheelchair users) getting involved in refereeing which would be a huge bonus in terms of inclusivity.

 

[RustyRef]

They already have a career path where young referees give up being a referee for AR, wouldn't be impossible to introduce a third choice specialising into VAR.

That's extremely different. As an AR you are still involved at the game and on the pitch, not locked in a room at Stockley Park. Plus, as @JamesL has said, they have several years to make that ref vs AR decision, having experienced both. They aren't going to be experiencing VAR whilst coming through the ranks.

I know that you can coach at the top level without having played at that, or any, level. But it is still very rare, and is extremely difficult to get a role in the professional game if you haven't been a pro player. And coaching is very different, there's no right and wrong way of doing it, that isn't the case for refereeing. I just don't see how it would be credible for a VAR who hasn't officiated above the National League South telling Michael Oliver that he is got a decision wrong. There's already a view held by many that part of the problem with VAR is the new EPL referees are reluctant to tell the top FIFA officials that they have made a mistake, that would just be a whole different magnitude with dedicated VARs.

 

[Brian Hamilton]

That's extremely different. As an AR you are still involved at the game and on the pitch, not locked in a room at Stockley Park. Plus, as @JamesL has said, they have several years to make that ref vs AR decision, having experienced both. They aren't going to be experiencing VAR whilst coming through the ranks.

I know that you can coach at the top level without having played at that, or any, level. But it is still very rare, and is extremely difficult to get a role in the professional game if you haven't been a pro player. And coaching is very different, there's no right and wrong way of doing it, that isn't the case for refereeing. I just don't see how it would be credible for a VAR who hasn't officiated above the National League South telling Michael Oliver that he is got a decision wrong. There's already a view held by many that part of the problem with VAR is the new EPL referees are reluctant to tell the top FIFA officials that they have made a mistake, that would just be a whole different magnitude with dedicated VARs.

Its not even at the top level. I remember getting a call after a post match discussion with a 2B where I was "advised" to be less friendly (as the observer has no friends) with match officials. The call came because one of the ARs knew I had my progress curtailed by not making it past L5 because of a heart complaint. The referee effectively tried appealing to have my report struck out simply on the basis that I didn't know what it was like to officiate at his level. His appeal was doomed to failure as he couldn't find an error in it, neither in law nor description of events.

 

[Big Cat]

Its not even at the top level. I remember getting a call after a post match discussion with a 2B where I was "advised" to be less friendly (as the observer has no friends) with match officials. The call came because one of the ARs knew I had my progress curtailed by not making it past L5 because of a heart complaint. The referee effectively tried appealing to have my report struck out simply on the basis that I didn't know what it was like to officiate at his level. His appeal was doomed to failure as he couldn't find an error in it, neither in law nor description of events.

I understand it's not really possible to observe many levels above that at which you Refereed
That's just the way the game is I suppose

That model infers that today's refereeing can never be better that that of yesteryear

 

[RefGod]

Its not even at the top level. I remember getting a call after a post match discussion with a 2B where I was "advised" to be less friendly (as the observer has no friends) with match officials. The call came because one of the ARs knew I had my progress curtailed by not making it past L5 because of a heart complaint. The referee effectively tried appealing to have my report struck out simply on the basis that I didn't know what it was like to officiate at his level. His appeal was doomed to failure as he couldn't find an error in it, neither in law nor description of events.

You're a 5 who observes 2bs ?