santa sangria
RefChat Addict
Imagine, you have the power, you are Arsene, Collina, Ceferin and Infantino rolled into one. You have to make a choice about VAR for next season. What do you decide?
Simple poll - the state of the refchat nation - what would you do with VAR?
- Thread starter santa sangria
- Start date
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
Same goes to other poll respondents - if you are answered with major/minor changes, of course would be interesting if you have concrete ideas?
think i've stated my preferred solutions a few times...
major changes needed to take on a challenge based system.
each team/manager/captain has a set number of challenges per game (my ideal solution would be 2, they can be used to challenge any type of decision but you use them, you lose them whether right or wrong, means you really need to pick your challenges carefully and not on a whim) and they must be initiated within a set time frame (10/15 seconds) of the incident to prevent clubs using replays to check if a challenge is warranted.
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
While I haven't been a fan of the challenge idea, I'm becoming less of an opponent.
Although in some ways it feels like moving control from the referee, in another it is going back to the roots of the game: the game started without an arbiter, and team captains managed the rules. That didn't always work, so they added an official who only got involved if the captains disagreed. The captains would refer the dispute to him--hence the word referee (the one to whom it is referred).
Although in some ways it feels like moving control from the referee, in another it is going back to the roots of the game: the game started without an arbiter, and team captains managed the rules. That didn't always work, so they added an official who only got involved if the captains disagreed. The captains would refer the dispute to him--hence the word referee (the one to whom it is referred).
I'm for challenging. And happy to accept frivolous challenges late in the game.
Challenges are tactical in nature imo.
My other want is communication between VAR and referee. Be that afterwards, or in game. A lot debate around var decisions and subsequent follow on is born out of no understanding of a) the VAR process b) the laws c) the thresholds for involvement and non involvement of the VAR.
Edit: and an inconclusive area where the on field decision will stand eg offside etc.
Challenges are tactical in nature imo.
My other want is communication between VAR and referee. Be that afterwards, or in game. A lot debate around var decisions and subsequent follow on is born out of no understanding of a) the VAR process b) the laws c) the thresholds for involvement and non involvement of the VAR.
Edit: and an inconclusive area where the on field decision will stand eg offside etc.
yes, 100%, this is needed.
Justylove
RefChat Addict
Biggest thing for me is hearing the communication between on field officials and VAR.
We know the vast majority of people who watch don’t understand the law in detail and this would be a good way of helping to demystify the decision making as to what the law actually says.
We know the vast majority of people who watch don’t understand the law in detail and this would be a good way of helping to demystify the decision making as to what the law actually says.
Russell Jones
RefChat Addict
For me, football is a game where all the participants should be entitled to make mistakes. Players do, managers do, clubs do ... the intention of VAR was to try and make the officials a "special case" in this and it has failed miserably.
I can see the arguments for a radically simplified / changed system and I'd support that if we start from the (probably likely) premise that it's 'here to stay'. However, for me, ANY VAR system will still impact the natural fluidity of the game and take away the critical moments of instinctive celebration ... so the downsides will outweigh the benefits
I can see the arguments for a radically simplified / changed system and I'd support that if we start from the (probably likely) premise that it's 'here to stay'. However, for me, ANY VAR system will still impact the natural fluidity of the game and take away the critical moments of instinctive celebration ... so the downsides will outweigh the benefits
I said major changes. The key for me, certainly in England, is more communication around the decisions. Ideally broadcasting the audio live, but if that can't be done broadcast it a couple of days later like they do in the US and Australia so that at least people know the rationale.
What constitutes a clear and obvious mistake needs to be prescribed in more detail, it is just too woolly at the moment. And there needs to be a consistent implementation of VAR worldwide, stop countries for doing it their own way. PGMOL are more compliant this season, but are still putting out tweaks like revisions to handball guidance mid-season.
Let's be clear though, it is here to stay so they need to make it work.
What constitutes a clear and obvious mistake needs to be prescribed in more detail, it is just too woolly at the moment. And there needs to be a consistent implementation of VAR worldwide, stop countries for doing it their own way. PGMOL are more compliant this season, but are still putting out tweaks like revisions to handball guidance mid-season.
Let's be clear though, it is here to stay so they need to make it work.
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
I hope more people “vote” as it would be interesting if the same pattern continues.
I would like audio - but my guess is that very few prem referees would be able to do it. Dre is articulate, Clatts would have been, Madely and Webb surely... but public speaking is not why the bulk of refs at the top have been selected.
It would be really interesting if “challenge system” came out as the leading idea for major change. On one hand, yes, I like it as in principle it solves the clear&obvious problem. My fear is that a challenge system is some kind of default idea - a last hope - and really the only idea available to try to rescue this. But, OK, try it.
I would like audio - but my guess is that very few prem referees would be able to do it. Dre is articulate, Clatts would have been, Madely and Webb surely... but public speaking is not why the bulk of refs at the top have been selected.
It would be really interesting if “challenge system” came out as the leading idea for major change. On one hand, yes, I like it as in principle it solves the clear&obvious problem. My fear is that a challenge system is some kind of default idea - a last hope - and really the only idea available to try to rescue this. But, OK, try it.
We're not talking about public speaking. Look at all other sports (nfl/nhl/cricket/rugby) and the conversations between VAR equivalent, the ref and the public is undertaken in a very structured way using concise terms and phrases. Sure it would take time to get right and iron out but I don't see it being any sort of blocker.
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
Well, I like the positivity... but... not to diss our top flight colleagues... my guess is part of the reason they do not give press conferences, review games or get on the mic is that are not so articulate in the heat of battle. Perhaps, it can be easily trained, but TBH I think it will take a generational change in the chiefs and refs.
I think that's pretty dismissive tbh and as you say, a bit of training would go a long way if anyone needs a helping hand.
Think it is more that they aren't allowed to. We've heard most of the SG1 referees talk at events, conferences, or with Mike Dean even on the Peter Crouch podcast, so I don't think there is an ability problem, it is just not allowed.
one
RefChat Addict
Offside to have conclusive (C&O) evidence that the AR was wrong before changing it. Any technology used must be precise, insignificant margin of error and automated or not used at all. No guess work.
C&O to be enforced tightly and what it originally meant. Just about any neutral person/referee should think it was wrong. If there is debate about it, then it's not C&O.
OFR to be tightened and done correctly. E.g. always start with a full speed replay.
I'm more or less going back to how it was originally designed and meant to be operated. I feel like what I was sold and what I received are two very different things.
C&O to be enforced tightly and what it originally meant. Just about any neutral person/referee should think it was wrong. If there is debate about it, then it's not C&O.
OFR to be tightened and done correctly. E.g. always start with a full speed replay.
I'm more or less going back to how it was originally designed and meant to be operated. I feel like what I was sold and what I received are two very different things.