From elsewhere but relevant to this.


__________________________________________________________________________

The biggest argument against video refs is stoppages in the game. That is by far and away the biggest complaint so sort that out and you have a workable solution.

So firstly:

Step #1. What are we looking at?

Taking a few obvious ones let's start with these.

(a) Fouls, just outside the area where a penalty has been called, or not.
(b) Goals scored from offside positions
(c) Shots that go over the line and aren't called in.

Forget fouls that were a red but only got a yellow, corner kicks that should have been goal kicks and other rubbish like that. Same goes for on field violence off the ball. All that can be looked at by the MRP. So no change there.

Step #2

Set a strict time limit. 15 to 20 seconds max to review with no stoppage of the game at all. This is IMPORTANT.

THE GAME DOES NOT STOP.

The video ref has 15 to 20 seconds only to make up his mind. If he can't decide in that time then the original decision stands no matter what it was.

Step #3.

In the event that a decision requires overturning the 4th official / video ref immediately signals the main ref (via radio because they're all hooked up anyway) of whatever it was. The ref stops play and restarts at the appropriate place of the infringement and/or goal or disallowed goal.

Example #1: Penalty called for an infringement outside the box or vice versa.

Scenario: Self explanatory. There's a natural stoppage here anyway either to set up a wall or set up for a penalty. Call would come down in plenty of time prior to any kick being taken.

Complication: Quick free kick that goes in. Allow the goal. Restart from halfway. Quick free kick that misses. No goal.

Teams will have to decide whether to run the risk of a quick free kick within the 15 to 20 second window. As most free kicks in the final third are "ceremonial" (ask a ref) 99 out of 100 free kicks won't be taken quickly.

Example #2:

Scenario: Goal scored from an offside player.

Result: Ref and linesman declare "Goal". Whilst players are moping back to restart with a kickoff, call comes through saying, "offside". Goal disallowed. Play restarts at offside infringement.

Complication. Marginal calls. Go back to the time limit. If it's not immediately obvious (IE within the time limit allowed which remember, is only 10's of seconds) then the original call stands.

Example #3

Scenario: Ball over the line from a shot or freekick that is not called.

Result: Ref waves play on. Video ref radios ref to say ball crossed line. Ref blows up the game, where ever the ball is on the park and says "Goal, your kickoff".

Complication: In the unlikely (and it's very unlikely) that the opposition team immediately takes the ball downtown and scores, providing the video ref notifies the ref within the set time limit, that goal is disallowed and the original is given.

It seems ridiculous that obvious, as in that ball that went over the line the other night, calls that are replayed in the stadium for all and sundry to see, that are clearly wrong, when the technology is available, to not make use of it.

I like the concept of VAR, but hate the thought of seeing less goals awarded.

I want to see more goals awarded, not less.

Roar's goal looked legit from  watching it live. I left the room, and when I returned I thought a third Roar goal must have been annulled.

These are all fairly reasonable.

You could also add that everytime the game is stopped the referee can quickly ask the VAR for an opinion.

An example could be a bad tackle. Referee asks VAR, yellow or red. The VAR can, with the same time restriction, have a look and give an opinion.

Also every time the referee consults with the linesman the communication should be heard by the VAR and could have an input as well.

I guess the only complication NOT considered is the linesman calls offside when striker put through one on one. Ref calls it up before a shot is taken. VAR finds the striker was onside ...

outcome: drop ball??

Hmmmm.  Tricky one.  That one needs some thought.

There'd be others.  I'm no guru on this but I think the above is miles better than what we have.

@Sokorny.  Based on your scenario above and in the interests of keeping the game flowing I'd say there'd be no VAR review if the ref makes a call either by himself or by deferring to a linesman.

We're chasing obvious errors right?

Line ball wrong decisions by linesman or refs should be left as is.  I would severely limit when, how, where and what the VAR could look at.

I think the rugby seems to have the best use of the system. The VAR watches the game live and and can have a quick word in the refs ear if they see something that the ref may have missed. Usually as stated above within a few seconds. For tries usually the ref will explicitly ask the ref to check specific things ... not everything and anything, and the ref gives their opinion "I think he grounded it correctly, so try. Can you please check grounding" ... that is all they look at then in the replay. Has to be clearly not grounded for on-field ref to be over ruled.

Could apply this to football I feel. In regards to the scenario I suggested, the only "answer" I believe would be for the ref to allow play to go on (i.e. much like cricket with run outs ... unless obvious it goes to the third umpire). Ideally you'd have two in the VAR room (if possible). I one quickly checks if they were or were not onside, the other continues to watch real time. Or if only one in VAR then play continues until a break. If only 10/15 seconds has elapsed (i.e. a goal / corner / goal kick comes from it directly) then can be reviewed, otherwise "onside". The only problem with this would be that the offside may be during the build up in play, or the ball doesn't go dead after the "review" point. That is make the run ... ruled "onside", the keeper saves back into play, defenders try to clear but goes to the attackers, who then play out wide and cross in for a goal. Although the goal is now legitimate, the original play that lead to the goal was "offside".

In the end to me it all suggests that we should simply just have refs and live with their mistakes. Although as another stated on here, about 6 months ago many on here were baying for the blood of refs and analysing every foul from multiple angles at varying speeds.

What about if an obvious error flagging the offside??

The problem to me becomes the interpretation of "obvious" error. This is why penalties would rarely be overturned, unless an obvious dive ... but as can be seen with Carney's penalty. The VAR has to agree with the ref because there was some contact, it doesn't matter that Carney dives because there was some contact. The VAR can't determine if it was sufficient contact or not to warrant a penalty.

imagine how short match threads will become if they keep the VAR

If anything VAR will see any form of contact as a penalty if the player goes down. 

These things are subjective. People still argue about referee decisions years later. 

I think VAR will eventually change lineman behaviour.  They'll be far less likely to flag for offside in tight calls knowing that if a goal is scored it can be overturned. I suspect eventually yesterday's incident will become a weekly occurrence.  

That has happened in cricket with run outs, send it to be reviewed even in clear cases just to be sure. I don't think it is a good thing. What happens if for some reason VAR cannot make a decision, the linesman can hardly turn around and say, I know I didn't flag it but it was offside.

Or, out of left field I know, you take away the linesman flagging for offside all together?  I wouldn't like to see the liney's role diminished and not flag but if we're testing ideas.....

Or you say VAR can only adjudge the last pass and leave it at that.

With regards to cricket I'm not sure why the square leg umpire even exists anymore.  Pretty much everything he does can be covered by the centre umpire and the TV.

The whole point is that the VAR is too arbitrary.There is no need to solve refereeing errors as we have always accepted they are part of the game.  By trying to do so you are only creating more problems than you are initially trying to solve. A classic case was last week the referee put his flag up too early while the "Wellington player was offside" and this week he didn't put his flag up in the Brisbane Roar game and it was brought back for offside. For both games I wouldn't have minded one bit if the original decisions on the field just stood. Yes I am aware that both calls on the field were wrong but that's how it goes in football. What we got in place of a free flowing game was a long stoppage in play, a decision that was taken back a number of phases, second guessing of referees and linesmen and just a genuine let down of what VAR is supposed to do. Even though VAR is getting the right decisions I still hate it with a passion and want it gone from our game. Its not right. 

If you look at the 3 scenarios above this isn't one of them. I'd keep it real basic.

The only time the VAR would be used for penalties if it was in or out of the box.

  

Nope.  As above keep it simple.  Too many stoppages. 

The game should never stop.  That's the #1 consideration here.

Funny cause I see a lot of bagging of refs after a big decision changes the outcome of a match...


Well VAR isn't going to change that, is it? The penalties like that on Saturday are still going to be there to argue about.

If VAR gets rid of the obvious errors, that's a good thing. We can still debate whether the ref got it right or wrong in tight calls that could go either way, but VAR will get rid of the shockers that everyone agrees on (e.g Berisha's dive in the grand final against Perth).

The only real issue for me is getting calls quickly. Like some have suggested, there should be some sort of rule that if the call can't be obviously changed in a certain amount of time, then it's too late. But when the game's stopped already (e.g. a goal has been scored), there's already a stoppage so taking a little longer isn't a big deal. Definitely don't need the ref to go over and watch the replay himself though - if it's not obvious enough for the VAR to make the call, then it's not obvious enough.

The situation where a player is called for offside incorrectly is a tough one. Game is stopped, even though he might have had a chance at scoring. Maybe when the linesman puts his flag up, the ref should be slower to whistle - let the player score, then see if the offside call should be overturned.

Everything I wrote about in my post was to occur when the game is already stopped, no extra stopping required.

Not sure why people are complaining about the Maccarone goal. Was it a farce? Yes. Was it exactly what the VAR was brought in for? Yes.

You can't bitch and moan about how bad officials are and want video assistance and then complain when that video assistance helps eliminate a howler of a decision.

The problem with yellows and reds are that they're subjective.  What's a straight red to you is a yellow for me. 

I'm on a referees forum in the UK and the amount of arguing that goes on in there, between refs mind you, is a great insight into what one blokes sees another doesn't.  And that's with the benefit of slo-mo's and different camera angles.

They even have a term for when they're not sure and that's an 'orange'.  IE halfway between a red and a yellow when they're still not sure.

Maybe the VAR could contribute when the ref consults his liney.  That's probably fair enough.   

Well the wheels have fallen off your argument there.  Berisha's foot was clipped and a million replays showed that clearly.  Surprising to hear this from a Sydney fan.  Thought only the Glory boys still whinged about this.

Was a great call from the ref.

did you see his face tho, like someone had taken away a puppy's evening bowl of jellymeat

@ sydneycroatia58

A "howler of a decision" - how the heck is that a howler decision? In real time the linesman could reasonably assume the ball might have come off the defender in which case Maccarone is on side. So it's no "howler".

Is that what the VAR was brought in for? Yes it was and even as a Roar fan I can't argue its offside.

But it's the arbitrary nature of its use - last week leading up to the equaliser from Adelaide Fox clearly showed the AU player made a foul throw ... pass, pass, pass, goal 1-1.

There's your howler. Not reviewed. why?

There's just too many incidents where the VAR is coming across as unfair. It's got a lot of fans offside and the authorities would be foolish to ignore that. In many people's eyes it's spoiling the game - a sentiment echoed by Union and League fans.

Was a poor decision whatever team you support. 

Huh? It was a dive but big deal. What you have to realise is that those who decide to cheat will be forever remembered for it.
Thierry Henry was supposedly one of the more honest and sincere footballers out there but he will be remembered as cheat against the Irish. I can totally understand why he did it, but till the day he dies that is one of the biggest things I will remember about him. He might look on with regret about it now, but its too late. The same goes with Berisha. Don't get me wrong a fantastic player in the A-league but I will still remember him as someone who had to dive in order to win the GF. He wasn't touched. 

His outside leg (left) was clipped which meant he trod on the ball and took an air swing.  It certainly wasn't a dive. 

But anyway make your own mind up.  Here's a video.  Take note of the topmost comment if you watch it through youtube.

 

It was a dive then and it is a dive now. If var ever gave that it would be a disgrace

@Coverdale

They ran that video as part of the pre-trial testing and training for VAR. Ben Williams reported it was unanimous - the penalty would have stood as there was no obvious error lol.

Wouldn't you rather live in a world where Henry's handball had been overturned, and you didn't have to remember him as a cheat? :laugh:

That's the crux!
VAR does nothing, but the idiots watching it make the call. So they could be wrong by bias, all it really does is stop the flow of the game and stuff all the supporters around for 3-5 minutes. 
It's just another bit of useless crap that does SFA.