All About The VARPosted: July 16, 2017 Filed under: Uncategorized 4 Comments
Last week the Confederation Cup was played in Russia and won by a German team missing many of that nation’s best players. The Confederation Cup tournament is a warm-up to the World Cup every four years, held in the host country of the next World Cup and many of the processes to be used the next year are tested for readiness in this smaller version of the world’s biggest sporting event. Stories like the success of the German B team, the continued strength of Chile, the failure of Mexico to dent the top tier teams (again) were all worthy of discussion, but the use of the Video Assistant Referee will have the greatest long-term effect on the sport.
The VAR is a technological addition to the management of the game that seeks to eliminate errors by the referee and assistants on the field. Added to the goal-line system that has been in place for several years, one gets the idea that FIFA is finally entering the modern era. To an American sporting audience familiar with the use of video replay in all other major spectator sports in this country, these changes beg a “what took you so long” response. But many Americans don’t understand the massive effect that tradition has on soccer around the world. Remember, this is the sport that still doesn’t recognize the invention of the stopwatch, so adding these other tech innovations represents a huge change in viewpoint by the organization that runs almost all soccer on the planet.
First, lets examine how the VAR works. While many up-to-date soccer fans know of it’s existence, very few know just how it works. First of all, the crew that operates the VAR system consists of 3 individuals. The crew can be at the location of the game or very near, but technological communication being what it is…the crew might be in a room hundreds of miles away. The crew consists of the head person – the Video Assistant Referee, who must be a present or past field referee, and who makes the final decisions of the VAR system. The second person is the Assistant Video Assistant Referee (no, I’m not making that up). The AVAR helps the VAR in making the calls. There is also a Replay Operator who operates the video machines and plays the appropriate bits of the game for the consideration of the other two. There is a bank of monitors so the two video refs can get many looks at the play and even compare them to each other. There are four types of plays that can be reviewed by the video crew: 1) goals – was there was a violation leading up to the scoring of the goal? These “violations” can be hand balls, missed fouls etc, but the primary question that tends to be decided is offside. 2) penalty kick decisions 3) straight red cards – red cards pulled as a result of a second yellow cannot be reviewed 4) mistaken identity in awarding a red or yellow card – yes, this seems strange, but it does happen once in a rare while.
A review can be called for by either the field referee or the VAR. Field refs occasionally know that they haven’t had the best vantage point for a call, so the VAR allows for another set of eyes (or two) to look at the play from a different view and speed. The VAR can conduct a check of a call without bothering the field ref if he feels that the call may be wrong. If all seems correct the VAR does nothing, this is called a “silent check”. If the VAR decides that there has been a “clear ” error ( that is the language that triggers a review) , the VAR notifies the field ref that the video indicates an error has been made. At that time the field ref can accept the judgement of the VAR or decide to take a look for himself by using a video system set up on the side of the field. The ref can also decide he was right with his initial decision and ignore the VAR. The on field play is stopped by the ref when a VAR review is taking place, a signal consisting of a rectangle formed by index fingers is given to notify fans when the review is being used. Players who make the rectangle motion to demand a review or who interfere with the process are given an automatic yellow card. Perhaps this is a first step in lowering the amount of dissent referees allow from players on a regular basis, a move long overdue. FIFA has provided guidelines in regard to the use of the system, especially in respect to slow motion. Regular speed is to be used in all cases except to determine the amount of contact in handballs and physical offenses. In reviewing goals and penalty kick decisions, the “beginning of the attacking phase” can be used as a starting point for the review.
The first major use of the system came in a friendly match between France and Spain this past March. France scored from a header set up by a chip from midfield. The goal was scored, the on-field assistant referee’s flag stayed down and the French celebrated. But the VAR reviewed the play and notified the on-field ref that the French were offside and the goal was taken away. And he was right.
Later in the match Spain had a goal disallowed by the on-field referee, but the VAR correctly found the goal was good. So a potential 1-1 draw became a 2-0 victory for Spain and the VAR had become a factor in international soccer.
Since then the system has been used most notably in the Confederation Cup and, as would be expected with the use of a new process in multiple games, the results were mixed. A couple decisions took a lengthy amount of time and the video tape was seemingly overlooked in a couple calls when the video indicated the standing decision was wrong. In the final match an elbow by a Chilean defender looked very deliberate and the on-field referee called for video review. Despite the video showing a very red-cardish foul, only a yellow was given. This, of course, set up howls of complaints about the system in general but FIFA President Gianni Infantino indicated after the tournament that he was happy with the overall performance of the process and it will be used in select future FIFA events including next summer’s World Cup. The system was good enough not to change Germany’s decision to use it in their national league next year and the English have indicated they will use it in their cup competitions next season with possible introduction to regular league competition in 2018. In the USA, the MLS is planning to use it in all games starting next month.
Of course, in a sport as tradition oriented as soccer, the VAR has produced lots of comments with opinions running both pro and con. The main complaint revolves around the time it can take to make decisions. Although some reviews have been quick enough to avoid major stoppages to play, others have taken long enough to stop the game flow completely. Goal decisions don’t disrupt the game very much as the time taken to celebrate goals is usually enough time to review the play. Reviews on foul decisions, which normally take little time, can stretch out when video is involved. But the Soccer Yoda has heard one complaint, voiced by a number of soccer pundits, which seems rather incredulous, at least to me. That is the concept that incorrect calls are part of the game- they provide a “human” element and many talking points for fans to argue about with each other. One would think that accuracy would be the major aim of referee decisions and not “talking points”, but some don’t see it that way. They point to Diego Maradona’s famous “Hand of God” goal scored on England in the 1986 World Cup as a moment which would never have been allowed by video and therefore a loss to soccer history. I look at it differently. In that same match, Maradona brilliantly dribbled through practically the entire English team starting from his own half to score a goal that might be the best goal ever scored in a major soccer competition, but the controversy over his hand ball goal commands the discussions of that game and that World Cup.
The laws of the game are explicit, they don’t give leeway for bad decisions by officials. Offside is offside, hand balls are not allowed. Flow can be important to the game and game stoppages can affect that flow. But FIFA has decided that accuracy in game-deciding referee decisions takes precedence. As for talking points, there are calls which require opinion…..fouls can be decided by the observer, red cards are frequently a matter of referee discretion. And the VAR system is still controlled by humans…there will still be controversy even as the process becomes more refined, fans will still have plenty to talk about, that is certain.
Well done! Key issue is fairness, not tradition.
I agree Joe, I understand the issue of game flow, but the unneeded and constant stoppages for exaggerated injuries is worse than the VAR system will ever be.
I’m all for it. No Thierry Henry handball goal. Better offsides decisions. The stoppage hasn’t been obtrusive. The violence reviews have been poorly handled. The elbow on Timo should have been a red. The Mexico-Chile (?) brawl was handled badly by the ref and the VAR. I think the VARs will get better over time. Diving is the another blight on the game: I wouldn’t go for in-game reviews of dives, but post mortem: for sure. I agree with yoda: stoppage for exaggerated injuries is more annoying then VAR reviews.
Thanks for the comment! and I agree….it’s overdue and will make game outcomes more just.