Umpires call in cricket v VAR

[Spijed]

Why was that rule brought in for cricket when in other sports such as tennis & offside in football it's black-and white?

If it's hitting the stumps for lbw then surely it should be out, regardless of whether it's just going to clip the outside stump.

In tennis, even if the ball is a fraction on the line it's still in, and likewise the other way it's called out.

In football we are seeing a toes width given as offside, so why all this rubbish about umpires call in cricket?

[Foulthrow]

I presume because they know that ball tracking can’t be 100% accurate, therefore unless all of the ball is hitting the stumps you go for umpires call. Works pretty well I think.

[dsr]

Why was that rule brought in for cricket when in other sports such as tennis & offside in football it's black-and white?

If it's hitting the stumps for lbw then surely it should be out, regardless of whether it's just going to clip the outside stump.

In tennis, even if the ball is a fraction on the line it's still in, and likewise the other way it's called out.

In football we are seeing a toes width given as offside, so why all this rubbish about umpires call in cricket?

In tennis, they're judging what has happened - did the ball hit the line, or not. In cricket, they're judging what might have happened - would the ball have hit the stumps, or not. It's a lot harder to do.

How accurate would the tennis calls be if they didn't use the pictures of actual spot where the ball hit the line, but instead cut off the film when the ball is a couple of yards away and had a guess?

[Dyched]

The bits I like from tennis/cricket are the challenges.

Non of this ******* about going to VAR every 5 minute. Both teams have 1 challenge in each half each. Job done.

[ClaretTony]

I presume because they know that ball tracking can’t be 100% accurate, therefore unless all of the ball is hitting the stumps you go for umpires call. Works pretty well I think.

That’s exactly it and it works perfectly

[Foulthrow]

The bits I like from tennis/cricket are the challenges.

Non of this ******* about going to VAR every 5 minute. Both teams have 1 challenge in each half each. Job done.

Yep. Exactly what they should do in football.

[rob63]

Yep. Exactly what they should do in football.

Two failed challenges per match with only the captain to question the referee?
Mind, it'd mean that captains would have to be halfway intelligent to decide the challenges......that could be a challenge in itself, good job Ibrahimovitch has gone!

[ClaretTony]

Not sure how you could implement a challenge system in football. Just wouldn’t work for me and who would make the challenge?

[Quickenthetempo]

Not sure how you could implement a challenge system in football. Just wouldn’t work for me and who would make the challenge?

The manager.

Then when he's giving the 4th official loads of stick they can just say stop mouthing off and challenge.

[dsr]

Not sure how you could implement a challenge system in football. Just wouldn’t work for me and who would make the challenge?

I can think of two possibles - either the manager telling the fourth official (and it's up to him how he gets the info from his players); or, any player on the field (and it's up to the manager how he decides who can be trusted to make the appeal and who isn't). Or possibly both players and manager.

Either way, the appeal would have to be very quick - perhaps 10 seconds - to avoid unfair advantage from the home team sneaking a peek at their own TV system.

[ClaretTony]

I can think of two possibles - either the manager telling the fourth official (and it's up to him how he gets the info from his players); or, any player on the field (and it's up to the manager how he decides who can be trusted to make the appeal and who isn't). Or possibly both players and manager.

And how would the referee know which player(s) had the authority?

[dsr]

And how would the referee know which player(s) had the authority?

All players would have the right under the laws to make an appeal. My point was that the manager would have to tell his players, or some of them, to keep their mouths shut at all costs.

[ClaretTony]

All players would have the right under the laws to make an appeal. My point was that the manager would have to tell his players, or some of them, to keep their mouths shut at all costs.

Brilliant - so that sorts VAR out then.

[rob63]

I can think of two possibles - either the manager telling the fourth official (and it's up to him how he gets the info from his players); or, any player on the field (and it's up to the manager how he decides who can be trusted to make the appeal and who isn't). Or possibly both players and manager.

Either way, the appeal would have to be very quick - perhaps 10 seconds - to avoid unfair advantage from the home team sneaking a peek at their own TV system.

The TV thing is the reason why only the captain is allowed to challenge for the bowling side & also why there's a time limit on it

[MDWat]

I presume because they know that ball tracking can’t be 100% accurate, therefore unless all of the ball is hitting the stumps you go for umpires call. Works pretty well I think.

Pretty simple for me with VAR. Well, two simple options.

1. Sack VAR off. It's crap and it's ruining the game.
2. If we have to have VAR, introduce a 'margin of error' or more backing the official where possible, in a similar way to Umpire's call.

The description above isn't correct - it's dependent on what the Umpire has given on the field as to whether something is given out or not, and it's based on HALF the ball or more hitting the stumps or not. If an Umpire gives not out, and the technology shows that less than half the ball is going to hit the stumps, the decision remains at not out. This gives the Umpire the autonomy to make what they believe to be the right decision.

I think it'd be pretty easy to implement something similar with offside, though it's only possible where offside isn't given due to the game stopping when it is given. The linesman is encouraged to give whatever decision they think is correct. If they say onside and a goal is scored, use the replays to determine how offside it is. If it's a toe, that shouldn't be given as offside in my view. There would need to be a pre-determined amount that is acceptable (5cm, 10cm, whatever it is) and if it's within those parameters, you stick with the Assistant's decision. Otherwise, you might as well just get rid of the Assistant Referee.

Red cards are fine for VAR - it either is or it isn't and if a referee has missed it, I'm fine with them looking at an incident again. Same with mistaken identity.

Penalties are a nonsense though. The handball rule needs (yet another) re-write. Should be intentional handball only, or where it's directly stopping a goal in my view.

They should also use it for diving outside the box.

[Foulthrow]

I think this is a good idea. In cricket we have seen the system evolve quite well and teams are pretty savvy in how they review now. Obviously, most teams would automatically review pretty much every goal, penalty or red card but, like we saw yesterday at Lords, Root just walked off for his lbw even though he knew how important it was.

[arise_sir_charge]

The technology in cricket and tennis is far more advanced than that in football and works because the games are stop start in any event. There are many natural breaks in play within cricket and tennis.

VAR should be scrapped until such a point that the technology is capable of doing what they want it to.

One thing I would change in cricket is umpires call. If it’s hitting it’s hitting and should be given out. As it is umpires call allows opposite teams to get different calls on identical decisions.

[MDWat]

The technology in cricket and tennis is far more advanced than that in football and works because the games are stop start in any event. There are many natural breaks in play within cricket and tennis.

VAR should be scrapped until such a point that the technology is capable of doing what they want it to.

One thing I would change in cricket is umpires call. If it’s hitting it’s hitting and should be given out. As it is umpires call allows opposite teams to get different calls on identical decisions.

It leaves the decision making up to the decision maker though and that's important, otherwise they might as well not be there. And we need them there!

[arise_sir_charge]

I don’t think it does. There are multiple decisions given out and not challenged.

[Foulthrow]

Pretty simple for me with VAR. Well, two simple options.

1. Sack VAR off. It's crap and it's ruining the game.
2. If we have to have VAR, introduce a 'margin of error' or more backing the official where possible, in a similar way to Umpire's call.

The description above isn't correct - it's dependent on what the Umpire has given on the field as to whether something is given out or not, and it's based on HALF the ball or more hitting the stumps or not. If an Umpire gives not out, and the technology shows that less than half the ball is going to hit the stumps, the decision remains at not out. This gives the Umpire the autonomy to make what they believe to be the right decision.

I think it'd be pretty easy to implement something similar with offside, though it's only possible where offside isn't given due to the game stopping when it is given. The linesman is encouraged to give whatever decision they think is correct. If they say onside and a goal is scored, use the replays to determine how offside it is. If it's a toe, that shouldn't be given as offside in my view. There would need to be a pre-determined amount that is acceptable (5cm, 10cm, whatever it is) and if it's within those parameters, you stick with the Assistant's decision. Otherwise, you might as well just get rid of the Assistant Referee.

Red cards are fine for VAR - it either is or it isn't and if a referee has missed it, I'm fine with them looking at an incident again. Same with mistaken identity.

Penalties are a nonsense though. The handball rule needs (yet another) re-write. Should be intentional handball only, or where it's directly stopping a goal in my view.

They should also use it for diving outside the box.

Agree with pretty much all of that and I suspect we’ll end up with a system very much like that in the end. However, it will probably take a season or two or VAR carnage before we get to that point.

VAR is frustrating me from a couple of points.

Firstly, a number of sports have implemented similar systems yet football doesn’t seem to have looked at how they use it or learnt the lessons of what has worked and what hasn’t.

Secondl, they are so obsessed with getting this system implemented whilst ignoring some of the easy things that could be done to make a referees life easier. For example, why doesn’t the fourth official (or someone else) control the time. He could have a huge stopwatch type thing that gets stopped when the ball isn’t in play. Teams would still try to slow things down but at least the added time wouldn’t be completely arbitrary - as it is now. Why don’t they make it a standard yellow for anyone bar the captain approaching the ref? Refs are miked up now - anyone verbally abusing them = automatic red. Anyone diving- and it’s clear and obvious - 5 game ban.

They should focus on things they can solve not things that they can’t.

[dsr]

The technology in cricket and tennis is far more advanced than that in football and works because the games are stop start in any event. There are many natural breaks in play within cricket and tennis.

VAR should be scrapped until such a point that the technology is capable of doing what they want it to.

One thing I would change in cricket is umpires call. If it’s hitting it’s hitting and should be given out. As it is umpires call allows opposite teams to get different calls on identical decisions.

What you mean is that if hawkeye's best guess says it's hitting, then it should be given out. Hawkeye's operators claim (with justification, I believe) that it is more or less perfect at assessing what has happened, but they don't claim perfection at assessing what will happen in the future.

It's a fair argument about the "different decisions" call, but it's not based on certainty.

[Spijed]

What you mean is that if hawkeye's best guess says it's hitting, then it should be given out. Hawkeye's operators claim (with justification, I believe) that it is more or less perfect at assessing what has happened, but they don't claim perfection at assessing what will happen in the future.

It's a fair argument about the "different decisions" call, but it's not based on certainty.

Surely with technology, they could accurately predict wind speed and other deviations from the point at which the ball hits the pitch until it reaches the stumps (to a fraction of an inch)?

[Devils_Advocate]

One of the challenges with VAR in football is that a lot of the decisions are ones where 2d camera's are not great in proving a conclusive answer. Whether there was contact between players who are at different depths really needs 3d and apart from where refs miss something blatant eyes are much better than cameras.

The comparison to this in cricket is where there is contention whether a catch touched the ground and they find it virtually impossible in cricket to make a conclusive decision. Even on LBW they nearly always need the snicko to confirm if the ball touches the bat or not cos again 2d camera is too unclear

Personally I don't think that refs are as bad as people think and the problem often lies more that supporters, managers and players are so biased they think every decision against them is wrong. Every football fan I talk too thinks they get all the bad refs and they have all the decisions go against them which mathematically cannot be true.

Even if we get VAR working well in football all you will see is a shift in fans disagreeing with the 3rd official and still thinking they are rubbish and that everything goes against them.

VAR is great for goal line technology and could be brilliantly if used sparingly for absolute clangers but football matters so much and there is so much at stake once technology is there the pressure will be to use it for every little thing which will slow down and take a lot of excitement out of the game without removing supporters feelings that they get bad decisions that constantly cost them

[dsr]

Surely with technology, they could accurately predict wind speed and other deviations from the point at which the ball hits the pitch until it reaches the stumps (to a fraction of an inch)?

Nope. For one thing, they don't have an accurate anemometer positioned by the stumps; for another, the swing of the ball is not an exact science. Just because it swung half an inch over the previous two yards doesn't mean it will swing half an inch over the next two. And the information they can work on is limited to the path of the ball after it bounces, so it's not a long flightpath.