How does the PL fix the VAR problem?

[jlup1980]

This season has been a complete shambles where VAR is concerned, I think we can all agree on that. Last night was just the latest in a number of dodgy decisions that leave us all scratching our heads. We're living in a world where you genuinely can't predict what the outcomes are going to be - there is no consistency; so how does the PL sort the mess they've created?

Personally I think they need to start by going back to the original reason VAR was introduced; clear and obvious errors. In my experience clear and obvious errors are exactly that; you know almost immediately that a mistake has been made.

With this in mind, should there be a time limit on how long an incident can be reviewed? For arguments sake, let's say the VAR officials are given 30 seconds from the moment they tell the referee there could be a review to make a decision. That's more than enough time to watch several replays. If the 30 seconds pass-by and they haven't found something conclusive then by it's very nature it cannot be considered to be clear and obvious; surely? It won't be perfect and it will likely miss the odd thing here and there, but at least it gives you a base to work from and everyone knows where they stand beforehand. Watching replays from 6 different angles over 3 minutes can never be clear and obvious.

[bumba]

Clear and obvious is a smoke screen it can never work that way.
Once they've slowed it down so much then change the angles and find something to disallow the goal for they will push ahead with it.
They'll all meet up during the week high fiving saying what a good spot it were they've no idea that they are ruining football.
It needs ex pros on the VAR panel with a referee it's the only way it'll work and the referee needs to be mic'd up for everybody to listen to like rugby it'd stop all dissent too because a player couldn't argue if he's sent off for bad language when everybody is listening.
It's a very simple game being ruined by idiots.

[Vincent'sCap]

We should scrap it all together and get our National game back because right now it's a shambles

[Vegas Claret]

the two ex refs have it right

[quoonbeatz]

By getting rid of it. It's completely unnecessary, beyond badly managed and is ruining the sport.

Goal line technology yes, the rest, no.

[RVclaret]

Put the money it’s costing every season (£1.2m per club I read) into referee development.

[BleedingClaret]

Put ex players in the VAR room

[Napoleon]

Stick to clear and obvious errors.
For the VAR refs;
Watch 3 different angles only once each
No slow motion replays
Max time, say 20 seconds for each review
No need for ref to view monitor, if it's a clear error opinions aren't needed.

[Dark Cloud]

By getting rid of it. It's completely unnecessary, beyond badly managed and is ruining the sport.

Goal line technology yes, the rest, no.

As I've just posted on another thread, there's a reason why goal line technology works and it's the same reason that Hawkeye works in tennis and DRS for LBWs etc in cricket. That's because the human element has been removed and the technology makes the call. VAR is useless because it still totally relies on human judgement and the circle of people looking at it, including the ref, all have a view. Thus it's pointless as all it's done is bring more people into the decision making process, but they're still people and they still get stuff wrong.

[Bordeauxclaret]

Stop giving control of it to absolute clowns.

[Tricky Trevor]

Scrap the old boys club that is PGMOL. Been a disaster since day one and the standard of refereeing is at its worst ever.
All refs make mistakes and I can live with that so spread the load and bring some of the younger guys in from lower divisions.

[CrosspoolClarets]

I’d say scrap it because it replaces one unfairness with another, so the ruining of the enjoyment of attending fans isn’t worth it. Yesterday all the young kids in our end were celebrating a winner then have to have it explained why it isn’t a goal.

But it is a FIFA thing now so is here to stay.

So I would say the intervention should be “beyond any reasonable doubt” like a court case. VAR handballs should be for instances like Maradona, missed by the ref, VAR coming into use rarely but importantly. We are seeing it more than once in every game. The offside thing needs thicker bars because I’m not convinced by the accuracy of the moment of freeze frame (in the time the ball compresses on the boot a player can run half a metre, so it can’t be accurate just showing it on the boot).

So that’s the secret - to make it just for the really obvious stuff, like, sadly, Foster’s elbow. It isn’t really a secret though, it’s darn obvious what needs to be done, annoyingly.

[Dinks]

Put ex players in the VAR room

What you mean?
Dicks like Merson please don't consider this.

[Roosterbooster]

I'm not sure the argument of "ex-players" is the fix we are looking for. Too many times I've heard ex and current pros commentate on games and provide nothing more than an audible expression of idiocy. Some ex pros are excellent, and can clearly balance the evidence to provide a reasonable judgement. Some would struggle to spell VAR

Here's my solution

3 independent VARs looking at the same pictures
30s max to reach a conclusion
All VARs must agree to overturn the onfield decision
Slow motion used ONLY to prove a negative. E.g didn't touch the hand/arm, or no contact with player. But full speed must also be used to provide context

[Conroy92]

Very simply put it needs scrapping.

There are so many reasons for scrapping it but the only reason I can see to keep it is so that mistakes are "corrected". The problem is it isn't correcting mistakes, and we are getting just as many through the use and interpretation of it.

Reason for getting rid of it include and not limited too:-

Killing Celebrations/Fan enjoyment
Wasted periods of play
Still multiple mistakes but the frustration factor is bigger
The talking points that it creates just distracts from the football.

Clough was right years ago when he talked about punditry and the game, all VAR has done is allow pundits to tell us about the game rather than letting us watch it. The amount of time spent breaking down these naff decisions is just boring.

[Goody1975]

In large parts VAR is pointless.

You can have an identical situation where the onfield referee gives a different opinion from one week to the next. VAR looks at both and gives a different outcome as they stick with the referees decision.

VAR has to be consistent or should just stick to factual decisions like onside/offside and the ball being out of play.

Otherwise we might as well have stuck with what we already had, far less hassle.

[Conroy92]

The fact they have had to look at altering rules to help VAR such as handballs and offsides absolutely stinks. We are changing the game to suit it and in reality VAR needs to change to suit the game.

[Vegas Claret]

Put ex players in the VAR room

they aren't allowed to at the moment, I think that's a FIFA or UEFA thing.

[Conroy92]

Personally I don't think anyone should be making decision in the VAR room. I would much rather someone tell the ref in his ear piece, you've made a big call there, were not sure if its right or wrong but have another look and if your happy with your decision then stick with it, if not youve a chance to change it.

Instead its

"go to the monitor that should have been disallowed for handball"

I wonder when we will see a referee grow the ******** to go to the screen and ignore the VAR team in his ear after rewatching and saying you know what, i think i got it right first time I'm sticking with it.

[claretspice]

As a preliminary point, I think we have to accept that this is not just a Premier League issue. Around the Europe there have been more examples than you might expect of TV officials getting it wrong. And I think there are a couple of linked reasons for this.

The first reason is that I think match officials who have come up through the ranks and trained their brains to make decisions based on processing what they saw happen in front of them in real time struggle with having to look at things multiple times and from multiple angles. That might sound odd but it isn't. All of their training - and the skills that got them to the top in the first place - is about having really good instincts, and having the courage to trust them and to use techniques to help them use those instincts as effectively as possible. You are asking them to suddenly start making decisions in the opposite way using an analytical skill set. Unsurprisingly, they aren't all very good at it. There's no reason why they should be.

The second bit is about the technology itself. About 15+ years ago, Cricket went through a lot of pain around the foreshortening of images and the distorting effect of that on replays - because it believed, wrongly, that the camera couldn't lie. It can and it does. Football does not appear to have learned that lesson yet to me. We are still at the point when TV officials are relying on images that - quite literally - distort the actual events, by slowing them down to the nth degree, and trusting a 2D projection of a 3D image. Cricket now judges things like inside edges by lining the snickometer up with side on images, not front on images, or splitting the screen to show both front and side on images simultaneously. It also uses full speed replays. And it understands that sometimes the TV image itself needs to be treated with caution.

Those points are ultimately interlinked because the point is that being a TV official (in any sport, actually, but especially football given the pace of the game) is a specialist job. It needs someone with a really good analytical mind and who understands the limits of tech. They will almost certainly be different people to those who are good at refereeing a game in real time on the pitch. The only thing they need to have in common is an understanding of the rules.

[Cirrus_Minor]

I don't know why we have to have the referees being requested to go back to a screen on pitch side. This is just adding unnecessary theatre, making the referee centre of attention. If the team watching remotely can't decide then clearly the referees original decision should stand.

VAR was originally brought in to make sure that the correct decision is made for crucial action. It is making it worse. Either sort it or scrap it.

[claretspice]

Put ex players in the VAR room

No particular reason why ex pros would be any better. The key thing is to find the best qualified people to be video refs from wherever they may come from.

[dougcollins]

Are you sure the PL thinks there is a problem?

[Spijed]

Interesting that Rugby is often used as how VAR is being used properly & correctly, but as has been seen quite a few times in the rugby world cup it's just as much open to mistakes as football is. Especially when it's down to the opinion of the referee and those operating TMO.

[Duffer_]

Scrap it! The authorities are complaining that it takes too long to complete a match, so what is their answer? It is to further reduce the spectacle by increasing the number of sendings off for spurious time wasting, instead of getting rid of the biggest waste of time of all!

https://www.change.org/p/the-premier-le ... e-football

[Colburn_Claret]

Scrapping VAR wouldn't solve the problems of terrible decision making. The problem is the officials controlling it. Rather like a car is only as good as the driver.

If we cannot trust officials, and I don't, it has to be taken out of their hands, or at least give them help. Create a panel, include ex pros, people who understand the game, anything that stops a smug, arrogant, faceless, unaccountable tool from ruining the game.

[dushanbe]

I don't like it one bit, but we are definitely stuck with it now. That being the case, it should just be used for non-subjective decisions like offside where its either on or off, mistaken identities and absolute rickets, like when the ball went out of play before United scored the other day. At the moment its being used for decisions that are open to opinion and its ruining football.

[LaLigaClaret]

VAR is destroying the game completely as we are now getting completely stupid and incorrect decisions on a regular basis. It makes me wonder whether there is corruption going on. It is also absolutely pathetic that goals are given or struck off on the basis of fag paper differences in distance based on someone's little finger or eyelash measurement.

[RMutt]

Are you sure the PL thinks there is a problem?

I don’t think they do. They won’t bat an eyelid at last night’s decision.
They will look at the use of VAR objectively (ironic, given the type of mistakes we are talking about) from a statistical point of view. How many wrong decisions have been overturned against how many wrong decisions have been made because of it.
As long as the balance is in favour they’ll just keep adjusting it, oddly by changing the rules of the game in some instances.
The supporter experience, particularly live at the ground, won’t come into it.
I wish it had never been introduced but the genie is out of the bottle now unfortunately.

[Spijed]

Scrapping VAR wouldn't solve the problems of terrible decision making. The problem is the officials controlling it. Rather like a car is only as good as the driver.

If we cannot trust officials, and I don't, it has to be taken out of their hands, or at least give them help. Create a panel, include ex pros, people who understand the game, anything that stops a smug, arrogant, faceless, unaccountable tool from ruining the game.

I suspect whoever you get it won't make much difference. As I mentioned with the Rugby, for some reason it's held up as the standard bearer of officiating but in the current world cup there has been some bloody awful decisions. No better than football.

So pro's, ex-pro's, those who have played, never played, you'll always get good/poor opinions.

The only solution is to get rid of VAR completely and go with the flow on a match day.

[Claretforever]

It has to be automated instead of bringing in human emotions. How much has the ref been swayed by the crowd for a start? Then factor in he knows he can never be 100%, but that a professional colleague is questioning his decision by asking him “are you sure?” By suggesting a visit to the monitor. He will always change his mind.

I’d like rid of it but doubt that’ll happen. Automate offsides like at the World Cup, so it’s immediate. Then only check potential red card offences.

[Rick_Muller]

personally after experiencing it, I'd scrap it in its current form but still continue to use the technology as it does have some purpose.

Goal line tech - yes, as its a did it go over or not. No problem.

Offside - VAR should never be used for this during a game. Post game as a learning point for the officials, yes it has a use. All with a caveat that VAR can (not must!) highlight to the on field officials that a serious error has occurred - which is what they should be doing now, but fail miserably with when it comes to offside.

Violent conduct and other incidents - VAR should be used retrospectively in these incidents to "correct" on field issues that were missed by the officials during the game. I'd go as far as to say simulation etc players should be banned for a game if they have clearly attempted to con the ref. Violent conduct (yes like Foster last night) should be dealt with after the game if the on field officials miss it (after all they're allegedly human!). If the on field officials do see the incidents but get the punishment wrong, then they should be enabled to retrospectively fix the issue but lengthening or shortening the punishment accordingly.

The officials need to feel that it is OK to make mistakes sometimes, but that will never come with the amount of money involved.

None of this is helped by the pundits (muppets?) constantly dissecting each and every decision and apportioning blame to the officials when it goes against their favourite team (don't ever claim they're impartial!), all of which contributes to the fervour for supporters watching which I suppose the TV money wants them to generate right...

[dsr]

Interesting that Rugby is often used as how VAR is being used properly & correctly, but as has been seen quite a few times in the rugby world cup it's just as much open to mistakes as football is. Especially when it's down to the opinion of the referee and those operating TMO.

Rugby League is the one they should look at for how to work VAR. For one thing, in rugby league the referee is the man with the whistle on the pitch, not the man in the studio with a telly. If the referee says it's a try, then it's a try. If the referee has some uncertainty, then he makes his decision but asks the TV man for confirmation. the TV man will only go against the ref's decision if he can prove the ref is wrong.

I'm sure that attitude could be adapted for football.

[RicardoMontalban]

It’s got to be the bin for VAR.

From a PR point of view alone it’s just a disaster every week. Simon Evans made an interesting comment on the pod that it’s massively overused in the PL compared to other leagues that have it. It’s a cultural, obsessive, control freak thing that our refs seem to have that seems to suggest this lot are just never going to use it in a pragmatic and measured way. They’ve just gone down some rabbit hole where they’re so fixated on not missing something that they overuse and overanalyse to the point of ruining the game, and that points to a cultural issue within the PGMOL.

Take their toy away, they can’t be relied upon to use it properly.

[quoonbeatz]

Scrapping VAR wouldn't solve the problems of terrible decision making. The problem is the officials controlling it. Rather like a car is only as good as the driver.

If we cannot trust officials, and I don't, it has to be taken out of their hands, or at least give them help. Create a panel, include ex pros, people who understand the game, anything that stops a smug, arrogant, faceless, unaccountable tool from ruining the game.

Scrapping var wouldn't stop crap decisions but that's not really the point. A football match should never be refereed by someone who isn't even in the ground but that's where we are. The on pitch referee is almost a peripheral figure now because any decision they make is checked by someone else. Liners are alresdy obselete. There's no accountability on the pitch yet they wonder why there's no respect for and no trust in referees.

We need to go back to what we had to save the game. The 3 officials between them make the decisions on the pitch and even if they're wrong, we live with them. That's how sport works. VAR can never truly work in football.

[dsr]

Scrap it for now. Then set up a committee who can look into how it could be done right (and Lord knows, they have plenty of examples of how it is done wrong to learn from) and then reintroduce it when it can be used without spoiling the game.

At present it spoils the game more than referee errors ever did.

[BleedingClaret]

No particular reason why ex pros would be any better. The key thing is to find the best qualified people to be video refs from wherever they may come from.

I think playing the game gives you a better understanding of the game than watching or officiating ever will

[BleedingClaret]

they aren't allowed to at the moment, I think that's a FIFA or UEFA thing.

Strange directive then

[BleedingClaret]

What you mean?
Dicks like Merson please don't consider this.

There are few more ex players than Dicks like Merson

[whiffa]

For me, it needs to be simplified that an on-pitch decision can only be overturned if it is absolutely 100% guaranteed to be the incorrect decision - without debate from 99% of fans. Otherwise let the original decision stand. If there is debate, at all - it should stick with the ref's original decision.

[Vegas Claret]

if it needs slowing down to get a decision then it's not clear and obvious - they get 3 replays all at full speed and a maximum of 1 minute to watch them, if they haven't seen enough then the on field decision should stand. It's been made easy for them to over think decisions.

[Scampi]

I struggle to see how a consistently applied system can ever be devised that works for subjective decisions being made in a dynamic fast-paced environment.

As a lawyer I spend all my working life thinking about rules - how they work, how they apply and when they apply. Two inherent problems with using VAR:

1) What is the threshold for review? How can a clear and consistent rule work that says what that threshold is? Any perceived error? Any error in a certain phase of play? Any error of a certain perceived severity or impact? How far back do you go? (the Lyle Foster problem from last night - why not go back to the foul on him?)

2) Then what is the threshold for changing the decision? "Clear and obvious" is so vague as be a pointless test. So what should it be or what even could it be?

I just don't see how you can ever come up with the right tests and rules that can ever be clear and capable of being applied quickly.

I've always figured that the Thierry Henry handball for France against Ireland is what really prompted VAR - and those are really the situations that we would be looking to remedy. To do that, problem number 1 should be removed by making VAR interventions solely at the decision of the appealing team. And to be honest, I would be as restrictive as to say that they only get say 5 chances per season.

[ClaretAL]

Currently enjoying the Rugby world cup, and the handle the VAR (TMO) absolutely brilliantly. Their process is the Referee on the pitch instigates the TMO and asks the remote viewer to show him a certain angle so he can double check his decision, as opposed to football VAR that the remote ref instigates the review and more or less tells the referee what the decision should be and proves it by selecting his own angle to back up his claim, and this could be seen in the ref going to the pitch monitor tonight and instantly making a decision from and angle in favour of what the remote ref wanted the outcome to be, rather than viewing from an angle the on field ref wanted.

All that said we don't seem to have a problem with VAR in Euro and world cup tournaments as the remote refs are from other countries, so maybe it is our inept use of it in this country.

[whiffa]

I just look at how they do it in Rugby, with good replays, mic'ed up refs and seemingly correct decisions. I don't understand how it's so difficult in football to get it right.

[Hipper]

I don't know why we have to have the referees being requested to go back to a screen on pitch side. This is just adding unnecessary theatre, making the referee centre of attention. If the team watching remotely can't decide then clearly the referees original decision should stand.

VAR was originally brought in to make sure that the correct decision is made for crucial action. It is making it worse. Either sort it or scrap it.

Because the general principle is that the man in the middle is in charge and has the final say. VAR is, as far as I'm aware, advisory.

For example, in the case of our disallowed goal I doubt that Jones could have seen any handball himself as he would have been behind Berge/McKenna. His assistant may have but as it was a swift break he was probably a bit behind the play and even if he was in line Berge had both arms up so he probably wouldn't have seen anything anyway. This situation is exactly what VAR was meant for.

If there was a hand ball it is right that VAR asks the ref to check the monitor. I don't think it matters how he transmits this information, from 'there's a clear handball' to 'their may be a handball' (how do people on here know what the VAR official said?). The ref should be strong enough to decide for himself (I'm pretty sure they are as to get to the top of the referee ladder you have to be tough and decisive).

[Hipper]

Scrap it! The authorities are complaining that it takes too long to complete a match, so what is their answer? It is to further reduce the spectacle by increasing the number of sendings off for spurious time wasting, instead of getting rid of the biggest waste of time of all!

https://www.change.org/p/the-premier-le ... e-football

Has anyone been sent off for time wasting?

[summitclaret]

I just look at how they do it in Rugby, with good replays, mic'ed up refs and seemingly correct decisions. I don't understand how it's so difficult in football to get it right.

Absolutely and what the ref sees is via the big screen, so the crowd can as well. Also he can ask for other angles. I've said it before, if it's done like RU, it's as open as possible. So why not for football. Is it because the powers that be want it like it is?

[Hipper]

I struggle to see how a consistently applied system can ever be devised that works for subjective decisions being made in a dynamic fast-paced environment.

As a lawyer I spend all my working life thinking about rules - how they work, how they apply and when they apply. Two inherent problems with using VAR:

1) What is the threshold for review? How can a clear and consistent rule work that says what that threshold is? Any perceived error? Any error in a certain phase of play? Any error of a certain perceived severity or impact? How far back do you go? (the Lyle Foster problem from last night - why not go back to the foul on him?)

2) Then what is the threshold for changing the decision? "Clear and obvious" is so vague as be a pointless test. So what should it be or what even could it be?

I just don't see how you can ever come up with the right tests and rules that can ever be clear and capable of being applied quickly.

I've always figured that the Thierry Henry handball for France against Ireland is what really prompted VAR - and those are really the situations that we would be looking to remedy. To do that, problem number 1 should be removed by making VAR interventions solely at the decision of the appealing team. And to be honest, I would be as restrictive as to say that they only get say 5 chances per season.

I don't know the actual answers but it seems sensible to be:

1. Threshold for review. Any incident that has a major impact on the outcome of the match. Clearly that is goals, penalties and straight red card incidents.

2. Threshold for referee to change his decision. The ref to be guided but not told by VAR officials.
a) If VAR reviews a decision and finds no error, just tell the ref and the game continues.
b) If VAR finds an error or possible error they ask the ref to check via the monitor. Checking should include any 'foreplay'.

The Foster red card incident is a good example of what should and shouldn't happen. VAR saw there was a serious incident and alerted the ref. He checked the monitor and then correctly administered the red card. However, he should also ask the question 'why did Foster do this?' There's usually a reason in the immediate past play so the ref should check that too (it didn't appear that he did check this). Then he would have come to the complete correct decision of the whole incident, namely a red card for Foster, a yellow for Yates and a penalty to Burnley. We would certainly have a happier crowd on here anyway!

[DCWat]

We can go on about the need for changes to the tech, how it’s used, analysts or ex pro’s.

Ultimately though, there is something seriously wrong when your everyday, impartial football fan can determine the correct outcome following a brief replay, whilst those currently responsible struggle so regularly.

[Spijed]

Absolutely and what the ref sees is via the big screen, so the crowd can as well. Also he can ask for other angles. I've said it before, if it's done like RU, it's as open as possible. So why not for football. Is it because the powers that be want it like it is?

Obviously you haven't been watching the rugby.

https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/rugby/ ... 06449.html