Video Assistant Referee

[LeeNYCFC]

I would've much rather had something like end line refs (preferably in a lifeguard chair) to add eyes on the goal line and play in the box. But we live in an age of innovations that improve the function of things while shaving down their character. As far as holding that back goes, tell em Ellis:

 

[Tom in Fairfield CT]

The most hilarious opinion I see is that this will be a net positive for our team. As if all the calls will be for us. It's net zero. Just like it is now. Nothing changes. Except the fact that it's not a goal until referee #5 says it is, two minutes later.

 

[ManhattanValley]

Imagine if we played in the final and had a PK call like against Chicago missed and lost.

Imagine if we played in the final and won because the same decision went our way! (Spoilers: it would still be amazing) The scenario you're trying to invoke should have nothing to do with whether or not this is a good idea, but people can't seem to look past their own individual loyalties.

I'm more concerned about imagining being in the final and not being able to lose my shit at a penalty decision in the moment because I have to wait for Schroedinger's ref to tell me if I can celebrate or not. I totally get that other people don't feel the same way I do. It's just frustrating that people keep throwing out all these hypothetical scenarios about how much I could enjoy a fairer game, when fairness has next to nothing to do with my enjoyment of football. (Fair play to JGarrettLieb for figuring that out btw)

 

[SoupInNYC]

Imagine if we played in the final and won because the same decision went our way! (Spoilers: it would still be amazing) The scenario you're trying to invoke should have nothing to do with whether or not this is a good idea, but people can't seem to look past their own individual loyalties.

Yeah, if we benefitted from an incorrect call that helped us win the cup final, it would not feel nearly the same at all as winning it while calls were correct.

Any time you talk to anyone else in the league, that win has a massive asterisk next to it

 

[Seven]

Yeah, if we benefitted from an incorrect call that helped us win the cup final, it would not feel nearly the same at all as winning it while calls were correct.
Any time you talk to anyone else in the league, that win has a massive asterisk next to it

Not sure that's true. I think it might have an asterisk for the next year or so, but eventually people forget those details.

Does anyone remember that in the first round last year the Sounders won on a pretty obvious offsides goal late in the game?

 

[NYCFC_Dan]

Great call back on that goal. Without VAR everyone talks about it the next day. With VAR it's correctly called back. Watching the game live I thought he cheated the ball down.

 

[LionNYC]

Adi was fouled in the box. It's a penalty. The referee did not call the foul. VAR is only for clear and obvious wrong decisions. So the referee decided it was not a penalty.

Like I said, VAR will not fix shit refereeing.

 

[NYCFC_Dan]

Adi was fouled in the box. It's a penalty. The referee did not call the foul. VAR is only for clear and obvious wrong decisions. So the referee decided it was not a penalty.

Like I said, VAR will not fix shit refereeing.

I thought the same thing. That was a clear penalty. The player went down from a side tackle and the ball continued in the same direction as it wasn't touched. It's a clear penalty.

 

[ManhattanValley]

Yeah, if we benefitted from an incorrect call that helped us win the cup final, it would not feel nearly the same at all as winning it while calls were correct.

Haha I think I must be a terrible person, I wouldn't care at all.

 

[SoupInNYC]

Not sure that's true. I think it might have an asterisk for the next year or so, but eventually people forget those details.

Does anyone remember that in the first round last year the Sounders won on a pretty obvious offsides goal late in the game?

As a Steelers fan, I can attest to the opposite. I'm still reminded that Super Bowl XL was a referring farce and we didn't deserve to win.

On the contrary to that, I think that opinion is misguided based on an incompetent John Madden in the booth and will gladly run through any of the controversial decisions with anyone (im not biased at all on this )

 

[Rimil]

I feel like the front office put the word out to keep VAR under utilized to keep people's criticism of it very very light. Like they had to use it at least once on its debut but they really don't want to have the ref look at all the controversial plays for fear of people bitching its delaying the games too much. They wanted one example of it working then left the rest of the games the same. I think that's how its going to play out the rest of the season. Then when everyone is foaming at the mouth complaining why they didn't let the ref look at the controversial plays it will make people less inclined to complain about the delays. And then once the league sees the fans screaming for the ref to take a look and they feel its been accepted you'll see the league lift the flood gates on the call down to the head refs to take a look.

 

[ZYanksRule]

I feel like the front office put the word out to keep VAR under utilized to keep people's criticism of it very very light. Like they had to use it at least once on its debut but they really don't want to have the ref look at all the controversial plays for fear of people bitching its delaying the games too much. They wanted one example of it working then left the rest of the games the same. I think that's how its going to play out the rest of the season. Then when everyone is foaming at the mouth complaining why they didn't let the ref look at the controversial plays it will make people less inclined to complain about the delays. And then once the league sees the fans screaming for the ref to take a look and they feel its been accepted you'll see the league lift the flood gates on the call down to the head refs to take a look.

It was used on Villa's penalty last night -- they just didn't go to the video because there was no reason to. The referee had his ear to his headset, and after a minute of the VAR looking at it, he placed the ball on the spot and that was it. Not every VAR decision will go to the on-field monitor, which is the way it should be.

 

[Ulrich]

It was used on Villa's penalty last night -- they just didn't go to the video because there was no reason to. The referee had his ear to his headset, and after a minute of the VAR looking at it, he placed the ball on the spot and that was it. Not every VAR decision will go to the on-field monitor, which is the way it should be.

Looked like the ref was going to award the PK, VAR cornfirmed it, so there was no need to watch the video. Had Chapman disagreed with the Ref, then he would have gone over to watch.

 

[Gotham Gator]

So after all the discussion in this thread - and others - it's worth revisiting whether we like VAR or loathe it.

I have to say after what was written here, the last thing I expected was for people to dislike VAR because it is not being used often enough. If you read through this thread, there were multiple dire predictions of frequent and lengthy reviews taking up too much time and breaking up the flow of the game.

Now that we have been living with it for 10 weeks or so, the major complaint seems to be that there should be more video reviews, not fewer. With every questionable call, fans are screaming for the referee to stop play, walk to the sideline and spend 2 minutes looking at an iPad. This, of course, is the exact opposite of the concerns that so many had prior to August 5.

It's worth remembering that every play is reviewed. The guy in the booth takes a quick look at everything, and then he stops play if he wants a longer look. We've had that happen. He then recommends to the referee whether he should stop the game and take a longer look himself - a decision that is totally in the hands of the referee. I think the real issue here is that we never know what happens on those controversial calls. Did the VAR decide there was no chance of a "clear and obvious error"? or did ask the referee to take a look and the referee decided not to? Clarity on these points would go a long way.

 

[LionNYC]

dislike VAR because it is not being used at all.

FIFY

 

[Marito]

So after all the discussion in this thread - and others - it's worth revisiting whether we like VAR or loathe it.

I have to say after what was written here, the last thing I expected was for people to dislike VAR because it is not being used often enough. If you read through this thread, there were multiple dire predictions of frequent and lengthy reviews taking up too much time and breaking up the flow of the game.

Now that we have been living with it for 10 weeks or so, the major complaint seems to be that there should be more video reviews, not fewer. With every questionable call, fans are screaming for the referee to stop play, walk to the sideline and spend 2 minutes looking at an iPad. This, of course, is the exact opposite of the concerns that so many had prior to August 5.

It's worth remembering that every play is reviewed. The guy in the booth takes a quick look at everything, and then he stops play if he wants a longer look. We've had that happen. He then recommends to the referee whether he should stop the game and take a longer look himself - a decision that is totally in the hands of the referee. I think the real issue here is that we never know what happens on those controversial calls. Did the VAR decide there was no chance of a "clear and obvious error"? or did ask the referee to take a look and the referee decided not to? Clarity on these points would go a long way.

Maybe they could implement something, like using the next stoppage to publish in the big screen at the stadium what the verdict of the VAR review was? Something to add transparency.

 

[Keith Putnam]

Maybe they could implement something, like using the next stoppage to publish in the big screen at the stadium what the verdict of the VAR review was? Something to add transparency.

So you'd rather go from simply seeing that MLS refereeing is terrible to having that fact explicitly acknowledged by PRO?

 

[mgarbowski]

There were a pair of questionable VAR calls against Orlando last night.
The first was a hand ball. In real time, it was definitely a defensible hand ball call. But it was not called in real time. In VAR, I don't think it came near close enough to being a defensible VAR overruling. The ball hit the guy's hand, but the arm was down, close to the body, and the ball was kicked into him from 2 yards away. It does not come close to being the sort of call undisputed call that VAR is supposed to be limited to.

The second VAR call was fine on substance, but hideously implemented. at 36:46 Orlando's PC and DC's Asad vie for a ball in the air and PC wacks Asad in the back of the head with his hand. Ref calls it a yellow. Asad gets medical attention and it takes nearly 2.5 minutes to set up the ensuing free kick. The ref signals the DC players to initiate play. Then finally at 39:14 the ref blows his whistle to signal Video Review, which was at best simultaneous, and arguably after, the DC player hit the free kick. The call to switch it to red was fair, but the process was ridiculous.

 

[Ulrich]

There were a pair of questionable VAR calls against Orlando last night.
The first was a hand ball. In real time, it was definitely a defensible hand ball call. But it was not called in real time. In VAR, I don't think it came near close enough to being a defensible VAR overruling. The ball hit the guy's hand, but the arm was down, close to the body, and the ball was kicked into him from 2 yards away. It does not come close to being the sort of call undisputed call that VAR is supposed to be limited to.

The second VAR call was fine on substance, but hideously implemented. at 36:46 Orlando's PC and DC's Asad vie for a ball in the air and PC wacks Asad in the back of the head with his hand. Ref calls it a yellow. Asad gets medical attention and it takes nearly 2.5 minutes to set up the ensuing free kick. The ref signals the DC players to initiate play. Then finally at 39:14 the ref blows his whistle to signal Video Review, which was at best simultaneous, and arguably after, the DC player hit the free kick. The call to switch it to red was fair, but the process was ridiculous.

The second VAR never should have needed VAR - it was a hand to the face without question, and the ref needs bigger balls to make the correct call of Red rather than rely on being overruled by video. That said I’m glad the VAR official got it right even if he/she took too much time and ruined the continuity of the match. I just can’t understand why these calls are so difficult for the officials to make in real time, or if it’s more they’re afraid to make the calls.

 

[Keith Putnam]

Now that we've seen VAR in action at part of a World Cup, and the majority of it pretty successfully, I have some predictions about its future.

One, I think it is going to force a revision of the Laws of the Game to much more precisely define what a foul is, and the criteria for a penalty. Right now we're having to contend with the fact that we do not know in a precise way what a handball is, for example, or what kind of contact in the box is going to consistently result in a penalty. If consistent application of VAR results in a large increase in the number of penalties awarded, the soccer community will have to decide if that's a good or a bad thing.

Second, and relatedly, it is going to change the technique of defending. VAR is going to wind up establishing what kinds and amounts of physicality are acceptable, and, again, the soccer community will have to weigh whether or not we like the changes.

So, in short, VAR is going to require us to confront both what the Laws of the Game actually are, and whether or not we honestly like them if their application becomes more precise and consistent.