Video Assistant Referee

[kila]

Being used in tonight's FA Cup game, Brighton v Palace, (live on BT Sport)

 

 

[Ferryjambo99]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/41430247

 

Good video showing how it works in the mls. Think it's the same system 

[Roxy Hearts]

Imagine the seethe if this was used in a bigot sisters game! Weegie press would be beside themselves.

[Phil Dunphy]

In a world where referees egos are more important than sporting integrity, I can’t see how this is going to be that beneficial. 

[Liamthejambo]

The SFA won’t be having that , imagine , if all a sudden the playing field became even, can’t be doing with that nonsense , 

[Dazzle]

I think there are only two scenarios where it should be used during a game. 1. To determine if the ball crossed the line for a goal. 2. When a penalty kick is awarded. 

[JyTees]

23 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

I think there are only two scenarios where it should be used during a game. 1. To determine if the ball crossed the line for a goal. 2. When a penalty kick is awarded. 

 

No, they already have goal line technology.

 

It's used to check the validity of a goal, red card, penalties and mistaken identity.

 

[Maroon Sailor]

Did that not come off Murray's arm ?

 

No VAR ?

[DETTY29]

I thought it was worth a look.

 

Interesting that Wayne Hennessey is convinced from 100 yards away it was a handball tough...

[bajthejambo]

5 minutes ago, DETTY29 said:

I thought it was worth a look.

 

Interesting that Wayne Hennessey is convinced from 100 yards away it was a handball tough...

 

He probably had a better view than most...

[Sooperstar]

14 minutes ago, Maroon Sailor said:

Did that not come off Murray's arm ?

 

No VAR ?

Nah, didn't hit his arm.

[By the light]

Excellent comments from Woy there

[Maroon tinted glasses 2]

I work with the company that supplies this specific tech and funnily enough four days prior to the derby it was actually housed a few hundred yards away in Murrayfield before being transferred to the Emirates. 

 

Shame that, sugar puff teeth could have done with it too........ 

[Paolo]

4 hours ago, Maroon tinted glasses 2 said:

I work with the company that supplies this specific tech and funnily enough four days prior to the derby it was actually housed a few hundred yards away in Murrayfield before being transferred to the Emirates. 

 

Shame that, sugar puff teeth could have done with it too........ 

Not really.

 

The Hibs ‘goal’ would have still been ruled out due to the offside in the build up.  

[DETTY29]

9 hours ago, DETTY29 said:

I thought it was worth a look.

 

Interesting that Wayne Hennessey is convinced from 100 yards away it was a handball tough...

Actually the VAR was used and the ref checked but as no clear error there was no need for the VAR to ask the ref to over rule or look at again on screen.

 

Although the next challenge would have been if the ball had made some contact  with the arm we have the subjectivity of the hand ball rule, which is rare that player deiberately, hands the ball, but free kicks and penalties are still given.  I felt there was (very) minor movement of arm to ball but was it deliberate or Murray just got his body shape a bit wrong.  Maybe enough to look at again by ref on screen but not over rule.

 

In rugby the ref would probably ask to review and ask the TMO if any reason not to award the goal.

 

Pretty classy comments from Hodgson too.

 

Wait till Arsenal involved and Wenger claims not to have seen the replay but VAR shouldn't have been used as it looked clear enough hand ball not to award goal or refer to VAR.

 

Or if up here Lennon saying the ball was clearly punched in.

 

Not that we will get VAR up here.  Well, not until Scott Brown has retired.

[The Internet]

Can't see it ever being a success like goal line technology. There's too many things in football that aren't clear even after multiple replays. It's supposed to only be used when the assistant spots a clear mistake (I think, it's never been made really clear) but that opens it up to all sorts of criticism when, 3 days later after about 1000 replays, a big decision is shown to be wrong. 

[Bazzas right boot]

It will help but not 100%.

Anything that helps is surely good.

 

Up here, we'd be better using playground rules, probably be better than the Muppets in the middle ATM.

 

[Sooperstar]

The ref doesn't ask for the VAR to be used. He gets told in some way that the person in charge of the VAR is having a look at something. That person is in another location, not in the stadium. That person then decides if there is something worth the ref taking a look at and if so then the ref goes to the wee screen next to the dugouts to take a look and decides what to do.

[Jamboelite]

26 minutes ago, Sooperstar said:

The ref doesn't ask for the VAR to be used. He gets told in some way that the person in charge of the VAR is having a look at something. That person is in another location, not in the stadium. That person then decides if there is something worth the ref taking a look at and if so then the ref goes to the wee screen next to the dugouts to take a look and decides what to do.

Sounds good in theory just not sure how it will translate when pit into practice unless it’s absolutely clear when VAR should be used.

[Sooperstar]

4 minutes ago, Jamboelite said:

Sounds good in theory just not sure how it will translate when pit into practice unless it’s absolutely clear when VAR should be used.

Goals, penalties, red cards & mistaken identity. That's it. And can only be used to change an obvious error, so if there is debate then the original decision stands.

[kila]

VAR checks without the ref asking too if I recall right? Last night there was another hand ball claim before the winning goal one, and the VAR just confirmed to the ref he got it right but the game didn't stop I don't think.

[Lord Beni of Gorgie]

2 hours ago, DETTY29 said:

Actually the VAR was used and the ref checked but as no clear error there was no need for the VAR to ask the ref to over rule or look at again on screen.

 

Although the next challenge would have been if the ball had made some contact  with the arm we have the subjectivity of the hand ball rule, which is rare that player deiberately, hands the ball, but free kicks and penalties are still given.  I felt there was (very) minor movement of arm to ball but was it deliberate or Murray just got his body shape a bit wrong.  Maybe enough to look at again by ref on screen but not over rule.

 

In rugby the ref would probably ask to review and ask the TMO if any reason not to award the goal.

 

Pretty classy comments from Hodgson too.

 

Wait till Arsenal involved and Wenger claims not to have seen the replay but VAR shouldn't have been used as it looked clear enough hand ball not to award goal or refer to VAR.

 

Or if up here Lennon saying the ball was clearly punched in.

 

Not that we will get VAR up here.  Well, not until Scott Brown has retired.

His new job when he quits - VAR? John Brown the other one?

[EagleJambo]

We were at game last night. Murray goal was at other end from us but when we saw replay of the goal on screen at the ground thought it was a handball and all the Palace fans were screaming for VAR. it would appear that the VAR official told the ref there wasn't sufficient evidence for the goal to be disallowed. Fair enough, but it would have helped if there had been a signal or message on the screen at the game to say that the VAR Official confirmed that the goal should stand.

 

Piss poor game mind. Palace are nothing without Zaha and injuries to Townsend and Schlupp won't help. Bonus is we don't need to go to Boro for the next round. Not sure Brighton really wanted that.

[hughesie27]

16 minutes ago, David Bennett said:

We were at game last night. Murray goal was at other end from us but when we saw replay of the goal on screen at the ground thought it was a handball and all the Palace fans were screaming for VAR. it would appear that the VAR official told the ref there wasn't sufficient evidence for the goal to be disallowed. Fair enough, but it would have helped if there had been a signal or message on the screen at the game to say that the VAR Official confirmed that the goal should stand.

 

Piss poor game mind. Palace are nothing without Zaha and injuries to Townsend and Schlupp won't help. Bonus is we don't need to go to Boro for the next round. Not sure Brighton really wanted that.

They used VAR at a Match in Australianlast year I was at and they displayed the outcome on the big screen. The game was stopped at the time though.

[Nookie Bear]

57 minutes ago, Sooperstar said:

The ref doesn't ask for the VAR to be used. He gets told in some way that the person in charge of the VAR is having a look at something. That person is in another location, not in the stadium. That person then decides if there is something worth the ref taking a look at and if so then the ref goes to the wee screen next to the dugouts to take a look and decides what to do.

 

Yeah, strange process that because it then it still comes down to one man's decision as to what constitutes something worth looking at.

[Thomaso]

4 hours ago, Paolo said:

Not really.

 

The Hibs ‘goal’ would have still been ruled out due to the offside in the build up.  

 

And Hearts would have been awarded a penalty.....

[Nookie Bear]

Just now, Thomaso said:

 

And Hearts would have been awarded a penalty.....

 

From what i understand, the ref cannot refer to the VAR before making a decision, so he would have to have given the penalty and then it's up to the VAR to veto it?

 

Or maybe i read it wrong and he can say 'no penalty' but the VAR can step in and award it. But, at that point, the ref needs to consult the screen at the side of pitch.

 

I think!

[Thomaso]

1 minute ago, Nookie Bear said:

 

From what i understand, the ref cannot refer to the VAR before making a decision, so he would have to have given the penalty and then it's up to the VAR to veto it?

 

Or maybe i read it wrong and he can say 'no penalty' but the VAR can step in and award it. But, at that point, the ref needs to consult the screen at the side of pitch.

 

I think!

 

 

Who knows Nookie - the one thing that is certain is that Hearts should have been awarded a penalty for blantant hand ball - something that 'yelly teef' and the media totally ignored!!

[Sooperstar]

26 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:

 

From what i understand, the ref cannot refer to the VAR before making a decision, so he would have to have given the penalty and then it's up to the VAR to veto it?

 

Or maybe i read it wrong and he can say 'no penalty' but the VAR can step in and award it. But, at that point, the ref needs to consult the screen at the side of pitch.

 

I think!

I think the latter is correct. There was a clip from a game in Germany before where an incident happened in the box and the ref played on. The defending team then broke away and scored at the other end. At that point in time they went back to  VAR and returned to 90 seconds previous and awarded a penalty against the team that had scored!

[martinb]

Imagine that happening in the weggie derby

[Pans Jambo]

20 hours ago, kila said:

Being used in tonight's FA Cup game, Brighton v Palace, (live on BT Sport)

 

 

About time football had something like this. Worked well in rugby for years.

 

Now all we need is slightly bigger goals, a sin bin for 2nd yellow's and the clock to get stopped when there,s time wasting.

[Maroon Sailor]

3 hours ago, Pans Jambo said:

About time football had something like this. Worked well in rugby for years.

 

Now all we need is slightly bigger goals, a sin bin for 2nd yellow's and the clock to get stopped when there,s time wasting.

 

Bonus points for 3 or more goals scored.

[milky_26]

1 minute ago, Maroon Sailor said:

 

Bonus points for 3 or more goals scored.

extra time multiball

[Judge Fudge]

2 hours ago, Pans Jambo said:

About time football had something like this. Worked well in rugby for years.

 

Now all we need is slightly bigger goals, a sin bin for 2nd yellow's and the clock to get stopped when there,s time wasting.

I like the idea of the clock being stopped when the ball is technically still in play, goalkeepers have been taking the piss far too long with quick or slow kick outs depending on the score line. Throw ins etc could come of the back of that initial ruling. A level playing field is hard to achieve in the spfl because there has never been one. 

[DETTY29]

1 hour ago, Judge Fudge said:

I like the idea of the clock being stopped when the ball is technically still in play, goalkeepers have been taking the piss far too long with quick or slow kick outs depending on the score line. Throw ins etc could come of the back of that initial ruling. A level playing field is hard to achieve in the spfl because there has never been one. 

There is a simple solution for goal kicks and that is whatever side the ball is thrown back to the keeper, especially in games wih only available ball, is the side it must get taken from.  None of this wandering across the 6 yard box

[Kiwidoug]

On 09/01/2018 at 09:35, Dazzle said:

I think there are only two scenarios where it should be used during a game. 1. To determine if the ball crossed the line for a goal. 2. When a penalty kick is awarded. 

Good.  I love a mature, respectful disagreement.  I disagree with you.  By your determination the video shows a guy in a horrible green jersey hit the ball over the line but from a hideously offside position.

 

Are you arguing the goal should stand even though the scorer was both ugly and offside.

[jack D and coke]

I don’t agree with video refs personally. Why should it only be goal line or a penalty decision etc and people’s perception of contact and legitimate penalties is fairly broad. Imagine Andy Davis was the VR for example? 

Imo if you are going to have this it has to be all or nothing. I remember a Scottish cup final where Roy Aitken and an opposing player tackled close to the touch line, it was a Dundee united throw in but Aitken quickly grabbed the ball took the throw in and Joe Miller scored what was the winner. 

You can’t pick and choose what decisions you analyse for me they could potentially all affect the outcome. 

[kila]

It is in action again tonight for Chelsea v Arsenal

 

Maybe a chance of some controversy with this tie

[Dazzle]

17 hours ago, Kiwidoug said:

Good.  I love a mature, respectful disagreement.  I disagree with you.  By your determination the video shows a guy in a horrible green jersey hit the ball over the line but from a hideously offside position.

 

Are you arguing the goal should stand even though the scorer was both ugly and offside.

Obviously you don't. Otherwise you would not have posted such an inane comment. Grow up. 

[Dazzle]

12 hours ago, jack D and coke said:

I don’t agree with video refs personally. Why should it only be goal line or a penalty decision etc and people’s perception of contact and legitimate penalties is fairly broad. Imagine Andy Davis was the VR for example? 

Imo if you are going to have this it has to be all or nothing. I remember a Scottish cup final where Roy Aitken and an opposing player tackled close to the touch line, it was a Dundee united throw in but Aitken quickly grabbed the ball took the throw in and Joe Miller scored what was the winner. 

You can’t pick and choose what decisions you analyse for me they could potentially all affect the outcome. 

 

But you don't want the game bogged down with constantly having to review the most trivial of outcomes. I think the best of VAR is to try to cut out cheating at penalties where a player goes down under no contact at all. 

[kila]

Ref just requested VAR for a penalty claim, the ball went out right after so a natural pause in the game anyway, not given after review

[jack D and coke]

13 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

 

But you don't want the game bogged down with constantly having to review the most trivial of outcomes. I think the best of VAR is to try to cut out cheating at penalties where a player goes down under no contact at all. 

But that is my point why are we going to analyse certain incidents and not others? That doesn’t make sense to me. 

It’s a tricky one. 

[Dazzle]

3 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

But that is my point why are we going to analyse certain incidents and not others? That doesn’t make sense to me. 

It’s a tricky one. 

I don't think it is tricky. As I said, some outcomes are trivial, like who touched the ball last before it goes out for a throw in etc. Games are frequently won or lost on the outcome of a penalty award. That deserves scrutiny when the award has been dubious, i.e. did the player dive ? I know you gave an example of a thrown in that resulted on a goal, (Roy Aitken ?!!) but I don't think this happens all that often. Offside may throw up a few incidents, for example, was a player in an offside position interfering with play when a goal was scored but did not touch the ball. Perhaps that could be reviewed but in general, the marginal stuff should be left to the ref and linesman. IMO of course. 

[Hagar the Horrible]

Having watched the Chelseas v Arsenal game, I would say this was a huge success, got penalty claim rightly turned down, as was what was deemed to be a harsh tackle?  Fans still shouted, managers still animated but on the whole everybody was in total aceptance?   I did look like players tried harder to stay on feet, I think this will cut out a lot of cheating, and perhaps turn the game once again into a proper sport and a lot less of an academy award show for best simulation

[milky_26]

1 minute ago, Hagar the Horrible said:

Having watched the Chelseas v Arsenal game, I would say this was a huge success, got penalty claim rightly turned down, as was what was deemed to be a harsh tackle?  Fans still shouted, managers still animated but on the whole everybody was in total aceptance?   I did look like players tried harder to stay on feet, I think this will cut out a lot of cheating, and perhaps turn the game once again into a proper sport and a lot less of an academy award show for best simulation

the one thing i think could be improved, is letting managers know if something is being reviewed while the ball is still in play. i am referring to the welbeck fabregas penalty claim. It took i'm sure i heard 36 seconds for the VAR to confirm the ref was right not to give a penalty and the game carried on. Conte on the touchline was basically screaming to use the VAR (you see him making the rectangle shape with his hands). Maybe having a small screen, or the 4th official just stating to both managers that the VAR is looking at it would help?

[Hagar the Horrible]

21 minutes ago, milky_26 said:

the one thing i think could be improved, is letting managers know if something is being reviewed while the ball is still in play. i am referring to the welbeck fabregas penalty claim. It took i'm sure i heard 36 seconds for the VAR to confirm the ref was right not to give a penalty and the game carried on. Conte on the touchline was basically screaming to use the VAR (you see him making the rectangle shape with his hands). Maybe having a small screen, or the 4th official just stating to both managers that the VAR is looking at it would help?

True that will come from education and over hyped managers need to reailise that, it took that long because the ball was still in play, no doubt in future the agreived team will just kick the ball out of play sooner. Conte like all other managers will know in future, but I bet he was just making sure the VAR had another look?  albeit a bit drama queenish

[EagleJambo]

Think the difference between the Chelsea-Arsenal game and the Brighton-Palace game on Monday was that the referee in Chelsea game clearly indicated (by sticking his finger in his ear!) that he was reviewing with VAR. If supporters at game can see that (or it is shown on big screen at ground) they know what is happening. We had no idea at the Brighton-Palace game that VAR was being considered by the referee when Murray handballed (sorry - scored!) at the end of the game. Think some form of clarity is important for those at the game.

[Gambo]

See if the game continues for 1-2minutes whilst they look at VAR and they then decide it should have been a penalty etc, does that 1-2 minutes (when a lot can happen btw) of needless play get added on at the end?

[Hagar the Horrible]

2 hours ago, Gambo said:

See if the game continues for 1-2minutes whilst they look at VAR and they then decide it should have been a penalty etc, does that 1-2 minutes (when a lot can happen btw) of needless play get added on at the end?

Dont know?  In Rugby the TMO makes an assesment and the game clock stops?  but also what happens if should get that penalty but after 2 mins of play you score?

 

lots of questions

[milky_26]

Just now, Hagar the Horrible said:

Dont know?  In Rugby the TMO makes an assesment and the game clock stops?  but also what happens if should get that penalty but after 2 mins of play you score?

 

lots of questions

the goal would be disallowed and the penalty awarded