18 Dec 2019 12:06:41
I have been thinking about VAR and how it has been used in the EPL so far.

Personally I like the idea of it, and feel that anything that can be used to bring up the standard of refereeing decisions is a vital tool we need to use.

Clubs have been using sport science to improve the speed and agility of their players, and the balls have become lighter and move quicker, pitches have become pristine playing surfaces designed to allow the ball to move as quickly as possible.

So a lot of technology has been used to speed up the game, while TV analysis has massively improved meaning that fractional decisions can be analysed and checked and fans can find out on their phones during half time whether a fractional decision went their way or not.

All of this while all the ref's have got to help improve their performance is a can of shaving foam.

It's hardly surprising that the ability of a Ref has declined as the speed of the game has increased with no allowances for the ref's.

VAR is needed, that said it is not a perfect system and it never will be. But in a world where one bad decision in the EFL play off final could be the difference between promotion and 100m windfall or financial ruin for a club we need to make sure these decisions are right.

So, what do I think needs to change to improve VAR?

Firstly, it is supposed to be used for clear and obvious errors. Therefore, I would introduce a time limit of 2 minutes. If after 2 minutes of reviewing a decision you can't decide if it was wrong then it is neither clear or obvious. Also where possible the game should be allowed to continue being played while the VAR decision is being made, and where it isn't possible then the stoppage should be added to extra time.

Secondly, it shouldn't be used for offside calls. On the whole linesmen get these decisions right (although it does annoy me when they flag a player offside then it turns out they weren't as they are supposed to give the benefit of the doubt to the attacking team unless they are 100% sure, which in cases where they are wrong they clearly couldn't have been) .

Thirdly, every stadium should have at least one large screen which shows a live feed of what VAR is reviewing. That way people in the stadium know what is going on, and don't feel detached from the proceedings. It also removes ambiguity about what is being reviewed and why a decision is given one way or the other.

These three changes would in my opinion transform the impact of VAR, and go a long way to solving many of the complaints people have with it.

1.) 18 Dec 2019
18 Dec 2019 13:01:55
Just scrap it and improve the quality of refereeing in general. Have an independent body review refereeing decisions, rather than themselves.

2.) 18 Dec 2019
18 Dec 2019 13:59:24
Sepp, what practical solutions would you suggest to improve the quality of refereeing?

The issue is the game move too fast for a single person to keep up with every decision.

You would need refs to be fitter and quicker to at least the standard of the average EPL player. That's just not practical. To even have a chance you would need most of your refs to be in the mid to late twenties in order to physically keep up with athletes of a similar age.

Secondly how often do you see a foul or an issue during a game which until you see it in slow motion it is hard to give a clear verdict either way. How do you expect someone on the pitch, 30 yards away with players potentially obstructing his view to actually see something that you and the pundits can only see from three different angles with the action slowed down?

For a slightly different example go and have a look at Julian Brandt's goal for Dortmund against Leipzig the other day. Apart from being one of the most elegant goals you'll see all year, you have to watch it 3 or 4 times from multiple angles and slowed down to truly understand what he has done and the brilliance of the goal.

Now imagine if he went over, a player was near him had stuck out a leg, your 20 yards away in the same position that the Ref was in. Can you 100% guarantee you would be able to tell if there was sufficient contact to give a penalty?

What training would you give a Ref for them to be able to make that call?

If we the fans and pundits need multiple replays, slowed down in order to tell what happened then how do you expect a man on the pitch who sees it once in real time to be a better judge?

The game has moved on and progressed, technology has increased the pace it is played at. Professional footballers can sprint at Olympic qualifying sprint times, the movement is so quick the naked eye struggles to keep up.

We can either just accept Ref's making wrong decisions or we can provide them the tools needed to make the correct call more often than not.

Considering the money in football, and place it holds in the sporting world its a damning indictment that Tennis, Rugby and Cricket can all embrace technology in the refereeing processes and make it work. While football can't.

It's just the same stuffy grey haired antiquated old men who refuse to bring football into the 21st century as its scary new world they don't understand. It these same men who feel you need to make women wear skimpier clothes to improve women's football. Or those that give the excuse that we shouldn't include technology in football as it moves it away from grass roots. Ridiculous ideas or excuses made in a pathetic attempt to keep football in the 1970's when these men felt happy and safe.

3.) 18 Dec 2019
18 Dec 2019 16:48:04
Just a thought, how accurate are the GPS trackers they wear, could they decide offsides and forget about armpits and little toes ect, I have read somewhere the current camera system is only accurate to about 3/ 6 inches anyway?

{Ed002's Note - No, even with DGPS the answer is no.}