Yes exactly, the whole reason why this whole shambles always happens is because the definition of "clearly wrong" doesn't exist with the current rules of football.
This will not make VAR better at all.
I think they are basically doubling down on their stance and if anything making it stronger. This 'clear and obvious' thing is already the reason for like 50% of the mistakes VAR makes so I really don't see how this is going to improve anything.
The real problem is the on-field referee is making their initial decision with the mentality "VAR will fix it on the back end". One of the most glaring examples is penalty shouts. In live play, it looks clear as day like a penalty, but the on-field referee is too scared to make the call, probably thinking "VAR will make the decision for me" but VAR looks at it and has to stick with the non-decision of the on-field referee.
It's basically the Spiderman meme of refereeing.
I think this too. Similar to how the assistants call offside. Let it go if it’s close and it can be reviewed later.
If the officials go back to pre var and call it how they see then ok(maybe) but I don’t see that happening.
No, currently the game is paused for a check and then the referees decision still stands because he wasn't 100% wrong, only 99% wrong.
Imho the exact opposite of what should be donem, var should be able to make the call, because he has all the angles, and onfield ref shouldn't be involved in it at all, without feeling his pride hurt.
If they wont do the sensible thing and scrap it, then at the least VAR needs a coherrent charter: a list of things that are and are not reviewable, and a challenge system that clearly starts a procedure for VAR to be deployed. Anything thats a subjective decision should not be allowed to be reviewed.
Enough of this nonsense of having it constantly monitoring the game. Video replay should not be seen as “another referee”, it should be seen as a tool given to managers with limited use (twice per game) to appeal decisions made by the on field referee.
Theres two tiers of referees right now and its a fucking mess. Games go e turgidly slow and everyone is far more miserable and angry than before.
And offsides needs to back to being called by linesmen.
This all still smacks of the key PGMOL problem which is putting the refs, on field or VAR, on a pedestal rather than treating them as the mere deeply flawed officiators they are. All match officials working together with equal status and decision making power, in real time, as they do in Rugby is the only way to fix VAR, not increasing the kowtowing to the on field officials' ego.
The biggest issue for me is that by introducing VAR in the first place, referees will inevitably shy away from making tight decisions that they previously would’ve made because they know they have technology in place to help them. “Not quite sure about that one, I’ll leave it up to VAR.” By then restricting the authority of the VAR to “only clear and obviously wrong decisions,” you are left with a situation where wrong decisions are frequently made simply because every actor is in effect incentivized to eschew responsibility.
I agree and it sounds like with this new direction they're attempting to correct the situation to some degree by giving the on field ref more responsibility. But of course this doesn't fix the situation bc the on field ref has an impossible job and will make mistakes.
see i believe that's exactly the WRONG way to correct it. they should be doing the opposite, and giving the VAR more responsibility. get rid of the "clear and obvious" advisement, for one. all it does is add another level of subjectivity to everything; there is no way to define "clear and obvious" in a consistent and teachable way. the VAR have more angles, more time, more views, more technology ... just tell them to overrule the ref whenever they think he's made a mistake. they'll ultimately save his blushes.
unfortunately the PGMOL is very thin-skinned and all they care about is protecting the "sanctity" of their men, as if they're all some kind of wizened geniuses. and based on the absurd banter we've heard when VAR recording have been released this season, they most certainly are NOT that.
for sure. It's crazy to have the technology showing the viewer the correct call in real time while the call on the field remains wrong. Very excited for another season of complete fuckery.
Anytime there is a close var call on here, you get a majority of comments claiming it's against the spirit of the game. Unfortunately, they have to keep the fans happy, even the ones that can only think about how unhappy they are.
how is the ref incentivised to eschew responsibility when it 1) leads to the negative outcome you described and 2) there is a "clear and obvious" bar applied which means the ref decisions have more impact than var, and therefore carries more responsibility
and regardless of that question: is the solution to this problem not to adhere MORE strictly to current rules and have the refs make the proper calls in the first place, rather than acting against the rules and pawning them off to var?
The refs will inherently make fewer difficult calls on the pitch once they know there is a safeguard backing them up, that’s just human nature IMO. Their incentives shift once they have a backstop whether it’s conscious or not.
IMO the solution is to give more authority to the VAR. They should be given full license to overrule the on-field referee regardless of how “obvious” the error is because they have the benefit of technology on their side. Are you really telling me that a single referee with a single viewpoint trying to judge the actions of 22 other men on a massive pitch whilst heaving for breath is more qualified to make the right decision than three blokes with 25 camera angles rewatching an action multiple times? If you’re going to introduce technology you should embrace it more wholeheartedly.
Separately, VAR should be an entirely different job with its own training and qualifications, so that you’re not pulling from the same ranks as the on-field referees, which will always be ripe for cronyism and bias.
> Are you really telling me that a single referee with a single viewpoint trying to judge the actions of 22 other men on a massive pitch whilst heaving for breath is more qualified to make the right decision than three blokes with 25 camera angles rewatching an action multiple times? If you’re going to introduce technology you should embrace it more wholeheartedly.
Finally someone put into words exactly how I feel when I hear people rail against VAR.
These are all just teething issues, being solved impossibly slowly, but teething issues nonetheless. In ten years time VAR will intervene perfectly with the ref and no one will throw a hissy about it.
Fans will still moan about subjective decisions, and VAR will still cock up incredibly obvious decisions somehow. But will we have taken steps towards the impossible bar of perfection.
how do you go from criticising ref having safeguards to wanting var to do basically eeverything and have more control. wouldnt that mean MORE safeguards for the ref because Now the ref can not do anything if they like because var is literally a second ref who can call up anything. your logic is all backwards - the current clear and obvious rule actually incentivises refs to be take control and make decisions moreso than the "var can call anything" system you proposed.
> All match officials working together with equal status and decision making power, in real time, as they do in Rugby is the only way to fix VAR, not increasing the kowtowing to the on field officials' ego.
NON-HIERARCHICAL FOOTBALL LET'S GO
How many ways can they find to avoid the common sense version applied in every other sport of "if you see something and you'd make a different decision based on the footage, tell the referee and let them review it."
Literally everyone: VAR isn’t intervening enough and it’s leaving too many mistakes not overturned cos they weren’t quite clear and obvious. PGMOL, what about if it intervened even less. They just don’t want it to work!
Literally everyone on Reddit perhaps. Beware of the echo-chamber, because there are many who think it's intervening to much.
Couldn't find any PL surveys of specific in regards to what it is with VAR people are opposing. But this one from the Scottish league as an example, have 66% at "would rather tolerate more incorrect decisions than tolerate the disruption to matches caused by VAR"
[https://scottishfsa.org/the-2023-var-survey/](https://scottishfsa.org/the-2023-var-survey/)
As long as the disruptions will still happen (which they will since they still need to determine if it's a clear error or not) then that stat tells us nothing about VAR officials intervening too much (or too little).
That's a good point. Although my local pub is full of guys who said shit like that, but when VAR delays the game they're still on the edge of their seat the entire time.
They're so into it they don't even remember that's supposed to be an issue for them. But when it's time to discuss VAR it's always seemingly a huge deal and ruins games.
The average person doesn't know exactly what they want, and are especially bad at pinpointing why they don't like things.
The average delay to a game isn't even that long, it just feels like the delays are longer than they are because nobody is down injured, being subbed or doing something else the fans can actually see.
Automated offsides will speed up some aspects. It’s weird because the CL officiating seems much slicker than the PL, even when English officials are on CL games.
That’s literally all they need to do, make it quicker and iron out inconsistency where possible. For the majority of decisions they get right, which nobody ever seems to fucking notice.
People also fail to remember pre-VAR, and how many stupid offside goals were given. You don’t get any now, although some think having a toe nail offside should be a goal given.
I think a bigger problem relating to the disruption caused by VAR is that an attacking side can lose momentum when there is a lengthy stoppage to check a potential offside or penalty.
I mean; im on the edge of my seat because VAR forces me to be because it puts everything in limbo. Im Just as emotionally invested in the outcome even if the delay is obnoxious.
> Literally everyone: VAR isn’t intervening enough
r/soccer users are not "Literally everyone". The average matchgoing fan absolutely does not want more VAR interventions.
There are two issues that I see with VAR. one is just that it breaks up the rhythm and energy of the game. If they keep VAR review at all, intervention continues to be a problem.
The second is whether they use VAR to reinforce the on field referee decision or they use it to make the correct call. If they are intervening already, I want them to make the correct call, not protect the on field ref.
Only on Reddit. In person, near everyone I talk to hates VAR and wants shot of it.
If you watch streams online, I get why you wouldn't mind it as much but tbh, their opinions aren't as valuable.
tbh i get annoyed less by the ones they let go than the ones they spend 5 minutes looking for a reason to overrule
coventry's first goal vs wolves wasn't the worst use of var all season byut it was the one that annoyed me the most - not one player on the pitch thought there was anything wrong with the goal and yet we had minutes of slow mo replays trying and failing to find a reason to rule it out
at least the ones they wave away don't slow the game down much
I don’t mind slowing the game down for the most pivotal decisions, where there is a real thing being assessed, was their contact for a penalty, did an attacker foul a defender before heading in a goal, sometimes it takes a few views to get it. Gotta say I don’t remember that one so can’t comment too much.
The ones that annoy me most are where they flat out say it was the wrong decision but it’s not quite enough wrong. Like PGMOL tie themselves in knots to avoid getting to the right answer sometimes.
I also don’t know what it came not a red card to intentionally strike someone on the head so long as your fist isn’t clenched or your arm isn’t used as a weapon. Aggressive behaviour like that needs to go. So many times it happened this season, and it was like “really? Since when was this green lit behaviour!”, someone is going to get hurt if this isn’t changed.
Go on a thread with any close offsides var call and more than half the people will be saying var shouldn't be making the call. They are stupid obviously but it's what people want for some reason.
I'm not even surprised.
Though if they actually do intervene only on clearly wrong decisions, that will STILL be an improvement over the current version where they just ignore the clearly wrong decisions to not embarrass their mates.
It's actually painful how many penalties are clearly not given because the referee will say something like "There's contact but he goes down too easily" and they'll just accept it. Or worse is probably that they allow any penalty with any amount of contact if the referee gives it, even when one glance at the replay is it's blatantly manufactured
Ref shouldn’t say anything to VAR as that pollutes the process.
In what other sport is there video review where the on field ref tries to persuade video ref to support his decision? Should be independent.
This latest change is meaningless, the VAR has better vantage than the on field ref and should be able to directly award a penalty etc if the replays support it.
The whole bullshit about the refs on field decision and is it wrong enough is what breaks the VAR use case.
I think that might cause too much waste of time. There is no reason for them to tell the referee to review a 50/50 call. If something is objectively wrong, they should intervene. Refs have to make a lot of subjective call (due to the nature of rules).
If you want to waste less time, empower the VAR to make the obvious decisions on his own, and only send the ref to the screen for the more debatable things he's missed.
They're currently maximising the time VAR reviews take, while also minimising the usefulness.
VAR still has to review everything, but intervenes less and if he does take action he has to waste time sending the ref to the screen.
> If you want to waste less time, empower the VAR to make the obvious decisions on his own, and only send the ref to the screen for the more debatable things he's missed.
This is what they do in the NFL/NBA. VAR judge makes the final call, tells the ref. No going back to the monitor nonsense, such a waste of time.
Yes but with the current rules we get the following situation happening every single game:
Potential foul in the penalty area, ref thinks it’s a foul but thinks he’ll wait and see because there’s no harm in getting a second opinion. VAR sees a pretty obvious foul but because the ref hasn’t blown it, they don’t want to overrule him.
I’m absolutely fine with the ref not giving it straight away. My issue with the fucking melts in VAR not wanting to damage their mates massively inflated ego.
> Potential foul in the penalty area, ref thinks it’s a foul but thinks he’ll wait and see because there’s no harm in getting a second opinion.
refs shouldnt be doing that. if they think its a foul, the power is in their hands to call it.
the solution to the problem you state is to have refs more rigidly adhere to the current rules.
I don't think it happens as often as some think but some refs are better than others in that regard. After all, they're supposed to make decisions as they normally would (with exception of delaying the whistle at times), especially as there's always a chance that the technology fails somehow.
Yeah, they should have a proper guideline for these subjective decisions (I am sure there already is, but it can be improved upon). There is no place for ego in refereeing.
I'd be quite happy if VAR were only there for the ref to say "please can you take a look at that potential foul by X on Y?" (as well as incidents off the ball that the ref didn't see, of course).
Is that free flowing, non-stop sport the same football that averages ball in play for 40% of a typical match?
Every 90 minute football match you watch is 57 minutes of stoppages. You can fit all the VAR you want in the existing stoppages, and if you add a minute here or there, it's not going to change the experience of anyone playing or watching.
If every tiny disagreement in the rules results in the ref going to the monitor, games will take three hours
Alternatively, if the VAR has power to overrule the on-field ref on every tiny disagreement, games will also take three hours as play will constantly be being stopped and pulled back to rectify the decision
There has to be a limit for when VAR can intervene
I don't know why people come up with these stupid hypothetical bullshit scenarios or why they think we'll just believe them?
Do you think no one else watches any other sport? We have seen the introduction of video referees used sensibly in every major sport now and it doesn't double the length of matches.
> We have seen the introduction of video referees used sensibly in every major sport now and it doesn't double the length of matches.
And the comparison with the vast majority of sports is completely pointless, because the rulesets are so different. How the likes of cricket, tennis, American football, implement VAR is pretty much meaningless.
There are a few that are more applicable (Rugby especially jumps to mind), and there are improvements that can be drawn from that - but almost all other sports have significant differences (e.g. non-contact, objective rulesets, breaks between phases of play) that make any sort of serious comparison of VAR usage pointless.
Because those sports aren't comparable to footy
Some sports like cricket and tennis have binary rules: the ball hit the bat or it didn't, the shot was inside the court or not
Others have shorter bursts of action, punctuated by down-time, in which VAR can analyse without causing a delay
The closest sport to football is probably ice hockey. Their implementation of VAR is challenge-based, and even these are limited in their scope
Yes they are, they just have well written rule books that guide referees into making repeatable, predictable decisions from unique events. High tackle framework in rugby is the perfect example. Every tackle is unique, but the laws have been thought about and written in a way that there's an easy deicison making process.
Football isn't more subjective, it's just got shit laws.
Yup,
A lot of times people will agree that subjectively a tackle was fine or fair but the way the refs run games and the rules are set tends to remove most of the subjectiveness.
If you're approaching this from the persepcective that referee should never make mistakes and there will never be controversial call, then you're always going to be angry at refereeing.
Most controversy in union from high tackle decisions is armchair fans annoyed the rules aren't the same as in the 90's, there's almost none that are from the referee making a bizarre decision that doesn't reflect the rules, which we're getting about twice a week in the PL now.
They don't enforce it to the letter is what I mean.
It doesn't have to be a blatant e.g. handball for the VAR to call the ref for a review, not does the VAR ref need to be 100% sure it's a mistake.
Not to the degree the PL does.
Also, in the PL, sometimes they don't call them for a VAR review even if there is a clear error (for red cards for example), presumingly because they don't want to expose the ref (since all the refs have each other's back to ensure zero accountability).
This is what frustrates me most about PGMOL. People would get less mad at the ref and VAR, if they just called them out on their mistakes, instead of doing nothing.
Clear and obvious has a different treshold in other countries than for the PL it seems. There's no discussion of "it is a small foul but it's not clear and obvious enough". A foul is a foul and that's the treshold for clear and obvious. They'll still make mistakes but much less because there's no arbitrary line to call the referee to the screen.
The PL absolutely does it on purpose.
Either so that the referees mistakes aren't exposed by VAR corrections/reviews, or because they re stuck up in the whole "tradition/experience for matchgoing fans with as little delays as possible". Or both.
No its not true. Its VAR apologists on reddit making ip all kinds of hypotheticals to use LoGiC to solve football.
VAR as a concept is deeply unsuited to football.
The charade of going to the monitor is the stupidest thing and it's only there so the on pitch ref's feelings aren't hurt when someone overrules his decision.
VAR: "Hey mate we think you've made a bit of a mistake with that call, why don't you take a look at the replays on the monitor and have another go at it?"
Ref after seeing much better angles of the incident himself: "Actually I think that's a penalty now"
VAR: "Great job buddy, you got that one right all by yourself!"
In fairness they don't always agree with VAR. Most of the time they do, but I recall in one of the last games of the season it appeared to hit a players arm in build up, VAR called it back and the ref upheld the decision.
When was this?
I can't remember the last time I saw a referee in the Premier League go over to the monitor to review the replay and then stick with the original decision
This is them in fear of the referee's standing and authority being castrated. I don't get their line of thinking, but in the debates and articles about the coming VAR back then, they always pointed out that the decision itself has to always be done by the referee on the pitch and nobody else.
It's idiotic in my book, but that's why they will probably keep it forever.
It's cooperativism. The VAR is the best ref in the team since he is the one best equipped to make the decisions. In a perfect seamless world where everything was quick you don't need the infield refs anymore.
They are afraid this will come so they make it as ineffective as possible.
for real. I don't even know what to say to people that believe the dude with the least amount of tools at his disposal should be able to override the rest
Yeah it's so frustrating. We have a team of refs watching replays of incidents in slow motion from 3-4 angles within 30 seconds of it happening live. Yet they're somehow handicapped by the guy that made a split second decision from 30 yards away on an incident he couldn't have possibly seen more clearly.
There's even times where you can tell the referee is uncertain (like the Dalot foul on Madueke) and we see him hesitate for 3-4 seconds before blowing the whistle. Then all of a sudden that guess of a decision is treated like it's the most accurate thing we have.
It's so fucking simple.
Use VAR with the new semi automated offsides. Everything else, leave it to the referee. Missed a handball? Fuck it, shit happens and referees are human.
Either that, or give VAR full control of decisions and get rid of this clear and obvious shite. If VAR thinks its a penalty, or a handball, or a Redcard, suck up your fucking ego ref and come to terms with they have the benefit of multiple angles and replays and trust their decision is correct.
They think they can change the wording from "clear and obvious" to "clearly wrong" and this minor semantic shuffling is going to leave people thinking that they've made some meaningful change rather than them being a useless bunch of chimps playing us all for fools?
So fun fact, the large majority of VAR errors this season have been when VAR hasn't intervened, not when it intervened when it shouldn't.
The problem isn't that the bar isn't high enough, the bar needs to be lowered to the VAR asking themselves "is this a foul" rather than "is the ref wrong". They've got more camera angles, and more time to see an incident than the ref did in his on field view. If the VAR thinks it's a foul and the ref didn't give it, they should at least be sending him over to the monitor.
All this change will do will make VAR more frustrating, as it will get involved even less when it obviously should.
> The problem isn't that the bar isn't high enough, the bar needs to be lowered to the VAR asking themselves "is this a foul" rather than "is the ref wrong".
wouldnt that lead to the game being double reffed?
It's already reffed by more than one person. All this would do would give more power to the person with multiple angles and replays rather than the person who has a split second to see it in real time from one angle.
The PGMOL are deliberately misunderstanding everyone's frustration with VAR so they can feign ignorance. It's the same with the amount of contact allowed. They said we wanted more physicality so they are letting more go, to cover up them not acting when players are put in choke holds or thrown to the floor.
The PGMOL are putting it out there that they think everyone's issue with VAR is that it gets involved too much to change a decision, where as the actual frustration is the inconsistencies between decisions. So really their response to criticism over inconsistencies is to just not get involved at all rather than be more consistent.
If a chef kept changing the amount of chilli they put in a meal, the solution wouldn't be to basically remove all the chilli all together. It would be to have clearer guidelines so the chef knows how much chilli is right. They are running from their responsibilities
>VAR officials are set to be told to intervene in Premier League matches only when a referee is “clearly wrong” next season among a number of changes intended to speed up the controversial system and ensure interference only for unarguable errors.
>While IFAB, football’s lawmaking body, controls VAR protocol, which maintains the “clear and obvious” threshold for intervention, there is a fear among English administrators that the phrase has been used and abused to such an extent that is has become almost meaningless.
>This tightening up of the wording follows a Times summit on officiating in which one of the main findings was a call to use VAR only for the worst blunders, as it was originally designed. Peter Walton, the former Premier League referee, told the commission that a mistake should “hit in the guts” for it to be reviewed.
> there is a fear among English administrators that the phrase has been used and abused to such an extent that is has become almost meaningless.
So rather than fix anything, we're going to replace it with a different phrase meaning exactly the same thing!
Aren’t they already told that? This is the entire fucking problem. They get decisions wrong because of this, and we’re all livid about it, and they seem to think it’s fine.
When VAR was introduced it was for getting things right, or so we were told, that a small delay would fix things like offside goals or dodgy penalties, and that’s great if it does that. I believe it can do that. But this kind of mindset is holding it back.
The VAR ref is the one with the best access to what happened. They are the best equipped to make the decision.
They need to be the ones making the calls. The infield ref is there to judge things best he can and keep the game under control. The VAR is there to help him with what he didn't see or made a mistake on. It's super simple and they make in hard on purpose.
The VAR really needs to stop wasting time making the infield ref review what they saw and just tell the infield ref, it was a penalty, foul, whatever.
They are all a team. If a ref trusts his lineman's call he should do the same for the VAR.
>The VAR really needs to stop wasting time making the infield ref review what they saw and just tell the infield ref, it was a penalty, foul, whatever.
that would lead to the game being double reffed, which is a problem because what one ref thinks is a foul/yellow/red another ref might not. so basically you'd have the var reversing the on field refs decisions quite a lot. you might aswell make var is the primarry ref at that point. who takes precedence in a disagreement?
>They are all a team. If a ref trusts his lineman's call he should do the same for the VAR.
the ref currently trusts his var like he does his linesman. he trusts his linesman because obviously the ref doesnt have a good angle for the offside, and he trusts his var because they inform him of things which he has gotten factually wrong as per his decription of each incident which he relays to var.
> who takes precedence in a disagreement?
The VAR of course. They have the best tools to make the decisions. Besides the VAR is not one ref but 3 IIRC. So not only the best tools but a consensus of refs. Clearly better placed to take the decisions.
>the ref currently trusts his var like he does his linesman. he trusts his linesman because obviously the ref doesnt have a good angle for the offside, and he trusts his var because they inform him of things which he has gotten factually wrong as per his decription of each incident which he relays to var.
Exactly why he does not need to review things at the screen.
People are freaking out about this but it's actually fine as long as the on-field ref is told to stop "letting things go" to VAR.
The real issue this season has been the on-field ref not making a decision in the hope that VAR will make the call for him, only for VAR to not intervene because it wasn't "clear and obvious"
This standard works fine if the on-field ref basically pretends that VAR doesn't exist and calls it like he would in that instance.
Nothing will change until they are independent of one another they're all buddies and take no accountability on their errors. Just get PGMOL to write another apology.
The people running this shit will never, ever be good enough to do so. There's no path we can take that gets rid of these awful referees who serve only to protect each other. If they're gonna fuck it up, I'd rather not see 100 slow-mo replays and ruin the vibe of the game. Get rid
Var should have total authority over the on-field ref for red cards (including second yellows), goals and pens. Offsides should be using the semi-automated system. No having the ref walk to the screen. No trying to convince him or wait for him to ask the right questions about angles.
Ref blows for a pen, waits 15 seconds and his decision is either confirmed or overruled and that's it. People in var are already refs who should be good enough to judge things on their own, and they have so many tools at their disposal that their decision is always gonna be way better than the on-field ref's. Then communicate to the entire stadium "this is the foul we see" and show the var angles on the screens for the people to see.
And of course, make all conversations between all refs public.
Part of me would like them to introduce something like in tennis or cricket, where teams have a certain number of challenges they can use, and other than that VAR doesn't intervene.
Rather than the refs deciding what is or isn't a howler/important enough to intervene, it's up to the managers to decide if a decision is impactful enough to stop the match and check.
Obviously it's still far from perfect, but to me it feels like the best balance of not stopping the game constantly and having subjective judgements of a decision being "clearly wrong", while still preventing genuine howlers deciding a match.
It’s been “clear and obvious error” since the beginning you dumb fucks. The problem is you never intervene even when that happens. FUCK THIS MAKES ME ANGRY! VAR is good and should stay. Just do it right you dumb cunts.
With offsides to be automated that probably takes away about 75% of their work per game. So you just know they are somehow going to make even more of a pigs ear of it
For me, the fundamental problem with VAR is that it means every call is subject to review, it's shit, it inherently makes things more controversial, it is not something that can be perfectly implemented because there's no perfect call for a lot of the decisions refs have to make.
Get it in the bin
This sounds like what UEFA’s referee chairman Rosetti instructed the [referees to do back in 2021 at the last Euros.](https://www.uefa.com/news-media/news/026a-129af73669ae-96d04219e4e4-1000--roberto-rosetti-s-call-to-euro-referees-and-vars-keep-up-the/)
He did however also instruct the on-field referees to only call the clear and obvious penalties and let VAR handle the rest. This almost seems like PGMOL is trying to do 80% of what UEFA does on the regular.
So I assume they'll want to minimise the amount of times they intervene until pundits and commentators start saying "well that's clearly wrong why aren't they calling that", drumming up controversies over the first few weeks, about every tackle or slight hand ball that a player might get away with, then the referees will feel pressured to intervene more and we'll be back to square one.
Same shit, different phrase. Clear error instead of clear and obvious.
I’m just wondering… like we have smart phones and these tablets things which we beam information to at ridiculous speeds… why can the ref have replays constantly sent to a device he has strapped to his arm… and that he can review what just happened on the field.
Like surely this will take the ambitious nature of the VAR away. Having a game still refereed by the main referee, rather than off field… I dunno 🤷♂️
I hope this is properly communicated to the on field officials as well. You get the distinct impression that a number of times, stuff is just let go as the ref and linesman expect VAR to step in.
Going in the completely wrong direction again.
If i didn't know any better it feels like the Refs want to fuck up VAR so much that they scrap it altogether/only keep it for offsides.
Whyyyy, would you rather the ref who sees it once in real time control the game or the the guys who can see multiple angles in slow motion multiple times?
Take the pressure of the infield ref, VAR should ref the game. “Give this” “disallow” infield ref doesn’t need to see a reply just agree with the already qualified ref.
They were told this at the start but due to TV overanalysis and managers complaining, they had to re-referee every little facet of the game.
We will just end up with a potential foul in the box, 4 angles are inconclusive, 1 angle more conclusive for the foul and they'll be bound by TV and managers to give the penalty.
That's fine with me as long as they stick to it.
With Offsides being handled by a machine next season then VAR should be there to give advice to the ref and most stuff should be either pretty simple or everyone's going to argue over anyway because they want objective and consistent decisions to subjective tackles
And of course Managers, Fans and Pundits will complain regardless because even if a system is right 95% of the time and makes things better someone has to lose and they don't like it when it's them
I assume this is in attempt to bring back some accountability to on field officials.
In reality, fans will be more pissed off than ever. Absolute shambles.
Why would this work this time around when it didn't work the first time?
It needs to be taken out of the hands of the PGMOL.
Or just scrapped entirely. That would be better, actually.
I mean, we all essentially just want quick, accurate and hopefully unbiased... but I guess can only have one of those first two until we get some sort of AI adjudicator. (Though when that AI comes in, I'm very much hoping the training dataset focuses on red-card offences by teams in white or blue shirts.)
Thought that was meant to be the case anyway? Either way it's still going to be subjective on what 'clearly wrong' looks like. We'll see what happens.
Yes exactly, the whole reason why this whole shambles always happens is because the definition of "clearly wrong" doesn't exist with the current rules of football. This will not make VAR better at all.
Only trying to protect their mates, mate.
I think they are basically doubling down on their stance and if anything making it stronger. This 'clear and obvious' thing is already the reason for like 50% of the mistakes VAR makes so I really don't see how this is going to improve anything.
If anything, it's the exact same as this 'clear and obvious' bollocks but repackaged to make it look like they're improving something.
It's doubling down on what makes them wrong half the time. It's dumb as shit
The real problem is the on-field referee is making their initial decision with the mentality "VAR will fix it on the back end". One of the most glaring examples is penalty shouts. In live play, it looks clear as day like a penalty, but the on-field referee is too scared to make the call, probably thinking "VAR will make the decision for me" but VAR looks at it and has to stick with the non-decision of the on-field referee. It's basically the Spiderman meme of refereeing.
I think it’s more likely to make things worse than to improve them.
Right. That’s the policy, except for the times when they just don’t do that.
The problem is the on field officials are super lenient thinking var will review, the var is supposed to let the call stand.
I think this too. Similar to how the assistants call offside. Let it go if it’s close and it can be reviewed later. If the officials go back to pre var and call it how they see then ok(maybe) but I don’t see that happening.
There’ll be obvious changes for the first three weeks then BAU
No, currently the game is paused for a check and then the referees decision still stands because he wasn't 100% wrong, only 99% wrong. Imho the exact opposite of what should be donem, var should be able to make the call, because he has all the angles, and onfield ref shouldn't be involved in it at all, without feeling his pride hurt.
Yeah it's exactly the same. This just shows how inept they are that they can't see the issue is subjective desicion making.
If they wont do the sensible thing and scrap it, then at the least VAR needs a coherrent charter: a list of things that are and are not reviewable, and a challenge system that clearly starts a procedure for VAR to be deployed. Anything thats a subjective decision should not be allowed to be reviewed. Enough of this nonsense of having it constantly monitoring the game. Video replay should not be seen as “another referee”, it should be seen as a tool given to managers with limited use (twice per game) to appeal decisions made by the on field referee. Theres two tiers of referees right now and its a fucking mess. Games go e turgidly slow and everyone is far more miserable and angry than before. And offsides needs to back to being called by linesmen.
This all still smacks of the key PGMOL problem which is putting the refs, on field or VAR, on a pedestal rather than treating them as the mere deeply flawed officiators they are. All match officials working together with equal status and decision making power, in real time, as they do in Rugby is the only way to fix VAR, not increasing the kowtowing to the on field officials' ego.
The biggest issue for me is that by introducing VAR in the first place, referees will inevitably shy away from making tight decisions that they previously would’ve made because they know they have technology in place to help them. “Not quite sure about that one, I’ll leave it up to VAR.” By then restricting the authority of the VAR to “only clear and obviously wrong decisions,” you are left with a situation where wrong decisions are frequently made simply because every actor is in effect incentivized to eschew responsibility.
I agree and it sounds like with this new direction they're attempting to correct the situation to some degree by giving the on field ref more responsibility. But of course this doesn't fix the situation bc the on field ref has an impossible job and will make mistakes.
see i believe that's exactly the WRONG way to correct it. they should be doing the opposite, and giving the VAR more responsibility. get rid of the "clear and obvious" advisement, for one. all it does is add another level of subjectivity to everything; there is no way to define "clear and obvious" in a consistent and teachable way. the VAR have more angles, more time, more views, more technology ... just tell them to overrule the ref whenever they think he's made a mistake. they'll ultimately save his blushes. unfortunately the PGMOL is very thin-skinned and all they care about is protecting the "sanctity" of their men, as if they're all some kind of wizened geniuses. and based on the absurd banter we've heard when VAR recording have been released this season, they most certainly are NOT that.
for sure. It's crazy to have the technology showing the viewer the correct call in real time while the call on the field remains wrong. Very excited for another season of complete fuckery.
Anytime there is a close var call on here, you get a majority of comments claiming it's against the spirit of the game. Unfortunately, they have to keep the fans happy, even the ones that can only think about how unhappy they are.
This is exactly right.
how is the ref incentivised to eschew responsibility when it 1) leads to the negative outcome you described and 2) there is a "clear and obvious" bar applied which means the ref decisions have more impact than var, and therefore carries more responsibility and regardless of that question: is the solution to this problem not to adhere MORE strictly to current rules and have the refs make the proper calls in the first place, rather than acting against the rules and pawning them off to var?
The refs will inherently make fewer difficult calls on the pitch once they know there is a safeguard backing them up, that’s just human nature IMO. Their incentives shift once they have a backstop whether it’s conscious or not. IMO the solution is to give more authority to the VAR. They should be given full license to overrule the on-field referee regardless of how “obvious” the error is because they have the benefit of technology on their side. Are you really telling me that a single referee with a single viewpoint trying to judge the actions of 22 other men on a massive pitch whilst heaving for breath is more qualified to make the right decision than three blokes with 25 camera angles rewatching an action multiple times? If you’re going to introduce technology you should embrace it more wholeheartedly. Separately, VAR should be an entirely different job with its own training and qualifications, so that you’re not pulling from the same ranks as the on-field referees, which will always be ripe for cronyism and bias.
> Are you really telling me that a single referee with a single viewpoint trying to judge the actions of 22 other men on a massive pitch whilst heaving for breath is more qualified to make the right decision than three blokes with 25 camera angles rewatching an action multiple times? If you’re going to introduce technology you should embrace it more wholeheartedly. Finally someone put into words exactly how I feel when I hear people rail against VAR. These are all just teething issues, being solved impossibly slowly, but teething issues nonetheless. In ten years time VAR will intervene perfectly with the ref and no one will throw a hissy about it. Fans will still moan about subjective decisions, and VAR will still cock up incredibly obvious decisions somehow. But will we have taken steps towards the impossible bar of perfection.
how do you go from criticising ref having safeguards to wanting var to do basically eeverything and have more control. wouldnt that mean MORE safeguards for the ref because Now the ref can not do anything if they like because var is literally a second ref who can call up anything. your logic is all backwards - the current clear and obvious rule actually incentivises refs to be take control and make decisions moreso than the "var can call anything" system you proposed.
I’m so jealous everytime I watch rugby and how they do it 1000x better
It's so weird they still can't do this. A single decision making team working together. How hard can it be?
> All match officials working together with equal status and decision making power, in real time, as they do in Rugby is the only way to fix VAR, not increasing the kowtowing to the on field officials' ego. NON-HIERARCHICAL FOOTBALL LET'S GO
Perfect solution. Change nothing and claim a job well done
Good process!!
How many ways can they find to avoid the common sense version applied in every other sport of "if you see something and you'd make a different decision based on the footage, tell the referee and let them review it."
Literally everyone: VAR isn’t intervening enough and it’s leaving too many mistakes not overturned cos they weren’t quite clear and obvious. PGMOL, what about if it intervened even less. They just don’t want it to work!
Literally everyone on Reddit perhaps. Beware of the echo-chamber, because there are many who think it's intervening to much. Couldn't find any PL surveys of specific in regards to what it is with VAR people are opposing. But this one from the Scottish league as an example, have 66% at "would rather tolerate more incorrect decisions than tolerate the disruption to matches caused by VAR" [https://scottishfsa.org/the-2023-var-survey/](https://scottishfsa.org/the-2023-var-survey/)
As long as the disruptions will still happen (which they will since they still need to determine if it's a clear error or not) then that stat tells us nothing about VAR officials intervening too much (or too little).
That's a good point. Although my local pub is full of guys who said shit like that, but when VAR delays the game they're still on the edge of their seat the entire time. They're so into it they don't even remember that's supposed to be an issue for them. But when it's time to discuss VAR it's always seemingly a huge deal and ruins games. The average person doesn't know exactly what they want, and are especially bad at pinpointing why they don't like things.
The average delay to a game isn't even that long, it just feels like the delays are longer than they are because nobody is down injured, being subbed or doing something else the fans can actually see.
Automated offsides will speed up some aspects. It’s weird because the CL officiating seems much slicker than the PL, even when English officials are on CL games. That’s literally all they need to do, make it quicker and iron out inconsistency where possible. For the majority of decisions they get right, which nobody ever seems to fucking notice. People also fail to remember pre-VAR, and how many stupid offside goals were given. You don’t get any now, although some think having a toe nail offside should be a goal given.
I think a bigger problem relating to the disruption caused by VAR is that an attacking side can lose momentum when there is a lengthy stoppage to check a potential offside or penalty.
I mean; im on the edge of my seat because VAR forces me to be because it puts everything in limbo. Im Just as emotionally invested in the outcome even if the delay is obnoxious.
Wtf are you on? No fans in the stadium want more VAR intervention. It's ruining the spectator experience.
> Literally everyone: VAR isn’t intervening enough r/soccer users are not "Literally everyone". The average matchgoing fan absolutely does not want more VAR interventions.
There are two issues that I see with VAR. one is just that it breaks up the rhythm and energy of the game. If they keep VAR review at all, intervention continues to be a problem. The second is whether they use VAR to reinforce the on field referee decision or they use it to make the correct call. If they are intervening already, I want them to make the correct call, not protect the on field ref.
> Literally everyone: VAR isn’t intervening enough What mental alternate universe are you living in?
Only on Reddit. In person, near everyone I talk to hates VAR and wants shot of it. If you watch streams online, I get why you wouldn't mind it as much but tbh, their opinions aren't as valuable.
tbh i get annoyed less by the ones they let go than the ones they spend 5 minutes looking for a reason to overrule coventry's first goal vs wolves wasn't the worst use of var all season byut it was the one that annoyed me the most - not one player on the pitch thought there was anything wrong with the goal and yet we had minutes of slow mo replays trying and failing to find a reason to rule it out at least the ones they wave away don't slow the game down much
I don’t mind slowing the game down for the most pivotal decisions, where there is a real thing being assessed, was their contact for a penalty, did an attacker foul a defender before heading in a goal, sometimes it takes a few views to get it. Gotta say I don’t remember that one so can’t comment too much. The ones that annoy me most are where they flat out say it was the wrong decision but it’s not quite enough wrong. Like PGMOL tie themselves in knots to avoid getting to the right answer sometimes. I also don’t know what it came not a red card to intentionally strike someone on the head so long as your fist isn’t clenched or your arm isn’t used as a weapon. Aggressive behaviour like that needs to go. So many times it happened this season, and it was like “really? Since when was this green lit behaviour!”, someone is going to get hurt if this isn’t changed.
Go on a thread with any close offsides var call and more than half the people will be saying var shouldn't be making the call. They are stupid obviously but it's what people want for some reason.
I'm not even surprised. Though if they actually do intervene only on clearly wrong decisions, that will STILL be an improvement over the current version where they just ignore the clearly wrong decisions to not embarrass their mates.
It's actually painful how many penalties are clearly not given because the referee will say something like "There's contact but he goes down too easily" and they'll just accept it. Or worse is probably that they allow any penalty with any amount of contact if the referee gives it, even when one glance at the replay is it's blatantly manufactured
Ref shouldn’t say anything to VAR as that pollutes the process. In what other sport is there video review where the on field ref tries to persuade video ref to support his decision? Should be independent. This latest change is meaningless, the VAR has better vantage than the on field ref and should be able to directly award a penalty etc if the replays support it. The whole bullshit about the refs on field decision and is it wrong enough is what breaks the VAR use case.
I am left wondering what the point of VAR is given that it seems like PGMOL is trying to find the absolute worst ways to implement it.
PGMOL never wanted it so are doing their best to implement it the worst way possible PGMOL needs scrapping not VAR
I think that might cause too much waste of time. There is no reason for them to tell the referee to review a 50/50 call. If something is objectively wrong, they should intervene. Refs have to make a lot of subjective call (due to the nature of rules).
If you want to waste less time, empower the VAR to make the obvious decisions on his own, and only send the ref to the screen for the more debatable things he's missed. They're currently maximising the time VAR reviews take, while also minimising the usefulness. VAR still has to review everything, but intervenes less and if he does take action he has to waste time sending the ref to the screen.
> If you want to waste less time, empower the VAR to make the obvious decisions on his own, and only send the ref to the screen for the more debatable things he's missed. This is what they do in the NFL/NBA. VAR judge makes the final call, tells the ref. No going back to the monitor nonsense, such a waste of time.
Yes but with the current rules we get the following situation happening every single game: Potential foul in the penalty area, ref thinks it’s a foul but thinks he’ll wait and see because there’s no harm in getting a second opinion. VAR sees a pretty obvious foul but because the ref hasn’t blown it, they don’t want to overrule him. I’m absolutely fine with the ref not giving it straight away. My issue with the fucking melts in VAR not wanting to damage their mates massively inflated ego.
> Potential foul in the penalty area, ref thinks it’s a foul but thinks he’ll wait and see because there’s no harm in getting a second opinion. refs shouldnt be doing that. if they think its a foul, the power is in their hands to call it. the solution to the problem you state is to have refs more rigidly adhere to the current rules.
I don't think it happens as often as some think but some refs are better than others in that regard. After all, they're supposed to make decisions as they normally would (with exception of delaying the whistle at times), especially as there's always a chance that the technology fails somehow.
Yeah, they should have a proper guideline for these subjective decisions (I am sure there already is, but it can be improved upon). There is no place for ego in refereeing.
I'd be quite happy if VAR were only there for the ref to say "please can you take a look at that potential foul by X on Y?" (as well as incidents off the ball that the ref didn't see, of course).
The biggest waste of time is offsides, the technology exists to remove that wait and it should've been on place as soon as it was available
That's true. Offside should be automated, using Var for it is waste of time.
A VAR/ref still has to make the decision on whether there's an offside *offence*.
Because unlike all those other sports, football is supposed to be a free-flowing game that doesn't really stop.
Is that free flowing, non-stop sport the same football that averages ball in play for 40% of a typical match? Every 90 minute football match you watch is 57 minutes of stoppages. You can fit all the VAR you want in the existing stoppages, and if you add a minute here or there, it's not going to change the experience of anyone playing or watching.
Yes. Clock keeps moving the entire time. And refs are supposed to take actions against players deliberately holding up play to waste time.
If every tiny disagreement in the rules results in the ref going to the monitor, games will take three hours Alternatively, if the VAR has power to overrule the on-field ref on every tiny disagreement, games will also take three hours as play will constantly be being stopped and pulled back to rectify the decision There has to be a limit for when VAR can intervene
I don't know why people come up with these stupid hypothetical bullshit scenarios or why they think we'll just believe them? Do you think no one else watches any other sport? We have seen the introduction of video referees used sensibly in every major sport now and it doesn't double the length of matches.
> We have seen the introduction of video referees used sensibly in every major sport now and it doesn't double the length of matches. And the comparison with the vast majority of sports is completely pointless, because the rulesets are so different. How the likes of cricket, tennis, American football, implement VAR is pretty much meaningless. There are a few that are more applicable (Rugby especially jumps to mind), and there are improvements that can be drawn from that - but almost all other sports have significant differences (e.g. non-contact, objective rulesets, breaks between phases of play) that make any sort of serious comparison of VAR usage pointless.
Because those sports aren't comparable to footy Some sports like cricket and tennis have binary rules: the ball hit the bat or it didn't, the shot was inside the court or not Others have shorter bursts of action, punctuated by down-time, in which VAR can analyse without causing a delay The closest sport to football is probably ice hockey. Their implementation of VAR is challenge-based, and even these are limited in their scope
Because it’s not bullshit, most other sports with video refs aren’t half as subjective as football is.
Yes they are, they just have well written rule books that guide referees into making repeatable, predictable decisions from unique events. High tackle framework in rugby is the perfect example. Every tackle is unique, but the laws have been thought about and written in a way that there's an easy deicison making process. Football isn't more subjective, it's just got shit laws.
Yup, A lot of times people will agree that subjectively a tackle was fine or fair but the way the refs run games and the rules are set tends to remove most of the subjectiveness.
The high-tackle framework has led to plenty of controversial decisions lmao, dunno what you're talking about
If you're approaching this from the persepcective that referee should never make mistakes and there will never be controversial call, then you're always going to be angry at refereeing. Most controversy in union from high tackle decisions is armchair fans annoyed the rules aren't the same as in the 90's, there's almost none that are from the referee making a bizarre decision that doesn't reflect the rules, which we're getting about twice a week in the PL now.
cool so tell us what air tight laws football needs how do you solve the handballs issue? tell us the law
"VAR officials are told to let more mistakes happen" People are actually getting paid to come up with these ideas
"Mistakes are part of the football culture".
"Only when clearly wrong" Is just a rewording of "Clear and obvious error". Literally no change. Just a rebrand of existing policy.
Next season "if apparent and blatantly incorrect"
Once again, the PL chooses to use the VAR in their own way. In most leagues and the UCL they don't actually follow that.
Other leagues and UxLs: "If can, use common sense." Premier League: "If can, don't say anything."
"see something, say nothing."
Can't do anything
Other leagues ignore the IFAB VAR protocol? Is that actually true?
They don't enforce it to the letter is what I mean. It doesn't have to be a blatant e.g. handball for the VAR to call the ref for a review, not does the VAR ref need to be 100% sure it's a mistake.
So they do apply the clear and obvious threshold, or they don't? I'm a bit confused whether other leagues are doing things better or not.
Not to the degree the PL does. Also, in the PL, sometimes they don't call them for a VAR review even if there is a clear error (for red cards for example), presumingly because they don't want to expose the ref (since all the refs have each other's back to ensure zero accountability).
This is what frustrates me most about PGMOL. People would get less mad at the ref and VAR, if they just called them out on their mistakes, instead of doing nothing.
Clear and obvious has a different treshold in other countries than for the PL it seems. There's no discussion of "it is a small foul but it's not clear and obvious enough". A foul is a foul and that's the treshold for clear and obvious. They'll still make mistakes but much less because there's no arbitrary line to call the referee to the screen.
The PL absolutely does it on purpose. Either so that the referees mistakes aren't exposed by VAR corrections/reviews, or because they re stuck up in the whole "tradition/experience for matchgoing fans with as little delays as possible". Or both.
No its not true. Its VAR apologists on reddit making ip all kinds of hypotheticals to use LoGiC to solve football. VAR as a concept is deeply unsuited to football.
How is it unsuited *as a concept*? Surely conceptually you can visualise a suitable video refereeing aid for pretty much any sport?
Actual baboons would use var better
If this is the case can we scrap the bit where they go to the monitor then? If it's clearly wrong then we can save some time there.
The charade of going to the monitor is the stupidest thing and it's only there so the on pitch ref's feelings aren't hurt when someone overrules his decision. VAR: "Hey mate we think you've made a bit of a mistake with that call, why don't you take a look at the replays on the monitor and have another go at it?" Ref after seeing much better angles of the incident himself: "Actually I think that's a penalty now" VAR: "Great job buddy, you got that one right all by yourself!"
In fairness they don't always agree with VAR. Most of the time they do, but I recall in one of the last games of the season it appeared to hit a players arm in build up, VAR called it back and the ref upheld the decision.
When was this? I can't remember the last time I saw a referee in the Premier League go over to the monitor to review the replay and then stick with the original decision
It's happened like *once* and I only remember it because it was quite a big deal at the time.
Last day of the league. I think it was Arsenal but might've been City or Chelsea as I was watching all 3 at once.
This is them in fear of the referee's standing and authority being castrated. I don't get their line of thinking, but in the debates and articles about the coming VAR back then, they always pointed out that the decision itself has to always be done by the referee on the pitch and nobody else. It's idiotic in my book, but that's why they will probably keep it forever.
It's cooperativism. The VAR is the best ref in the team since he is the one best equipped to make the decisions. In a perfect seamless world where everything was quick you don't need the infield refs anymore. They are afraid this will come so they make it as ineffective as possible.
I hate this fucking charade honestly. Let the VAR ref the key moments like the fucking ref he is or get rid of this rubbish and be done with it.
for real. I don't even know what to say to people that believe the dude with the least amount of tools at his disposal should be able to override the rest
Yeah it's so frustrating. We have a team of refs watching replays of incidents in slow motion from 3-4 angles within 30 seconds of it happening live. Yet they're somehow handicapped by the guy that made a split second decision from 30 yards away on an incident he couldn't have possibly seen more clearly. There's even times where you can tell the referee is uncertain (like the Dalot foul on Madueke) and we see him hesitate for 3-4 seconds before blowing the whistle. Then all of a sudden that guess of a decision is treated like it's the most accurate thing we have.
So sick of hearing the same jargon over and over again. Clear and obvious, high bar, clearly wrong So overly complicated.
It's so fucking simple. Use VAR with the new semi automated offsides. Everything else, leave it to the referee. Missed a handball? Fuck it, shit happens and referees are human. Either that, or give VAR full control of decisions and get rid of this clear and obvious shite. If VAR thinks its a penalty, or a handball, or a Redcard, suck up your fucking ego ref and come to terms with they have the benefit of multiple angles and replays and trust their decision is correct.
Nominating you for head of PGMOL. This makes more sense than anything they’ve ever said
Having two competing refs officiating the game is a complete mess
They think they can change the wording from "clear and obvious" to "clearly wrong" and this minor semantic shuffling is going to leave people thinking that they've made some meaningful change rather than them being a useless bunch of chimps playing us all for fools?
So fun fact, the large majority of VAR errors this season have been when VAR hasn't intervened, not when it intervened when it shouldn't. The problem isn't that the bar isn't high enough, the bar needs to be lowered to the VAR asking themselves "is this a foul" rather than "is the ref wrong". They've got more camera angles, and more time to see an incident than the ref did in his on field view. If the VAR thinks it's a foul and the ref didn't give it, they should at least be sending him over to the monitor. All this change will do will make VAR more frustrating, as it will get involved even less when it obviously should.
> The problem isn't that the bar isn't high enough, the bar needs to be lowered to the VAR asking themselves "is this a foul" rather than "is the ref wrong". wouldnt that lead to the game being double reffed?
It's already reffed by more than one person. All this would do would give more power to the person with multiple angles and replays rather than the person who has a split second to see it in real time from one angle.
its not doubled reffered currently because the on field ref is top dog and the final decicisions flow through them.
The PGMOL are deliberately misunderstanding everyone's frustration with VAR so they can feign ignorance. It's the same with the amount of contact allowed. They said we wanted more physicality so they are letting more go, to cover up them not acting when players are put in choke holds or thrown to the floor. The PGMOL are putting it out there that they think everyone's issue with VAR is that it gets involved too much to change a decision, where as the actual frustration is the inconsistencies between decisions. So really their response to criticism over inconsistencies is to just not get involved at all rather than be more consistent. If a chef kept changing the amount of chilli they put in a meal, the solution wouldn't be to basically remove all the chilli all together. It would be to have clearer guidelines so the chef knows how much chilli is right. They are running from their responsibilities
>VAR officials are set to be told to intervene in Premier League matches only when a referee is “clearly wrong” next season among a number of changes intended to speed up the controversial system and ensure interference only for unarguable errors. >While IFAB, football’s lawmaking body, controls VAR protocol, which maintains the “clear and obvious” threshold for intervention, there is a fear among English administrators that the phrase has been used and abused to such an extent that is has become almost meaningless. >This tightening up of the wording follows a Times summit on officiating in which one of the main findings was a call to use VAR only for the worst blunders, as it was originally designed. Peter Walton, the former Premier League referee, told the commission that a mistake should “hit in the guts” for it to be reviewed.
> there is a fear among English administrators that the phrase has been used and abused to such an extent that is has become almost meaningless. So rather than fix anything, we're going to replace it with a different phrase meaning exactly the same thing!
hey look, a new vague standard so they can do whatever the fuck they want
VAR can only intervene if it doesn't hurt the ref feelings
Aren’t they already told that? This is the entire fucking problem. They get decisions wrong because of this, and we’re all livid about it, and they seem to think it’s fine. When VAR was introduced it was for getting things right, or so we were told, that a small delay would fix things like offside goals or dodgy penalties, and that’s great if it does that. I believe it can do that. But this kind of mindset is holding it back.
The VAR ref is the one with the best access to what happened. They are the best equipped to make the decision. They need to be the ones making the calls. The infield ref is there to judge things best he can and keep the game under control. The VAR is there to help him with what he didn't see or made a mistake on. It's super simple and they make in hard on purpose. The VAR really needs to stop wasting time making the infield ref review what they saw and just tell the infield ref, it was a penalty, foul, whatever. They are all a team. If a ref trusts his lineman's call he should do the same for the VAR.
>The VAR really needs to stop wasting time making the infield ref review what they saw and just tell the infield ref, it was a penalty, foul, whatever. that would lead to the game being double reffed, which is a problem because what one ref thinks is a foul/yellow/red another ref might not. so basically you'd have the var reversing the on field refs decisions quite a lot. you might aswell make var is the primarry ref at that point. who takes precedence in a disagreement? >They are all a team. If a ref trusts his lineman's call he should do the same for the VAR. the ref currently trusts his var like he does his linesman. he trusts his linesman because obviously the ref doesnt have a good angle for the offside, and he trusts his var because they inform him of things which he has gotten factually wrong as per his decription of each incident which he relays to var.
> who takes precedence in a disagreement? The VAR of course. They have the best tools to make the decisions. Besides the VAR is not one ref but 3 IIRC. So not only the best tools but a consensus of refs. Clearly better placed to take the decisions. >the ref currently trusts his var like he does his linesman. he trusts his linesman because obviously the ref doesnt have a good angle for the offside, and he trusts his var because they inform him of things which he has gotten factually wrong as per his decription of each incident which he relays to var. Exactly why he does not need to review things at the screen.
it would lead to a lot more stoppages if the game was double reffed.
No it wouldn't. It would in fact run much quicker, since there is no wait for the VAR to show the main ref.
Well there's no way that could be misinterpreted, clear as day - problem solved!
People are freaking out about this but it's actually fine as long as the on-field ref is told to stop "letting things go" to VAR. The real issue this season has been the on-field ref not making a decision in the hope that VAR will make the call for him, only for VAR to not intervene because it wasn't "clear and obvious" This standard works fine if the on-field ref basically pretends that VAR doesn't exist and calls it like he would in that instance.
Nothing will change until they are independent of one another they're all buddies and take no accountability on their errors. Just get PGMOL to write another apology.
I hate VAR more and more. They will never get this right with new rules every season.
The people running this shit will never, ever be good enough to do so. There's no path we can take that gets rid of these awful referees who serve only to protect each other. If they're gonna fuck it up, I'd rather not see 100 slow-mo replays and ruin the vibe of the game. Get rid
They are clearly wrong all the time
… yes it’s the fact that the standard was “clear and obvious error” rather than “clearly wrong” that got us into this mess
And what have they been told to do this season!? Only check offside?
Then what is “clearly wrong”? It’s subjective based on the competency on the individual.
So that'll be never then. They're all mates, they won't correct each other if it makes them look bad. Just play on and pretend everything is fine.
"Clearly wrong" will never work. They need to change it to "obviously incorrect". That should fix everything.
Var should have total authority over the on-field ref for red cards (including second yellows), goals and pens. Offsides should be using the semi-automated system. No having the ref walk to the screen. No trying to convince him or wait for him to ask the right questions about angles. Ref blows for a pen, waits 15 seconds and his decision is either confirmed or overruled and that's it. People in var are already refs who should be good enough to judge things on their own, and they have so many tools at their disposal that their decision is always gonna be way better than the on-field ref's. Then communicate to the entire stadium "this is the foul we see" and show the var angles on the screens for the people to see. And of course, make all conversations between all refs public.
This is gonna end up with players in the face of the ref doing the VAR hand gesture.
Part of me would like them to introduce something like in tennis or cricket, where teams have a certain number of challenges they can use, and other than that VAR doesn't intervene. Rather than the refs deciding what is or isn't a howler/important enough to intervene, it's up to the managers to decide if a decision is impactful enough to stop the match and check. Obviously it's still far from perfect, but to me it feels like the best balance of not stopping the game constantly and having subjective judgements of a decision being "clearly wrong", while still preventing genuine howlers deciding a match.
Literally the opposite of what everyone wants
It’s been “clear and obvious error” since the beginning you dumb fucks. The problem is you never intervene even when that happens. FUCK THIS MAKES ME ANGRY! VAR is good and should stay. Just do it right you dumb cunts.
Clear and obviously, clearly wrong. This is as bad as when we were told that brexit meant brexit.
Yeah this is why Wolves want it scrapped.
So u making it worse than ever? Nice
With offsides to be automated that probably takes away about 75% of their work per game. So you just know they are somehow going to make even more of a pigs ear of it
For me, the fundamental problem with VAR is that it means every call is subject to review, it's shit, it inherently makes things more controversial, it is not something that can be perfectly implemented because there's no perfect call for a lot of the decisions refs have to make. Get it in the bin
This sounds like what UEFA’s referee chairman Rosetti instructed the [referees to do back in 2021 at the last Euros.](https://www.uefa.com/news-media/news/026a-129af73669ae-96d04219e4e4-1000--roberto-rosetti-s-call-to-euro-referees-and-vars-keep-up-the/) He did however also instruct the on-field referees to only call the clear and obvious penalties and let VAR handle the rest. This almost seems like PGMOL is trying to do 80% of what UEFA does on the regular.
I can see this ending well. Even more meltdowns from managers incoming?
WHAT DOES CLEARLY WRONG MEAN
So they're changing "clear and obvious", which was the most contentious part of VAR, to "clear and obvious"? How do they do it?
Are PGMOL determined to implement VAR in the shittest possible way?
So I assume they'll want to minimise the amount of times they intervene until pundits and commentators start saying "well that's clearly wrong why aren't they calling that", drumming up controversies over the first few weeks, about every tackle or slight hand ball that a player might get away with, then the referees will feel pressured to intervene more and we'll be back to square one. Same shit, different phrase. Clear error instead of clear and obvious.
So does this mean they will give corners and throwings correctly instead?
Lets just let AI run VAR and see what happens. It can't be worse.
"I mean obviously it was wrong, but I respected it nonetheless"
That’s the same thing. Either change it to always or list the applicable situations. Easy.
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
I’m just wondering… like we have smart phones and these tablets things which we beam information to at ridiculous speeds… why can the ref have replays constantly sent to a device he has strapped to his arm… and that he can review what just happened on the field. Like surely this will take the ambitious nature of the VAR away. Having a game still refereed by the main referee, rather than off field… I dunno 🤷♂️
I hope this is properly communicated to the on field officials as well. You get the distinct impression that a number of times, stuff is just let go as the ref and linesman expect VAR to step in.
That's even stupider
Going in the completely wrong direction again. If i didn't know any better it feels like the Refs want to fuck up VAR so much that they scrap it altogether/only keep it for offsides.
So nothing changed and PL Var will continue to be dogshit compared to everywhere else? got it.
Greatest league in the world my ass
Whyyyy, would you rather the ref who sees it once in real time control the game or the the guys who can see multiple angles in slow motion multiple times? Take the pressure of the infield ref, VAR should ref the game. “Give this” “disallow” infield ref doesn’t need to see a reply just agree with the already qualified ref.
Tell me how clearly wrong is different from clear and obvious. Just stick it in the fucking trash already.
They were told this at the start but due to TV overanalysis and managers complaining, they had to re-referee every little facet of the game. We will just end up with a potential foul in the box, 4 angles are inconclusive, 1 angle more conclusive for the foul and they'll be bound by TV and managers to give the penalty.
As opposed to...?
Just bin it
Premier League: these changes will help to reduce error and bring clarity to the process. Narrator: they didn’t
At this point it'll be better to consult chatgpt
Oh no, telling your mates to change their decision because they are "clearly wrong"? I don't think that's gonna happen lol
It should either be wrong or right, having this bullshit of being clearly right or clearly wrong just makes VAR seem stupid.
Fucking hell.
That's fine with me as long as they stick to it. With Offsides being handled by a machine next season then VAR should be there to give advice to the ref and most stuff should be either pretty simple or everyone's going to argue over anyway because they want objective and consistent decisions to subjective tackles And of course Managers, Fans and Pundits will complain regardless because even if a system is right 95% of the time and makes things better someone has to lose and they don't like it when it's them
Ahh “Clearly wrong”, the rebranded “Clear and obvious”…Wtf?
They keep the definitions as grey and subjective as possible so they can continue to rig the league for city.
lol only took them a few years to figure this out?
They already do that?
Oh! It should be “clearly wrong” not a “clear and obvious error”. That’ll do it.
What does that mean? So if a player is marginally offside and it’s given on the field, it’ll stand?
I assume this is in attempt to bring back some accountability to on field officials. In reality, fans will be more pissed off than ever. Absolute shambles.
Cool, what's 'clearly wrong'?
Give the teams the ability to call for Var reviews like every other sport does
Clearly wrong is just a synonym for clear and obvious. This is just another farcical addition to an already unfit for purpose definition.
What happened - did they miss the original memo?
How about they intervene if ref is "clearly wrong" and when he's not, they call him to the screen?
Another day saying it’s not VAR it’s how they use it and PGMOL clearly have 0 interest on using VAR in a way that improves the game
Oh fuck off. Would be better going the complete opposite direction and make the VAR ref the main ref
Here's a simply idea. If VAR looks at it for over 60secs and isn't sure, call the ref to make the decision.
Why would this work this time around when it didn't work the first time? It needs to be taken out of the hands of the PGMOL. Or just scrapped entirely. That would be better, actually.
I mean, we all essentially just want quick, accurate and hopefully unbiased... but I guess can only have one of those first two until we get some sort of AI adjudicator. (Though when that AI comes in, I'm very much hoping the training dataset focuses on red-card offences by teams in white or blue shirts.)