Excellent point re: handballs Fitzy, totally agree with that
VAR - The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
I mean overall hows the A league standard of reffing? Are any of them full time pro refs?
no amount of technology is going to fix the muppets using it to make a decision. if the a-league persists on giving the current list of idiots a whistle each week and a seat behind a screen we are going to suffer the same poor decisions being made week in and week out.
no amount of technology is going to fix the muppets using it to make a decision. if the a-league persists on giving the current list of idiots a whistle each week and a seat behind a screen we are going to suffer the same poor decisions being made week in and week out.
You mean the very same muppets that continually make screw ups on the pitch and are now doing the same off it! I have always said that since day 1 of the very first A League game, the only thing that has not improved one inch, is the match officiating.
Here's some footage of the fa cup final, and the sort of comms being used by VAR.
https://twitter.com/Paracelsus/status/103377556934...
Not a million miles away from some private A-League footage of VAR I have seen.
https://outline.com Pay wall breaker Photo's not in correct order
Exclusive: First look inside A-League’s revolutionary NRL-style VAR bunker
OCTOBER 17, 2018
THERE were three squads involved in the FFA Cup semi-final between Western Sydney and Sydney FC, but one of them was a long way from Penrith Stadium.
Away from the public eye, deep inside a Redfern office block, the latest stage in football ’s video revolution was unfolding, with quiet but significant ramifications for the A-League this season.
Following the example of the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) system used in Russia at the World Cup, the A-League will this season have its VARs in a bunker, similar to the NRL’s and sited just a floor below in the offices of the same production company.
The FFA Cup semi-final was the first and only chance to trial it before the new season, which is why all the VARs and their assistants – as well as The Daily Telegraph - were gathered in front of the multiple screens to watch every moment of the game and review all key decisions (though, not, in this “offline” trial, communicating the results to the referee on the pitch).
Two of the VARs, Craig Zetter and Kris Griffiths Jones, will do the majority of games from the centralised location. The number of VARs has been halved, aiming for greater consistency of what decisions should be challenged – but it doesn’t take long in the semi-final for the subjective nature of football to rear its contentious head.
Sydney’s Trent Buhagiar goes down under challenge from Keanu Baccus but the sky blue appeals for a penalty are waved away by ref Daniel Elder on the pitch. In the VAR room, Zetter looks at two replays before declaring it not a penalty.
Across the room though, Griffiths Jones and fulltime ref Chris Beath both declare the decision to need reviewing, with a recommendation to give a penalty.
At halftime that moment prompts an intense discussion, led by FFA’s head of refereeing Ben Wilson. The truth is that after viewing multiple replays there isn’t a consensus, let alone within the seconds demanded by the VAR rules, and therein lies a major point of contention.
Head of refereeing Ben Wilson (white) surveys the VAR room. Picture: Tim PascoeThe public and players demand consistency from the refs – and especially the VARs – even though players and fans, let alone referees, will often disagree over what constitutes a foul.
There’s no shortage of screens to view Baccus’s tackle on, including a back-up system on a different server in case the main one fails.
That’s particularly reassuring for Zetter, the VAR left helpless in the minutes the system went down during the grand final last season, during which Melbourne Victory’s winning goal was wrongly allowed.
As the Buhagiar discussions continue, and with the second half about to start, Wilson suggests that consistency is paramount, and that refs in real time and via video review should view any trip in the penalty box as a penalty, even if it could be deemed soft. On his laptop, Wilson plays video of a heel-clipping challenge by Antony Golec on Diego Castro last season, which wasn’t deemed a penalty – this season, it will be. Referees during the FFA Cup semi-final.
Picture: Tim Pascoe
There’s no doubt around the penalty Sydney are given in the second half of the semi-final, when Adam Le Fondre goes down and it’s quickly obvious that his knee was clipped. All three VARs concur, and it’s striking how fast their reviews are, over in seconds. At one stage Brandon O’Neill and Josh Risdon clash in what seems like a heavy manner, but Zetter has cleared it before the TV broadcast replays are even underway.
In fact Wilson reckons that most goal reviews are over inside 20 seconds. It’s a major bugbear of the anti-VAR lobby that it holds up the game, but it’s interesting to note a very slight delay for the restart after Sydney’s third goal in the semi-final – caused clearly not by the VAR, but by the TV broadcast of the game finishing its replays.
Video refs Richard Naumovski (Assistant VAR) Kris Griffiths-Jones (VAR).
The need for speed puts a lot of pressure on the VARs, and their teamwork is notable. Near the end of the game Abraham Majok’s ugly tackle on Michael Zullo provokes a minor melee, and while VAR Kurt Ams is reviewing the tackle itself, assistant Michael Bailey is watching the scuffle in real time to ID any serious offenders.
Bailey’s role rather highlights the stress fracture in the A-League’s refereeing set-up, where Beath, Jarred Gillett and Shaun Evans are fulltime refs, but the rest all have other jobs. Bailey for instance is the FFA’s referees coordinator but also one of the assistant referees; most of those out in the middle hold down fulltime jobs.
Richard Naumovski keeps an eye on the action. Picture: Tim PascoeAt least they won’t want for technological assistance, with up to 12 camera angles at each game. Part of the challenge for acceptance lies in communicating with viewers and supporters as the reviews happen; FIFA has blocked attempts around the world to broadcast the conversations between refs and VARs.
But somehow you feel that is coming, just as the concept of the VAR itself took years for FIFA to accept. A small part of the future of the game is unfolding in that Redfern office block.
THERE were three squads involved in the FFA Cup semi-final between Western Sydney and Sydney FC, but one of them was a long way from Penrith Stadium.
Away from the public eye, deep inside a Redfern office block, the latest stage in football’s video revolution was unfolding, with quiet but significant ramifications for the A-League this season.
Following the example of the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) system used in Russia at the World Cup, the A-League will this season have its VARs in a bunker, similar to the NRL’s and sited just a floor below in the offices of the same production company.
A-League will trial a new centralised VAR system this season. Picture: Tim PascoeThe FFA Cup semi-final was the first and only chance to trial it before the new season, which is why all the VARs and their assistants – as well as The Daily Telegraph - were gathered in front of the multiple screens to watch every moment of the game and review all key decisions (though, not, in this “offline” trial, communicating the results to the referee on the pitch).
Two of the VARs, Craig Zetter and Kris Griffiths Jones, will do the majority of games from the centralised location. The number of VARs has been halved, aiming for greater consistency of what decisions should be challenged – but it doesn’t take long in the semi-final for the subjective nature of football to rear its contentious head.
Sydney’s Trent Buhagiar goes down under challenge from Keanu Baccus but the sky blue appeals for a penalty are waved away by ref Daniel Elder on the pitch. In the VAR room, Zetter looks at two replays before declaring it not a penalty.
Across the room though, Griffiths Jones and fulltime ref Chris Beath both declare the decision to need reviewing, with a recommendation to give a penalty.
At halftime that moment prompts an intense discussion, led by FFA’s head of refereeing Ben Wilson. The truth is that after viewing multiple replays there isn’t a consensus, let alone within the seconds demanded by the VAR rules, and therein lies a major point of contention.
Head of refereeing Ben Wilson (white) surveys the VAR room. Picture: Tim PascoeThe public and players demand consistency from the refs – and especially the VARs – even though players and fans, let alone referees, will often disagree over what constitutes a foul.
There’s no shortage of screens to view Baccus’s tackle on, including a back-up system on a different server in case the main one fails.
That’s particularly reassuring for Zetter, the VAR left helpless in the minutes the system went down during the grand final last season, during which Melbourne Victory’s winning goal was wrongly allowed.
As the Buhagiar discussions continue, and with the second half about to start, Wilson suggests that consistency is paramount, and that refs in real time and via video review should view any trip in the penalty box as a penalty, even if it could be deemed soft. On his laptop, Wilson plays video of a heel-clipping challenge by Antony Golec on Diego Castro last season, which wasn’t deemed a penalty – this season, it will be.
There’s no doubt around the penalty Sydney are given in the second half of the semi-final, when Adam Le Fondre goes down and it’s quickly obvious that his knee was clipped. All three VARs concur, and it’s striking how fast their reviews are, over in seconds. At one stage Brandon O’Neill and Josh Risdon clash in what seems like a heavy manner, but Zetter has cleared it before the TV broadcast replays are even underway.
In fact Wilson reckons that most goal reviews are over inside 20 seconds. It’s a major bugbear of the anti-VAR lobby that it holds up the game, but it’s interesting to note a very slight delay for the restart after Sydney’s third goal in the semi-final – caused clearly not by the VAR, but by the TV broadcast of the game finishing its replays.
Video refs Richard Naumovski (Assistant VAR) Kris Griffiths-Jones (VAR). Picture: Tim PascoeThe need for speed puts a lot of pressure on the VARs, and their teamwork is notable. Near the end of the game Abraham Majok’s ugly tackle on Michael Zullo provokes a minor melee, and while VAR Kurt Ams is reviewing the tackle itself, assistant Michael Bailey is watching the scuffle in real time to ID any serious offenders.
Bailey’s role rather highlights the stress fracture in the A-League’s refereeing set-up, where Beath, Jarred Gillett and Shaun Evans are fulltime refs, but the rest all have other jobs. Bailey for instance is the FFA’s referees coordinator but also one of the assistant referees; most of those out in the middle hold down fulltime jobs.
Richard Naumovski keeps an eye on the action. Picture: Tim PascoeAt least they won’t want for technological assistance, with up to 12 camera angles at each game. Part of the challenge for acceptance lies in communicating with viewers and supporters as the reviews happen; FIFA has blocked attempts around the world to broadcast the conversations between refs and VARs.
But somehow you feel that is coming, just as the concept of the VAR itself took years for FIFA to accept. A small part of the future of the game is unfolding in that Redfern office block.
Save the money and just dump it. Goal line technology yes, VAR NO!!
nah, I think the VAR will eventually stamp out the Fornaroli style dives, as long as whoever is running the show allows them to do it. I still feel like the FFA has a say in certain players getting away with anything, Fornaroli being one of them.
Yes, well, the FFA won't be in charge much longer. How long do we have to put up with inept decisions made by a VAR team that consists of the very same low standards of referees that are out in the middle?
If A League match officials had improved along with the League and were competent, I would fully support VAR. But they are not and they haven't and therein lies the problem. Same crap quality match officials season after season after season.
VAR worked fine at the world cup.
Well it was shark this weekend in the A League.
VAR worked fine at the world cup.
Best ref's in the world doing VAR at the World Cup
Worse ref's in the world doing VAR at the A-League
VAR worked fine at the world cup.
Best ref's in the world doing VAR at the World Cup
Worse ref's in the world doing VAR at the A-League
So much this point. The same referees making the screw ups on the pitch are now doing VAR off it. I've said it before, since day 1 of the very first A League game, the Match officials have not improved one iota - period. And it is not as if they have not had a chance. The clubs, the coaches, the players have moved forward but match officials haven't.
The VAR giveth and the VAR taketh away.
The VAR giveth farce and the VAR taketh away the essence of the game.
VAR worked fine at the world cup.
Best ref's in the world doing VAR at the World Cup
Worse ref's in the world doing VAR at the A-League
Agree that's its the application of the VAR in the A league that is at fault and it is only the officials that can be blamed for this.
The fact that it worked fine at the world cup shows that the technology can work.
The VAR giveth farce and the VAR taketh away the essence of the game.
Not just the A-League mate, in general.
VAR worked fine at the world cup.
Best ref's in the world doing VAR at the World Cup
Worse ref's in the world doing VAR at the A-League
Think part of the problem is they still only have a couple of full time refs. Like players, you can't expect them to perform in a high performance environment if you're a part timer.
Watching the replay, I thought the Singh goal should have counted, and the Williams one was more a foul than Nichols.
From the Guardian today.....
From Football Today:
VAR
It might not be happy days, but "VAR is here to stay,"($) says the current Head of the A-League, Greg O'Rourke. There's no problem with the system, it's the referees.
In fact, O'Rourke would like more full-time referees - an amusing comment considering he's been in the job for two years where current management (of whom he is one) has not seen it as a priority.
Tom Smithies writes that those criticising the VAR are a little boring because if you look at the actual VAR decisions, they were not at fault. He says the big mistake from the weekend was one from referee Kurt Ams, for which he pays the price (being dropped for the next round) and nothing will take human error out of the game. He wonders how many others (eg. players - presumably not journalists) will be dropped for "stuttering" performances on the weekend. Smithies provides detail on the situations in which the VAR is used.
More pro refs, YES. VAR, NO !!!!
more pro refs managing VAR, it worked really well for the world cup.
I believe both VAR decisions on Sunday were correct. Singh moved his arm at the ball to control it so it is a hand ball and Nichols was taken in a rugby like tackle
Prior to VAR referees have allowed man handling from free kicks and corners and never enforced the laws.
From the Inside sport forum
From "FIFA analysis of match situations".
These are just 2. There's more than 20 of these.
Handling the ball
41 Is the hand moving towards the ball or is the ball moving towards the hand?
42 Are the player's hand's or arms in a ¨NATURAL POSITION" or an ¨UNNATURAL POSITION"?
43 Does the player attempt to avoid the ball striking his hand?
44 Does the ball strike his hand from a short or from a long distance?
45 Does the player use his hand or arm to deliberately touch or block the ball?
46 Does the player prevent an opponent gaining possession of the ball by handling it?
47 Does the player attempt to score a goal by deliberately handling the ball?
48 Does the player prevent a goal by deliberately handling the ball?
49 Does the player prevent an obvious goal scoring opportunity by deliberately handling the ball?
50 Does the player try to deceive the referee by handling the ball?
256 Is the ball moving in the direction of the goal?
Fouls & Misconduct: Careless, Reckless, Using Excessive Force and Violent Conduct
1 Does the player show a lack of attention or consideration when making his challenge?
2 Does the player act without precaution when making the challenge?
3 Does the player make fair or unfair contact with the opponent after touching the ball?
4 Does the player act with complete disregard of the danger to his opponent?
5 Does the player act with a complete disregard of the consequences for his opponent?
6 Does the player have a chance of playing the ball in a fair manner?
7 Is the challenge putting an opponent in a dangerous situation?
8 Does the player touch the ball after making contact with the opponent?
9 Does the player far exceed the necessary use of force when making the challenge?
10 Does the player use brutality against an opponent when challenging?
11 Is the challenge clearly endangering the safety of the opponent?
12 What degree of speed and/or intensity is the player using when making the challenge?
13 Does the player show clear malice when making the challenge?
14 Does the player lunge at an opponent from the front, from the side or from behind?
15 Which part of the body has the player used to make contact?
16 Does the player use his studs when making a tackle?
17 On which part of the opponent's body is contact made?
18 In what direction are the tackler's feet pointing?
19 Is the player challenging for the ball at the moment the contact is made?
20 Does the player(s) charge the opponent in a fair manner?
221 Do you consider the foul an act of violent conduct or a serious foul play?
222 Has the challenge been committed in a fair manner or a careless manner?
248 Does the player use his arm as a 'tool' or a 'weapon'?
249 Does the player challenge for the ball in a fair manner?
The front on view
Victory player pulling arm back and interlocking right leg in front of MC players left leg
MC player off balance, Victory players hand in his back
00:01 out stretched hand/arm of Victory player pushin MC player forward
00:02 Victory player hands up "No Sir Not Me" committed 2 fouls in the box IMO
5 screen shots show the process
From Refs view I suspect its all based on the leg action, so checks the VAR to see if the foot trip he sees at full speed was in the box.
VAR causing more uproar as Roly's goal was disallowed in the derby.
VAR causing more uproar as Roly's goal was disallowed in the derby.
Babbels second red card in his career.
VAR causing more uproar as Roly's goal was disallowed in the derby.
Apparently this wasn't for a foul but because the Wanderers player was offside and blocked the Sydney FC player, interfering in an offside position in lead up to the goal.
Here's video of Chris Beath asked about it straight after the match:
Here's the thing: VAR was sold as being there to correct "clear and obvious" refereeing errors. If VAR decisions are made which large numbers of neutral observers, including ex- officials, can't agree on, then the error (if there was one) clearly wasn't clear and obvious.
To put it another way: if VAR worked as it is claimed it was intended to work, there wouldn't be controversy about VAR decisions.
Here's the thing: VAR was sold as being there to correct "clear and obvious" refereeing errors. If VAR decisions are made which large numbers of neutral observers, including ex- officials, can't agree on, then the error (if there was one) clearly wasn't clear and obvious.
To put it another way: if VAR worked as it is claimed it was intended to work, there wouldn't be controversy about VAR decisions.
totally agree if the VAR was being used to correct the clear and obvious mistakes then that goal would have stood. No clear and obvious error in that at all, had Roly's shot gone wide the VAR would have stayed quiet. Which I get as its in the brief that VAR only comes into play in certain situations. But seriously Zullo was impeding himself, the offside striker is retreating as you'd expect him to do, he's not even looking at Zullo when they touch. Surely the defender has some responsibility to go around the player retreating.
Here's the thing: VAR was sold as being there to correct "clear and obvious" refereeing errors. If VAR decisions are made which large numbers of neutral observers, including ex- officials, can't agree on, then the error (if there was one) clearly wasn't clear and obvious.
To put it another way: if VAR worked as it is claimed it was intended to work, there wouldn't be controversy about VAR decisions.
totally agree if the VAR was being used to correct the clear and obvious mistakes then that goal would have stood. No clear and obvious error in that at all, had Roly's shot gone wide the VAR would have stayed quiet. Which I get as its in the brief that VAR only comes into play in certain situations. But seriously Zullo was impeding himself, the offside striker is retreating as you'd expect him to do, he's not even looking at Zullo when they touch. Surely the defender has some responsibility to go around the player retreating.
Here's the thing: VAR was sold as being there to correct "clear and obvious" refereeing errors. If VAR decisions are made which large numbers of neutral observers, including ex- officials, can't agree on, then the error (if there was one) clearly wasn't clear and obvious.
To put it another way: if VAR worked as it is claimed it was intended to work, there wouldn't be controversy about VAR decisions.
totally agree if the VAR was being used to correct the clear and obvious mistakes then that goal would have stood. No clear and obvious error in that at all, had Roly's shot gone wide the VAR would have stayed quiet. Which I get as its in the brief that VAR only comes into play in certain situations. But seriously Zullo was impeding himself, the offside striker is retreating as you'd expect him to do, he's not even looking at Zullo when they touch. Surely the defender has some responsibility to go around the player retreating.
Just do away with the ref and linesperson and install a loud siren to stop play when the experts on VAR decide to look at an incident.
This is already a joke, why not go the whole hog.
To be fair, it's not the fault of VAR if the commentators were too thick to realise what they were looking at was a clear & obvious offside. Except it does show yet again why it should be more transparent what the VAR are actually looking at.
well I hope they've set clear and consistent standards for handballs and holding, for example. The idea of the standard fluctuating, outrage dependent is stupid.
We saw, mostly, at the WC that the standard was clear (eventually) and the players stopped grappling. A league needs pro and protected refs.
To be fair, it's not the fault of VAR if the commentators were too thick to realise what they were looking at was a clear & obvious offside. Except it does show yet again why it should be more transparent what the VAR are actually looking at.
But it was anything but clear and obvious. The lino never flagged, there are different stories as to whether Beath asked for the VAR check for offside or an off the ball foul, and Beath himself in his frontup to the media resorted to justifying his decision by saying that "technically" it was correct.
This despite not a single other person in the ground or watching on TV seeing a problem with the goal, except possibly Zullo who was appealing for a foul, not offside. And even from repeat viewings it is highly debatable that Zullo would've got anywhere near the ball anyway even if there was no WSW player in his way.
All of which is a longwinded way of saying that once again we have a situation of no clear and obvious error, and for the good of the game and the viewing experience the goal should've stood. I don't blame Archie Thompson for bursting out with "I don't even want to watch the games any more" (which must've made Fox Sports execs squirm!) because that is definitely how I feel lately.
The Whistle: @FFA Director of Referees Ben Wilson reviews some of the key refereeing and VAR incidents from the weekend’s matches: https://t.co/YQqX0QVdb1 pic.twitter.com/RYjXLAb0AM
— Hyundai A-League (@ALeague) October 29, 2018
I brought this up in the v Adelaide thread, but thought I'd also put it on here in the appropriate place just to generate some discussion, because I'm still not decided on this whole VAR system. I can see it's good points, it's bad points, and area's/aspects where it could be drastically improved. Anyway, the incident I wrote about came about as a result of Mandi's sending off in the 68th minute in Adelaide.
If the VAR is in place to correct and overturn clear and obvious errors from on field, then shouldn't those in the hot seat be only limited to one, normal speed, look at any incident in question? This should apply to the ref reviewing any incidents on the sidelines too.
My reasoning for this would be that the guy in charge only gets one look at any initial incident, and for mine, It's not exactly a clear and obvious error if you have to look at several different camera angles, multiple replays, slow motion replays, & zooming in for close ups in order to make a decision that should be, well, 'clear and obvious' upon first viewing. Otherwise it sort of defeats the whole purpose of defining it as a clear and obvious error doesn't it? Maybe I'm just being overly rational about this though...
This really only applies for red card incidents and penalty decisions, as things like offsides, handballs etc should be easy enough to sort out.
That's pretty much the jist of it, I've added in a few little extra's to the original post as well. I'd love to hear feedback or any discussion, or even if this has been brought up previously by anyone.
The major issue with VAR is that the more people you have involved in decision making the less likely you are to get a unanimous outcome. Every single set of eyes see things differently. And once you involve multiple people in decisions then responsibility is deminished.
The use of VAR, in my opinion anyway, needs to be restricted to a clearly defined set of circumstances (ie penalty decisions). If we use it to review every supposed clear and obvious error during matches then we would end up with a game that takes as long as American Football.
Also, there is already a Match Review panel in place to overturn any clear and obvious errors so handing this responsibility off to the VAR will no doubt result in more incorrect decisions made by officials already under pressure to make the right decision.
The officiating is already average enough in the A-League. Adding more confusion is not the answer. More training and greater accountability for officials is.
