Injuring a player isn’t something that should be rewarded. Monumentally stupid.
it doesnt get rewarded, it gets a free kick or a card…
Sweden ditch the VAR
8 Likes
Bless those Swedes.
We were one of the very first, weren’t we? Jordy Buijs on a run forward resulting in a goal, and it did have that element of doubt or subjectivity straight away from that first time. Which would be a reminder that our rules aren’t black and white. In those days, it was used rarely enough that you can remember the incident. Now you can’t move in a professional game for a VAR checking absolutely everything.
The first one was a pretty clear handball by Marco Rossi in a game against us. The Buijs one was probably one of the first VAR controversies, though.
WWC-style on-field justifications coming for the finals:
The process will activate primarily when an on-field reviews occurs, which is where the referee reviews incidents directly from the pitch-side monitor. Upon completion of a review, the referee will signal using the ‘TV’ signal. Subsequently, the referee’s microphone will be activated, allowing both stadium attendees and broadcast viewers to hear the rationale for the decision before it is officially confirmed on the field. When a factual review takes significant time before a decision is made, the referee will also make an announcement to explain the rationale.
Yeah, let’s experiment with new tech during the finals…
Great idea.
How bout we just get offsides right in the grand final
4 Likes
New tech? They’re just doing a justification and explanation as to decisions rather than anything else.
Typical reactive nonsense that we’ve all come to expect. I’m a big believer that the same rules / systems should apply from week 1 and that you shouldn’t change stuff for the sake of it at the business end (of course would happily take correct, consistent application at any point they become capable).
Now I look forward to a World Cup where the players have been using that ball for the full season leading into it and a big game where we don’t decide to debut a questionable new chant. 
In fairness though, the fans have been asking for just basic transparency for ages. All they had to do at the start of the season, was to have the referees association come out with a simple statement of: “We’re enforcing a zero tolerance policy on any tackles that could end with an ankle injury” or something to that effect. Having the on field decisions made public in real time could actually assist that process. The argument this season, could even be that the refs that weren’t calling straight reds for specific tackles should obviously have been rested (assuming it was a specific target this season).
Granted it’s weird they’re introducing this right at the very end, but considering the low bar they’ve set, at least they’re doing something to show that they understand fan frustration across the board. It also means that refs are going to be examined even closer under the microscope. They can’t just make a decision that may or may not be examined behind closed doors, they now need to make a very public justification.
The ALM has obviously done this because they’re aware the spotlight is going to be on this finals series and they obviously want as little controversies as possible to pull away from the actual football.
That’s all valid, it just wouldn’t be necessary if we didn’t have the ridiculously low bar for VAR intervention / red card upgrades based on super slo-mo and some modicum of consistency.
Always better to fix the problem at the source.
1 Like
Just like live VAR is apparently debuting, us fans are highly likely to be “debuting” another new chant.
“YOU DON’T KNOW WHAT YOU’RE DOING!”
They did this in the women’s World Cup didn’t they? Though less rationale, more just announcing the decision?
I guess technically the whole “activate the refs mic to the stadium PA system” is new?
But yeah, should be low risk, and what could possibly go wrong?
*(Cries in Newcastle 2018)
1 Like
Yeah, a large percentage of it was just announcing the penalty decision. A few did go as far to explain what the offence was, and who (or rather, which jersey) committed the offence. I would prefer the latter. The former is pretty useless.
I think it would be a good start for the VAR to announce what the referee is looking at, then inform us of the offence committed and the outcome.
I mean, it works well in the NFL when they get the decision right…they also have rules analysts that chime in after the decision to provide critical analysis on the decision to the tv audience - was it right, was it wrong etc.
I have been watching the Mariners in the AFC Cup games which have no VAR.
It has been delightful.
Mistakes have been possibly made by officials but the game has flowed and no one has got overly upset.
In one of the games I suspect there were 3 instances which in the A-League VAR would have called for reds. I think there was one yellow and 2 free kicks and no controversy.
It has been a breath of fresh air.
VAR is killing the game.
9 Likes
I think I remember Harper commenting that one of the tackles would have been a life sentence in the A-league
1 Like
Also enjoyed the AFC Cup. Yep, plenty of mistakes were made, but the flow of the games were so much more enjoyable.
Bad VAR, poorly implemented VAR, shit process, poor officiating, & repeated reactionary rule & interpretation changes are what is hurting.
Anyway… this is nonsense if we’re not hearing how they come to their decisions.