Read on Twitter
Morning. A quite long thread on VAR and refereeing from the perspective of someone who was a big advocate of VAR at the start, and hopeful that it would massively improve the standards of decision making. 1/32
First, the reasons I supported VAR.
I've long believed our refereeing standards were low, and referee unconscious bias towards and against certain players was present. With the game speeding up, VAR would give more objectivity, which would clear a lot of the problems up. 2/32
I've long believed our refereeing standards were low, and referee unconscious bias towards and against certain players was present. With the game speeding up, VAR would give more objectivity, which would clear a lot of the problems up. 2/32
Also, VAR equivalents in other sports have added drama rather than detracted, even in action-based sports such as rugby.
Ultimately, VAR felt inevitable, so I was hopeful we'd make the best of it, and after some teething problems we'd wonder how we did without it. 3/32
Ultimately, VAR felt inevitable, so I was hopeful we'd make the best of it, and after some teething problems we'd wonder how we did without it. 3/32
The detractor arguments also felt like teething problems to me. At the start, they were centred around two issues - the fan experience inside the stadium and how stop/start it would make the game.
Both felt eminently solvable. 4/32.
Both felt eminently solvable. 4/32.
The fan experience was all about communication. You could use a big screen (still seems crazy to me that football stadia often don't have these, or within sight), and hear the officials discussing. Would give a fascinating insight and I hoped we'd work towards that. 5/32
The stop/start worry could be solved by restricting what VAR was used for, and following a clear process. Also, if the communication point was there, it would feel like a dramatic, exciting moment, rather than a chore to sit through. Both issues were linked in that way. 6/32.
I think life is often about admitting when you get things wrong, and I'm happy to admit that I was wrong about VAR, or at least the early implementation of VAR. It's been an absolute clusterfuck of frustration, for players, fans, managers and perhaps even officials. 7/32.
Why has it been so bad? For me, there's two glaring reasons, three if you include the fan experience, which has not been solved at all but obviously has temporarily been less of an issue with fans not being present. It will need to be solved for sure, but two others remain. 8/32
Issue 1 - VAR is overused.
When my kids found emojis, they used them all the time. When people discover gifs and memes, same thing.
Feels like we're in that place with VAR. It's used for everything, and in an over the top way. 9/32.
When my kids found emojis, they used them all the time. When people discover gifs and memes, same thing.
Feels like we're in that place with VAR. It's used for everything, and in an over the top way. 9/32.
VAR was supposed to be about overturning shocking decisions. That means VAR should refer to the on field ref when there's something clearly wrong.
Let's look at the good and bad of that in turn. 10/32.
Let's look at the good and bad of that in turn. 10/32.
The good, first. Possibly VAR's only tangible success has been the clampdown on shocking challenges and off the ball incidents. We've suffered with that - Xhaka and Pepe both sent off for idiocy that the on field referee didn't catch, and VAR corrected. That is a good use. 10/32
What makes it good? It catches clear incidents, refers to the referee to check, he checks and the player invariably sees red. Not disruptive, but corrective. So far, so good.
So let's look at the bad, particularly handball and offside. 11/32.
So let's look at the bad, particularly handball and offside. 11/32.
Handball. The rule is a dick. How can you tell? Because the officials keep changing interpretations whenever stupid decisions are highlighted. They don't have faith in the rule themselves.
It isn't just that though - the lack of common sense hurts. I'll come back to that. 12/32
It isn't just that though - the lack of common sense hurts. I'll come back to that. 12/32
Ultimately, handball decisions given or recommended by VAR have to be clear, but VAR has massively overreached in this area. So many terrible decisions have been made this season, with all interpretations, and it makes nobody happy. A complete disaster. 13/32.
Next, offside, and this is one I can make a suggestion on.
There is the argument that 'offside is binary, you either are or aren't' so forensic scrutiny is warranted here. I sympathise with this view, and maybe even subscribed to it, but not anymore. Let me explain why. 14/32
There is the argument that 'offside is binary, you either are or aren't' so forensic scrutiny is warranted here. I sympathise with this view, and maybe even subscribed to it, but not anymore. Let me explain why. 14/32
We don't have the technology to freeze frame at the exact moment a pass leaves the foot. We don't have universal agreement on what body parts count as offside. There is a margin for error that isn't being accounted for. But it feels relatively easy to solve. 15/32
In cricket, there is the 'umpire's call' argument for LBW - if the ball was clipping the stumps (defined as less than half the ball clipping the outside of the stumps), then whatever the umpire said (whether it was hitting or not) stands. Because it's too close to call. 16/32
Here's my football equivalent. Zoom to an agreed distance, and draw your lines, but have an agreed line width for the last defender and the attacker. It cannot be too thin.
If the lines overlap, it is 'referee's call' and you stick with the onfield decision. It's close. 17/32.
If the lines overlap, it is 'referee's call' and you stick with the onfield decision. It's close. 17/32.
Alternatively, you could give the benefit of the doubt to the attacker and call it onside, so fractional offsides are given as onside and clear offsides are given. I don't know. But I think it helps.
But VAR overreach is not as bad as the second issue. 18/32.
But VAR overreach is not as bad as the second issue. 18/32.
Issue 2 - officiating standards.
I've long criticised officials, and the counter-argument is often the speed of the game, and the fair argument that pundits and fans, with the benefits of replays and angles, can make decisions a referee cannot. 19/32.
I've long criticised officials, and the counter-argument is often the speed of the game, and the fair argument that pundits and fans, with the benefits of replays and angles, can make decisions a referee cannot. 19/32.
That argument has gone out of the window. VAR officials have all the replays, and when they refer to the on field referee, so does he.
At that point, a trained official should NOT be making worse decisions that fans, managers, pundits, and so on. It cannot happen. 20/32.
At that point, a trained official should NOT be making worse decisions that fans, managers, pundits, and so on. It cannot happen. 20/32.
But it is happening. The inconsistent approach is painful - some handballs were being looked at for three minutes, some for two seconds, despite seeming identical. Some penalty incidents were referred, some not, with no apparent reason for distinction. 21/32.
And while I'm tempted to point at the Luiz decision last night and the lack of cards for some pretty awful challenges ON Arsenal players this season, I'll be accused of partisanship. So I'm going to focus on an even worse decision from last night, away from Arsenal. 22/32
The penalty to United and subsequent red card for Bednarek was an absolute farce. Bednarek tried to pull out of the challenge, Martial 'anticipated' a foul (a common euphemism) and dived. There was slight contact when he was nearly horizontal. 23/32
You could tell it was a dive. Martial looked guilty straightaway. And when it went to VAR, I was convinced it would be overturned and Martial booked. It was a clear dive.
But it wasn't. It was upheld, and Bednarek sent off. Why? 24/32.
But it wasn't. It was upheld, and Bednarek sent off. Why? 24/32.
For me, it could only be one thing, and that is Mike Dean's lack of humility that would have enabled him to recognise that he made a mistake. When he had a decision overturned last season and had to give a penalty to Arsenal, he looked supremely pissed off....25/32
...but back then, VAR would outright overturn decisions so Dean didn't have a chance to review and stick with his own.
Last night he was given that chance, and took it.
Remember Dean is supposed to be an elite member of PGMOL. 26/32
Last night he was given that chance, and took it.
Remember Dean is supposed to be an elite member of PGMOL. 26/32
And this is the crux, for me. VAR decisions are made by poor officials and referred back to a referee who also makes bad decisions even with evidence. It comes back to PGMOL for me, and their standards - both quality and consistency are sorely lacking. 27/32
Dean is a good example. Managers hate him. Players hate him. Fans hate him. Pundits mock his theatrics. He has a litany of terrible decisions behind him and VAR isn't making him any better - his arrogance supercedes his rationality. WHY IS HE STILL THERE? 28/32
Two reasons for me - 1) there is no accountability at PGMOL - they are a closed shop that you cannot question, cannot query, cannot challenge and 2) there aren't high quality replacements. Again, I would point the finger squarely at PGMOL here. 29/32
Back to VAR, and I'm wrapping this up, I promise.
VAR isn't going away, but I don't see some of the issues as teething problems anymore. I think it will get better as rules are honed and we dial back on its use, but that doesn't solve the biggest issue we have. 30/32
VAR isn't going away, but I don't see some of the issues as teething problems anymore. I think it will get better as rules are honed and we dial back on its use, but that doesn't solve the biggest issue we have. 30/32
VAR will only ever be as good as the people that run it and use it. And from administrative decisions down to on field calls, the competency just isn't there. And I don't see how you solve that quickly. It can improve, but can it improve *enough*? I don't know anymore. 31/32
Conclusion - VAR fails the acid test. It was supposed to considerably reduce the number of terrible decisions. But it fixes some, and causes more. The solution is now a big part of the problem.
This VAR-enthusiast has seen enough. 32/32
This VAR-enthusiast has seen enough. 32/32
Any thoughts welcome. Happy to hear different opinions - I've had plenty of lively discussions about VAR with people who will likely, and fairly, see this thread as vindication of those initial debate. Go for it.
And yes, I use number 10 twice. I'm an idiot.
And yes, I use number 10 twice. I'm an idiot.
