The two faces of VAR.

[Romanis]

We saw both faces (and maybe more) of VAR in the 2018 WC Final. I will address two individual moments.

FACE #1

VAR is limited in its permitted use and that is, IMO, the bad face of VAR.

Let's take a look at the Griezmann "free kick". He conned the ref and got away with it because free kicks in open play are outside of the jurisdiction of VAR. Griezmann took the free kick and Mandzukic diverted it into his own net. 1-0 France.

If VAR had been allowed to be used then the free kick would have been rescinded and Griezmann would have got a yellow card for simulation.

This, IMO, is the embodiment of VAR's failings. I believe it should allowed to be used in all situations. ALLOWED being the important word here. I would never advocate its use in ALL situations as you would get 47 VAR situations in every game and a match would last 3 hours.

How would I use it then?

Allow it to be used all over the pitch for any kind of issue. However, its use should be rationed. The officials should be allowed to call for VAR if they are uncertain of what happened. Was it a goal or not? Should I give a penalty or not? Free kicks (Griezmann's for instance) and corners that could lead to goals, did I get it right? Game changing moments.

I would also give the teams a ration each. Two or maybe three "challenges" per half. If you challenge and was right then you don't lose a challenge. I would probably err on 2 per half as this would prevent spurious challenges designed to do litlle more than take the momentum out of the game. I realise that, late in a half and with both challenges still available teams may well take a spurious gamble. That would remain a "loophole" in the system but only a minor one. Unless of course teams lost one automatically after 35 minutes or so........ If you had already wasted 1 then you wouldn't have any left. That might be sufficient to stop misuse of the system. I fully expect more suggestions from you guys and gals.



FACE #2

It gets used in a situation that IS permitted by the VAR guidelines/rules/Laws.

The penalty. I only saw the replay as I had just nipped into the kitchen to get drinks for some of my guests and walked back out into the garden to see half a dozen or so happy looking French players with their hand above their heads. Some of them appeared to be clapping. My first thought was "bugger, they've scored". Then the replay kicked in and I said, as did everybody in my garden, penalty. The ref had a dialogue with the VAR official(s) and then drew an imaginary square in the air. He then ran off to watch his personal TV. Having seen the footage he gave the penalty. Penalty was the correct decision.

That giving of the penalty was an objective decision based on what actually happened. In this particular case it was a match in which I had no real vested interest.

The acid test for me is, would I accept the VAR decision if it meant a penalty beign awarded against Derby? The answer there is a resounding yes. I want Derby to win but I also want them to win fairly and deservedly. For instance, the Jerome yellow card at home to Bristol City that should have been a penalty to us. Reverse the situation and I may well mutter "bloody VAR" under my breath but, IMO, proper use of VAR will stop almost all, if not all, of the shenannigins and give all teams the right decision.

There you have it. The basis of the discussion. VAR is here to stay. The big question is where/how to use it. Should it have been allowed to be used to correct the wrongly given free kick that led to France's first. That it wasn't is 100% correct under the current Laws of VAR use. I think it should be allowed to disallow wrongly given free kicks.

Over to you my friends.

Disagree to both.
Questionable penalty. Benefit of doubt should have been given. I very much doubt the Reserve Referee Mr Kuipers (sp) would have given it.

The first - totally disagree. The referee was close to play and made his decision on what he saw. Case closed.

[MadAmster]

Disagree to both.
Questionable penalty. Benefit of doubt should have been given. I very much doubt the Reserve Referee Mr Kuipers (sp) would have given it.

The first - totally disagree. The referee was close to play and made his decision on what he saw. Case closed.

Glad you don't ref me then Rom.

Griezmann went down like a sack of spuds for absolutely no reason. The incident falls outside of VAR jurisdiction. VAR could not be used on it. My feelings are that it should. I hate cheating and diving and would accept any sensible idea that cut it out.