De videoscheidsrechter

quote:

The use of video technology at the Confederations Cup has been criticised following Germany's 1-0 victory over Chile in Sunday's final.

Chile defender Gonzalo Jara appeared to elbow Germany's Timo Werner in the face during the game, but got only a yellow card, even after the video assistant referee (VAR) system was used.

There were several contentious moments involving VAR at the tournament.

Former Arsenal defender Lee Dixon said the system was a "shambles".

"If you look at sports that use VAR - we're the laughing stock," he said on ITV.

Referees can decide whether they want help from VAR, although other officials, including the video ones, can suggest he uses the technology. If he does, he has the choice of trusting the VAR's decision or viewing the footage himself on a screen at the side of the pitch. ..... en verder

quote:

Op maandag 7 augustus 2017 14:46 schreef Tagliano het volgende:
Ik vind dit een prima ontwikkeling, maar er zitten nog wel behoorlijk wat haken en ogen aan. Die kaart van Jara blijft natuurlijk raar (en in datzelfde kader, maar minder bekend: de rode kaart die Ed Janssen gaf in de playoffs P/D afgelopen seizoen) en met het tijdsverlies lijkt ook geen (of niet voldoende) rekening gehouden te worden.

Maar toch, deels zal je het wiel ook opnieuw uit moeten vinden en dat kost gewoon tijd. De regels in voetbal hebben nu eenmaal een enorme ruimte voor interpretatie, voor mijn gevoel meer dan in andere sporten waar dit systeem wordt toegepast (vergelijk bijvoorbeeld de regels voor hands in het voetbal met die van shoot in het hockey of een bal in/uit bij tennis).

Wel zou ik ook voorstander zijn van een challenge-systeem, naast het systeem wat er nu is. Twijfelt de scheidsrechter (of de videoscheids), kan hij het altijd terugkijken. Is een team het niet met een beslissing eens, kan dat een beperkt aantal keren worden teruggekeken. Wel zou je dat moeten houden bij essentiële beslissingen als een goal/penalty/enzovoorts.

quote:

Reviewable decisions
Match officials make hundreds of decisions in every match, including decisions
that an offence has not occurred. It would be impossible, without completely
changing football, to review every decision. Thus, the experiment limits the use
of VARs to 4 categories of match-changing decisions/incidents:
• Goals
• Penalty/ no penalty decisions
• Direct red cards (not 2nd yellow cards)
• Mistaken identity
In all these situations, the VAR is only used after the referee has made a
decision (including allowing play to continue), or if a serious incident is
‘missed’ i.e. not seen by the match officials.

quote:

Principles
There are 12 principles which are the foundation of the VAR experiment:
1. Video technology will only be used to correct clear errors and for missed serious
incidents in defined match-changing decisions: goal, penalty/no penalty, direct red
card and mistaken identity (e.g. the referee cautions/sends off the wrong player)
2. The final decision will always be taken by the referee.
3. Video Assistant Referees1 (VARs) are match officials - any information the VARs
provide to the referee will be treated by the referee in the same way as information
received from an assistant referee, additional assistant referee or the fourth official.
4. The referee must always make a decision regardless of the existence of VARs i.e.
the referee is not permitted to give ‘no decision’ and refer the situation to the VAR. If
the referee decides not stop play for an alleged offence, the decision (to allow play to
continue) can be reviewed.
On rare occasions, when it is unclear whether a penalised cautionable (YC) offence is a
sending-off (RC), or who should receive the sanction, the referee may consult the VAR.
5. The original decision given by the referee will not be changed unless the video
review clearly shows that the decision was clearly wrong.
6. Only the referee can initiate a review; the VAR (and the other match officials) can
only recommend a review to the referee.
7. Whatever the review process, there is no time pressure to review the decision
quickly as accuracy is more important than speed.
8. The players and team officials must not surround the referee or attempt to influence
if a decision is reviewed, the review process or the final decision. A player who uses
the ‘review signal’ will be cautioned (YC).
9. The referee should, as far as possible, remain ‘visible’ during the review process to
ensure transparency.
10. If play continues after an incident which is then reviewed, any disciplinary action
taken/required during the post-incident period is not cancelled, even if the original
decision is changed (except a caution/send-off for stopping a promising attack or
DOGSO).
11. There is a maximum period before and after an incident that can be reviewed.
12. The full protocol conform to the principles and philosophy of the Laws of the Game.

quote:

Op maandag 7 augustus 2017 15:11 schreef Tagliano het volgende:

[..]

Hier zitten inderdaad nog best wat dingen in waar aan geschaafd kan worden. Maar goed, ik denk ik ook dat weinigen direct een perfect systeem hadden verwacht

Gewoon tegelijk invoeren met zuivere speeltijdgod, weinig gezeik over verloren tijd meer dan