Publications
Partners
Well, they shouted for it, they campaigned for it, they pleaded for it and then they got it.
What, you might ask? The video assistant referee (VAR) system. The idea of VAR is to bring clarification to situations where there is doubt regarding certain decisions. Currently, there are only four instances where it is used.
These are:
. Goals;
. Penalty decisions;
. Direct red card incidents; and
.
Certainly, the woman referees are availing themselves of the technology and, for the most part, they are getting the decisions right. But there have been some decisions that have not been so cut and dried. Let’s take goalkeepers as an example.
There is a rule that says goalkeepers at the ongoing Women’s World Cup in France must be cautioned for encroachment at penalties.
This has now been suspended because of the ambiguous nature of the wording.
The current ruling is as follows:
. Goalposts, crossbar and nets must not be moving when a penalty is taken and the goalkeeper must not be touching them;
. Goalkeepers must have at least part of one foot on or in line with the goal line when a penalty kick is taken; they cannot stand behind the line; and
. If an offence occurs after the referee signals for a penalty kick to be taken but the kick is not taken, it must be taken after any yellow card or red card is issued.
Fifa has now dropped this ruling for penalty shoot-outs where spot kicks are taken to decide the outcome of a match after 90 minutes and extra time.
This, to me, makes sense. Imagine a keeper being yellow-carded for moving on the first penalty she faces. Then yellow-carded again on the second penalty. She has to go – red card for two yellow cards. It’s a ludicrous ruling, in my opinion.
I also think it was a badly thought-out decision in the first place. But then there’s the other side of the coin. Let’s say a keeper receives a caution during the normal course of the game and there are penalties to decide the outcome of the game.
If they get another during the penalty shoot-out, then they are sent off. The request for the temporary suspension of the law, which will remain in place for the remainder of the tournament, was made by Fifa to the International Football Association Board, which is tasked with bringing in changes each year.
In explaining its decision to approve the request, the International Football Association Board accepted that the presence of the VAR greatly increased the likelihood of any offence being detected and, as goalkeepers would most likely face a number of kicks during a shoot-out, there is a higher risk that a goalkeeper will be sent off for receiving a second caution if already cautioned in normal time.
Several times during this tournament, goals have been disallowed following VAR intervention.
Now some are saying it slows the game down. Other “purists” will argue that the free flow of the game is being disrupted and therefore a rethink of VAR is required.
Well, you know, there’s just no pleasing everyone. You can’t have your cake and eat it. It’s fine when it benefits some, but not okay when it goes against their team.
I was, and still am, a big fan. I just wish it was expanded to cover additional areas such as diving, deliberate cheating and identifying certain players who are trying to hoodwink the match officials, including coaches and managers.
My main problem with VAR is that it takes too long to arrive at a decision and, if that were addressed, I think it would suit everyone and leave less to the human eye and ensure that justice is not only done, but seen to be done.
Happy whistling!
. Follow me on Twitter @dr_errol
. Please send your questions for the Hanging judge to sports@citypress.co.za
