Correspondent of the magazine "Football" and a permanent author of Football. ua Sergey Shevchenko assesses the work of the VAR in Serie A.
Video Repeat - one of the hottest topics of this year. The long-awaited innovation was tested in the Confederations Cup, and also began to be used in a number of European championships. Ukraine accedes to the general trend: the president of the FFU announced that in the spring the VAR system (video assistant referee) can be tested in the championship and the Cup of Ukraine.
For Serie A, the use of video becomes everyday. If at the beginning of the season the rectangle described by the arbiter in the air surprised the fans like a mobile phone in the 1990s, now this is a usual gesture that can be seen in the review of any tour. Over the past months, a whole body of information has accumulated, it is time to draw conclusions.
A small educational program on the Italian method of video replay (in Germany, it is somewhat different). First, the final decision is always for the main arbiter, this is the basic principle. Secondly, there was a post of video-judge - the person, whose duties consist exclusively viewing of video and recommendations to the main arbitrator. Thirdly, situations where video is used are limited; only important episodes are analyzed: goals, appointment of a penalty, removal. Finally, each episode is played out to the end, and only then, if necessary, the game stops to watch the video.
Positive Why someone has to lose the championship or just a match because of a clearly human error that can be fixed instantly. VAR does not just help the referee, it's an epochal change. Players are aware of the risk, disputes with the judges almost disappeared - for Italy this is a miracle. (Roberto Rosetti) 1. Arbitrator is easier to solve complex episodes The main and most obvious plus. Matches are becoming more dynamic, and referees often do not keep pace with developments. Each of the controversial points needed to be correctly evaluated from the first time, given the current interpretation of the rules (for example, when playing with a hand). A difficult task. Now the judge can trust the video and calmly, on a slow repetition see all the movements, touches and centimeters. This virtually eliminates obvious errors. Approximately how the underline is red in Word.
There was an opportunity to monitor every section of the UEFA field (and behind it and the FFU) tried to solve this problem by introducing additional assistants behind the gates. The team of referees at the warm-up resembled the third team, but the quantity did not develop into quality, because two additional pairs of eyes could not keep track of what was happening. Thanks to video, fans hooliganize behind the referees receive a well-deserved punishment. A vivid example: Daniele De Rossi in a match with Genoa, who slapped Lapadule. As early as last season, the Roman would have stayed on the field, but now there is a repeat: removal and penalties.
Players argue less with the judges Disputes did not stop finally, but now the arbitrator has an ultimatum argument - video recording. Thanks to the repetitions, he makes a decision, being sure of his rightness, while behind the appeals of the players is often not the desire for justice, but only the desire to convince the referee to "whistle" in the right direction.
"VAR of a healthy person": Giacomelli removes De Rossi for a slap Lapadule Negative Everything is very long. This is not football, it turns into water polo. I was not happy when we earned a penalty, because from the moment of violation to the appointment six minutes passed. Video does not benefit the entertainment. (Gianluigi Buffon) 1. Some episodes still remain controversial Video is not a panacea. Sometimes there are situations where even a few delayed repetitions do not give a clear understanding. Not every fall in the penalty - a penalty or a simulation, not every hit of the ball in the hand - a foul. Example: an episode from the match Juventus - Inter, when the ball landed in the hand falling on the lawn Benatia, and the referee did not appoint an 11-meter.
Subjectivity remains Development of the previous paragraph. Judge not by a robot, but by a living person with his own interpretation of the rules. One referee gives a play, the other - whistles at every hard junction. Judge also live people. Example: Lazio suffered in a match with Torino, when Piero Giacomelli, instead of assigning a penalty to the gate of the Turinians, removed Ciro Immobile for the push of Nicholas Burdisso, who in this situation, it seems, dorisovyval. The score from "La Gazzetta dello Sport" - 4 points, from Turin "Tuttosport" - 6,5 points.
Arbitrators spend a lot of time deciding what the typical use of the VAR was like at the beginning of the season: a controversial episode occurs, the arbiter stops the game, consults with the assistant for communications, then goes to the curb, where he looks at the monitor and finally makes a decision. The audience at this time were sitting in the dark, and the compensated time reached a terrible 8-9 minutes. For the sake of justice, the referees in the course of the season have adapted, and frank delays are an exception. This problem can be eliminated by trusting the video-judge, who must promptly inform the main referee which episode deserves a complicated procedure, and where the solution is obvious.
"VAR smoker": strange decisions Giacomelli (again he!) In the match Lazio - Torino Conclusions All the radicals were amicably mistaken. Pessimists were afraid that football with repetitions would lose the spirit of the game. Of course, Buffon's quoted opinion should also be taken into consideration, but the VAR system did not turn the football inside out. Optimists were looking forward to an ideal refereeing and did not receive it. "Corriere dello Sport" after the scandal named Giacomelli published a list of all the uses of the video in the current season: 44 correct and 20 mistaken. High percentage of marriage.
The general conclusion: all the same it became better (fans Lazio can disagree with this thesis). A little less than fifty true decisions - already a good help, despite all the flaws. The arbitration process is now more transparent, and any fan sees the situation through the eyes of the referee. In addition, the BAP system is improving as it is used through the adaptation of judges.
Finally, this is part of the technical progress.
Will VAR be realized in Ukraine? The issue is mainly to our judges and their training. They need to now study the experience of their Italian colleagues, so as not to irritate the fans, compensating for the match with a dozen minutes. Repetitions, alas, will not cancel the scandals, discontent will always, but frank blunders for the most part will go to the past. Need to try!.
Author: Sergey Shevchenko.