Video Assistant Referee used for the first time by FIFA at Club World Cup

By Josh Robertson / Roar Rookie

For the first time ever, a Video Referee system was used in a football match during the FIFA Club World Cup semi-final clash between Atletico Nacional of Colombia and the Kagshima Antlers from Japan.

The technology was used in the 29th minute when Hungarian referee Viktor Kassai stopped the match after deciding to review a decision for a possible penalty to the Kagshima Antlers.

The use of the system left viewers, commentators, players, and coaches confused when the referee chose to stop Atletico from taking a throw in to allow the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) system to be used.

Initially referee Viktor Kassai had ruled play on. At the next stoppage of play, Kassai, who did not see the incident, ran to the touchline. He took around half a minute to watch a replay of what happened before pointing to the spot and awarding a penalty.

This left Atletico fuming and Kagshima celebrating after the decision to award the penalty, with Shouma Doi netting them the opening goal to win 3-0.

The VAR introduction into live matches was announced by FIFA on June 2. Six countries had agreed to be the first the technology, including Australia, Brazil, Germany, Netherlands, Portugal and the USA.

The technology will be introduced to domestic matches in 2017 after it is determined that the system is successful by both FIFA and IFAB.

The VAR system is an option when an incident occurs, and the referee on-field asks the VAR to review the incident. The VAR then reports back their view to the on-field referee who then can decide whether to accept the recommendation of the VAR or the referee can decide to review the incident himself on a monitor on the side of the field of play and take the appropriate action.

According to FIFA, the VAR is to be used on goals, penalties, red cards and to ensure the correct player is receiving the card.

The use of technology has been vital in sports such as cricket, rugby league and rugby union, where the decisions can be changed without stopping the play mid-stream and can be done so straight away after an incident and it can be reviewed without hold up.

In football it cannot. An incident might happen in the 29th minute of a match but if the ball stays in play until the 33rd minute, the referee cannot hold up play to check for a decision like this.

Should the VAR get involved does the referee let play go on until the ball goes out of play or if the referee wants to make his own decision off the replays does he stop the momentum of the game, view the replay then decide there was no foul or goal then restart play having broken the momentum of the game.

The way the system will work still hasn’t been decided on by FIFA and of course the system will develop as it is only in its infancy of being used.

The question now remains do we need this technology in football or sport in general?

To me the answer is a mixed one. Yes, we need some technology in sport. The technology used to determine whether or not a goal has been scored as the ball crosses the line looks to be a good implementation.

But is the VAR right in football? The answer is no. Football is a game of momentum and stopping the momentum kills the game and fans do not want stop start football games.

Take the NRL Bunker for example. The NRL has spent millions of dollars on technology but ultimately it is going to be the person using the technology’s comprehension of the rules that makes the decision and if that interprets a rule differently to what it is meant to be the decision is going to be wrong.

The Bunker has seen NRL officials afraid to make a decision and with the technology there it is going to become more and more a situation where decisions are not made on-field but by others sitting either away from the stadium.

Cricket has had one of the more successful uses of technology but now the use of technology is becoming overbearing on umpires who now are less aggressive in their decision making relying on players to use their reviews if they want a decision changed.

The basic third umpire system is the best in world sport; in a basic system the umpire can send up either a stumping or a run out appeal “upstairs” and the third umpire has one of two options to choose from either OUT or NOT OUT.

Now with DRS, the system is developing and the umpires are now having to make a judgement off the technology shown which umpire Nigel Llong proved last year can be a dangerous thing when he had to interpret whether Nathan Lyon had hit the ball using two pieces of technology that essentially contradicted each other.

Sport needs technology but not at the risk of match officials becoming obsolete. When referees or Umpires start out they are taught to referee to what they see and not what they missed, with technology coming into the game the referees are now second guessing themselves and this is becoming a problem.

It’s a danger that could come into football, a game where momentum and tempo is key and stoppages are to be avoided.

The Crowd Says:

2016-12-18T01:03:46+00:00

Ben of Phnom Penh

Roar Guru


Kashima Antlers are playing Real Madrid tonight in the final. There will be a lot of excitement in Ibaraki at the moment.

2016-12-15T10:03:35+00:00

northerner

Guest


I'm inclined to agree. That said, they are trialling it, not giving it the green light, so time will tell. Let's see how it works out with the A League.

2016-12-15T07:09:14+00:00

anon

Guest


Use it to catch those divers ie. cheats. Automatic red card for anyone caught simulating ie. cheating. If the umpires can't stamp out diving, then soccer crowds need to begin self-policing the players. If they dive -- boo them. AFL had a serial diving problem with Adam Goodes and Lindsay Thomas the worst offenders. AFL crowds booed them until they corrected their behaviour.

2016-12-15T06:46:48+00:00

Waz

Guest


Fifa needs level heads analysing this, technology has the potential to strangle the sport and a simplistic view of when and where VARs will be used misses the point - coaches post match will start to complain about decisions that were not reviewed that affect their team and the inevitable "creep" will commence, and before long we'll have a fragmented playing game. I hope it can work but I just don't think it will. The current less than perfect system will be replaced by another jess than perfect system.

2016-12-15T06:39:33+00:00

Waz

Guest


As the author pointed out even in test cricket the behaviour of umpires has changed to a more cautious approach leaving captains to review. But the fundamental difference is football is a low-scoring game and relies upon continuous flow of play for excitement, disrupt the flow of play and you seriously damage the entertainment on offer.

2016-12-15T06:31:54+00:00

Barto

Guest


Cricket is a fundamentally different game. It's a stop start game, in reality in the future it would be possible to have a purely DRS based umpire for all decisions. Football is not the same game. Unless these reviews can be instant (and one day they may well be) there's no place for them.

2016-12-15T05:52:52+00:00

Sydneysider

Guest


"Your comments were similar to those that said that the review system would not work in test cricket. Well the game is better for it. Soccer has had to many dinosaurs holding the game back for to long" LOL..LOL..LOL..LOL..LOL..LOL...

2016-12-15T05:45:23+00:00

Nemesis

Guest


"Soccer has had to many dinosaurs holding the game back for to long" Indeed. A real worry. Not having video reviews has held Football back compared to sports that have video review like; AFL, RL, RU, cricket which are thriving around the globe.

AUTHOR

2016-12-15T05:40:00+00:00

Josh Robertson

Roar Rookie


Apologies for the spelling error, got my Japanese towns and teams confused, but agree on the fact that the Antlers outplayed Atletico Nacional, the concern is how long after an incident the referee can stop play and then use the review. In last night's case he chose to view the sideline monitor which slows it down too much in my honest opinion.

2016-12-15T05:19:13+00:00

Martyn

Guest


Your comments were similar to those that said that the review system would not work in test cricket. Well the game is better for it. Soccer has had to many dinosaurs holding the game back for to long

2016-12-15T02:06:05+00:00

Barto

Guest


I really dislike the entire idea of video reviews. Yes, they may overturn some bad decisions, but at what cost? Making football, one of the few sports that has a continuous flow, a stop start affair risks affecting the viewing experience. Add to that, that unless you are reviewing everything bad decisions will still get made, which will introduce greater angst from fans when these unreviewable decisions go against them (fouls, yellow cards, offsides) Invest more money in referee's and leave the technology for the TV pundits. Yes every team may end up with some controversial decisions against them, but over time these will even out. Not to mention, that some infamous bad referee decisions have become legend, part of the history of the game, part of the folklore of being a football supporter. Would you want a world without the hand of god?

2016-12-15T00:59:14+00:00

Rodger King

Guest


I would argue that if this system was in use in the A League this current season then AUFC's season could of been totally different. If Clisby's tackle on Ciro round 2 had been 'reviewed' and Clisby sent off as he should of been the whole game would of changed (imo) let alone the Santalab hack on Holland.

2016-12-15T00:23:07+00:00

Ben of Phnom Penh

Roar Guru


Kashima Antlers (lose the "g") outplayed Atletico Nacional last night regardless of the penalty. It appeared to be the fourth official who blew the whistle alerting the central official as to the possible need for a review which meant there was a meaningful reason for making the review as opposed to a lack of confidence from the central official.

Read more at The Roar