Will video assistant referees solve the A-League’s officiating problem? They certainly could have saved Sydney FC’s unbeaten season on Saturday night.
Referee Chris Beath reportedly apologised to Sydney FC coach Graham Arnold after the Sky Blues were denied a clear-cut penalty in stoppage time of an enthralling Sydney derby.
Full credit to Beath for admitting his mistake, but there are still plenty of reasons to be annoyed – and not just if you’re a Sydney FC fan.
Perhaps the most frustrating element of the non-penalty decision is the fact that Brosque had no reason to go down in the first place.
He had already beaten Jonathan Aspro before Robbie Cornthwaite stuck out a leg and clearly tripped the Sydney FC attacker, so why didn’t Beath blow his whistle?
Maybe it had something to do with the fact he was around 15 yards behind the play, but no doubt his assistant referee had a clearer view?
And if neither of them saw it, then surely the addition of Video Assistant Referees from Round 26 onward can only be viewed as a good thing?
Or can it?
When a VAR was used in a friendly between Wellington Phoenix and Beijing BG in midweek, all accounts suggest video referee Kris Griffiths-Jones got the decision to award a penalty to the hosts spectacularly wrong.
Perhaps the most obvious example of the way video technology can impact a sport comes from the National Rugby League, where countless controversial video replay decisions led the NRL to introduce the Bunker last year.
Yet the Bunker has proved no less contentious, with the NRL once again tweaking the rules around the way it will be used in 2017, all the while as officials refer decision after decision to the video refs.
Is football doomed to the same fate? Or will VARs simply help referees make the right decision in situations like the Sydney derby’s stoppage-time drama, or Nebojsa Marinkovic’s goal in Perth Glory’s 2-2 draw with Brisbane Roar – after the ball had clearly gone out of play?
There was more questionable decision-making going on in the stands on Saturday night, with the Red and Black Bloc embarrassing itself with a crass banner of the utmost vulgarity.
It really is about time Football Federation Australia and the Western Sydney Wanderers stood up to the small collective of cretins who continually bring the A-League into disrepute, and they should start by banning the RBB for at least one game.
If Borussia Dortmund can play in front of an empty Südtribüne like they did on Saturday night, then the Wanderers should suffer the same punishment for the offensive banner displayed at the derby.
Unless officials start to take punitive action, the same thing will keep happening – not least because the selfish members of the RBB care more about themselves than what happens to their club, and delight in causing offence to the benefit of absolutely no one.
These are the same imbeciles who complain that the mainstream media has a vendetta against them, and the sooner FFA gets rid of the persistent trouble-makers, the better for the A-League.
It’s a shame to focus on the banner when the derby itself provided gripping drama, and the result certainly seemed to leave second-placed Melbourne Victory with a spring in their step.
They dished out an old-school thrashing to the Central Coast Mariners yesterday, thumping the hosts 3-0 in Gosford as James Troisi ran the show and Besart Berisha registered a brace in the rout.
The win means Victory have cut the deficit at the top of the standings to eight points, and their Round 22 summit meeting with Sydney FC at Allianz Stadium could yet prove pivotal.
The Sky Blues were unlucky to see their unbeaten run end on Saturday, but we haven’t heard the last of them yet.
Or, for that matter, the last of whether VARs will help or hinder the A-League.
Mandrake
Guest
Nem, I assume you have footballs interest at heart but people like you and part of the RRB bloc drive people away and eventually sponsors. According to other posts, the post match interviews talk about dodgy ref decisions on penalties all the time - so its time for a rethink isn't it...I blame the laws not the refs
Melange
Guest
Sorry to answer so late. I was actually chucking the question out there because I wasn't sure of the wording of the ruling. It seems from your comments that they would only lose competition points if there are further incidents relating to flares - I thought it may be if there was any incidents that are considered unwanted, anti-social, take your pick behavior.
At work
Roar Rookie
Cool and Cold - You're clutching at straws trying to convince us that Brosque didn't deserve a penalty. I watched the clip and can't agree with you. If the VAR was to ever rule on such a decision (which I hope they wouldn't because it was a non-call and would disrupt the game), then I cannot imagine them not giving that a penalty.
Cool and Cold
Guest
JB, It is not new to say that journalists try to manipulate (or to cover) some events. From time to time they do it occasionally. For this incident (in which Brosque was denied a penalty), I suspect the reporters (journalists) have keep away some videos (from different camera angles) to support what they have said. Watch this video: http://www.foxsports.com.au/video/football/a-league/a-league-highlights-show/a-league-highlights-show-r20!609167 When Ninković (no. 10) was denied a penalty, the video above shows 4 different camera angles to support what the commentators claimed: not penalty. However, when Brosque was denied a penalty a the end of the match, the video above shows only one camera angle to support what the commentators concluded (should be a penalty). The video I have quoted above is the new one I have found minutes ago. Before that, hardly I can find other videos of different camera angles. That is why I ask you about the where about one can find more camera angles. Even so, from the video I have quoted above, at 6:20, Brosque is seemed to be diving. At 6:26 of this video, the ball rolls a distance of around 1.5 meter (until at 6:27) before the ball suddenly bounce up (off the grass) at 6:28. This an evidence that Robert Cornthwaite (no. 18) has his yellow sneaker hit on or contacted the ball. Then until at 6:29, Robert Cornthwaite has his right foot tripping Brosque's right foot. Also, at 6:28 of this video clip I have quoted above, it is clearly shown that the main referee has a very good view on the happening. This clearly shows that the incident is not a penalty awarding one. The referee is right. From time to time there are people get confused by such an incident. This is a very good example in which a defender's (Robert Cornthwaite in this case) kick (or tackle) hits the ball and trips the striker in one go. Definitely, this is not a penalty. I wonder whether the reports saying the referee giving apology is correct. The referee is right. Also, this is a good example that VARs may not work if they are not good in refereeing and good in interpretation of video replay.
Cool and Cold
Guest
Your are probably a journalist in sports because you have made a very good analysis. Noticeably, you mentioned: "Camera angles are deceptive and camera framerates don’t paint the full picture." Please remember that the main referee in a soccer match has his own visual angle apart from that the 4 to 6 camera angles that the video-referee has (like in NRL). That can explain the Liam-Miller-vs-Berisha-incident happened years ago in the A-league Grand Finale. Also, in the WSW vs Sydney FC incident happened days ago (Brosque refused a penalty), the main referee had his own unique view other than the views from other cameras. Because of the above, some people have been advocating for almost a decade that, should VARs (video assisted referees) be in place or adopted, the VARs should not intervene. The VARs should only start to act until upon the call of the main referee. There are arguments over whether or not the VARs should intervene to stop a match. Those saying yes claim that "if the assistant referees, linesmen, can intervene by raising a flag (for offside, offline or foul calls), why the 5th referees (VARs) cannot? There are some considerations for VARs not intervening: 1) As mentioned above, the main referee has his own unique viewing angle. 2) Apart, from the main referee, the linesmen have their point of views too. They can intervene anytime by raising their flag. There are enough surveillance already. 3) Free flow of play is maintained. Therefore, the VARs should not be in action unless upon the call of the main referee.
marron
Guest
Agree with your final paragraph there AZ. A big reaction plays right into their hands and enables them to take the p some more to create more outrage. Rinse repeat.
ron
Guest
Nobody wants what the NRL does. Every second try gets reviewed and the fans cheer a bit a minute later. One of the major jokes in world sport. Having followed Football for 35 years, bad referee decisions have not lowered my experience as a player and spectator.
AZ_RBB
Guest
I really don't want to talk about it or bring attention to it. But it's almost hard to ignore now. I never expected a reasonable response from the RBB leadership on this. Silence would have been fine. But instead they've gone on a social media tirade accentuating their actions from Saturday. I've never associated myself with the leadership and nor have most of the people I stand on the terrace with. The terrace outgrew its core in the very early days. But it's infuriating to see how it's being handled at the moment. This sort of idiocy is not unique to the RBB and it's the by-product of groups of young men with something of a spotlight and a lot of spare time on their hands. I don't know the solution to it.
j binnie
Guest
Cool and cold .There is one right at the top of this article. Watch where the centre backs boot (the yellow one) contacts the turf as he pulls it back and you will see the striker has not yet hit the ground. We are talking about split seconds here. Cheers jb.
j binnie
Guest
Cameron - I do not know how FIFA propose to use this technology and I seriously doubt if they themselves know, for, as everyone appears to agree,it is only in a "test mode" at this point in time, and from previous experience, the "Gnomes" at FIFA. are not renowned for speed in the decision making process. Cheers jb.
Nemesis
Guest
"no reason why they can’t love our game as well as their own. " But, that's not true. They provide a list of reasons why they can't love our game as their own, including: * diving * low scores * faking injuries * offside * etc etc. If they want to love our game - welcome aboard. If they want to whine and whinge about the Game & make changes, I'll tell them: Go back to where you came from.
pauly
Guest
Ease up Nemesis, no reason why they can't love our game as well as their own. Let's be a broad church.
pauly
Guest
At the same time the imagery was somewhat X-rated and also insulting to the gay community. I know a Wanderers fan who is a gay man, I wonder how he must have felt seeing that. Interestingly, Huffington Post reported on it - this is a news outlet that almost never takes notice of our sport (also bought into the "AFLW invented women's sport" thing) but decided to post an article with a very negative headline, interestingly they also published a clear image of it too. Hmmmm.
c
Guest
do you have kids kaks if these kids are at the wrong age then it would be hard for the parent to explain
c
Guest
as i said they need to rectify their blatant errors by improving their skills no videos required
Cool and Cold
Guest
A car cannot help to save time if the driver does not know how to drive well. He may be involved in an accident. A good watch cannot help a man to be more punctual. An alarm clock cannot make a man stop sleeping if he chooses to stop it or throw it away. VAR cannot help if the main referee is not good enough.
TheVolley
Guest
Not sure about video referees fixing penalty/non-penalty decisions like the WSW vs SFC game. I am not in favour of stopping the game to perform a video review. However, automatic video review should occur immediately after a goal is scored. This will solve other issues like ball going out but not called (e.g. Perth e vs Roar), offside goals etc. Since the game is already stopped, a review should automatically occur.
Cool and Cold
Guest
It seems that the VAR used in the match Wellington Phoenix vs. Beijing BG (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJv_RGiFFWc) has only one camera angles. As for NRL, there are many replays from different angles.
Cool and Cold
Guest
Wellington Phoenix vs. Beijing BG ft. Video Referee (VAR) | [2017] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJv_RGiFFWc It is not the video replay/refereeing in trouble. It was a referee's mistake. Referees in Oceania area (including Australia) are not good. In this incident, rewarding a penalty is wrong. Without detailed reference to rule book, firstly, that was not intentional. Secondly, that "trip" did not take away Phoenix's chance to score. Thirdly, it was a Phoenix player who got the touch of the ball after a free kick. So, tripping or not tripping, the tripped Phoenix player was not in the vicinity for scoring. Just wrong decision. It was the main referee's wrong decision because he had watched the replay a couple of times.
Cool and Cold
Guest
"I think the only way a video system could work is if the ref who has given the decision has the chance to look again at the incident and change his mind based on the video evidence. How practical that is I’m not sure." I am not a rugby fan and I do not know rugby rules very well. However, in Rugby League, we can hear the referee tells the video referee something like: "Try, check if it was knock-on", or "No try, check if it is a forward pass", etc. So, we can imagine, and it should be that a soccer referee should call the assistant video referee something like: "Goal, check if it was offside", or "Penalty, check if it was a handball inside the box", etc. That means to say that a soccer main referee should still assume full and absolute power. That is to say, VAR is used when he thinks he needs. Anyhow, there is still a difference. It is that in rugby, we can hear the referee's saying through his microphone. However, hearing soccer-referees' conversation through microphone is still prohibited by FIFA.