Few tweets on FIFA taking over the management of the VAR project from the IFAB, and what it really means the Premier League (including a mention of the Harry Kane penalty claim).
But first, remember this. FIFA says the implementation of VAR has been a "universal success".
By taking over control of the VAR project, what FIFA really wants to do it make sure all associations are doing it the same way.
So it doesn't want the Premier League not using monitors, not penalising the GK off the line on pens, etc.
The new Laws of the Game, which will come into force in the Premier League at the start of next season, had already removed ambiguity over use of monitors in the VAR protocol.
So, in effect, FIFA taking control is not a catalyst for the PL using monitors. This is already set.
FIFA taking control only really means that it will set expectations that leagues will follow the protocol.
Several comps (not just PL) do not penalise the keeper for being an inch off the line on a penalty.
It's a bad law change, but the law will likely be enforced now.
One thing FIFA cannot do is change the subjective decision making of referees, or the competence of referees in individual leagues.
Yes, FIFA does control the education of referees globally. But there is a big step to changing the level of ability - certainly in the short term.
Take today's decision on the Harry Kane penalty. This is the process.
If the referee, Paul Tierney, tells the VAR, Michael Oliver, that he had a clear view of the incident and did not feel there was sufficient contact for Kane to go down, there will be no penalty. #BOUTOT
The Premier League's high bar, and refusal to use the monitors on subjective penalty decisions, means that any possible overturn sits with the VAR and how he interprets what the match referee has seen.
This alone makes it much more difficult for an overturn to happen.
This becomes a bigger problem if referees are missing more big decisions than you might expect in an elite league.
VAR seems better in the UCL, for example, because that competition only uses top referees.
Once you get to league level, ability and consistency will be lower.
So the use of monitors will undoubtedly be a positive addition, both for the accountability of referees and acceptance from fans.
But it's going to come down to two key things 1) Officials being good, as refs and VARs 2) How high the "bar" will be in the Premier League
Premier League referees have tied themselves up in knots over this high bar, and the lack of monitors.
It's the perfect storm of the VAR not being sure if he should overrule the referee, but not having the safety net of asking the referee to take a look himself.
But FIFA taking charge isn't going to stop the goals being disallowed for tight offsides, minor handballs and such like.
FIFA will be about consistency of application. The leagues themselves are still going to have to get this right "on the ground."
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Sick of keepers holding the ball for 30-40 seconds to waste time or slow down play?
The [unenforced] law says a keeper can only hold the ball for 6 seconds. Any longer and it's an indirect FK to the opposition.
We now have details of The IFAB trial to change it.
Thread. 👇
As well as wasting time, a goalkeeper holding the ball for too long is considered an unfair tactic because the opposing team has no possibility to regain possession.
That's because a goalkeeper cannot be challenged when in control of the ball with the hand(s).
A keeper holding the ball for more than 6 seconds should be punishable by an indirect free kick.
However, we have got to the stage where this is rarely enforced by referees, which in recent years has been exploited tactically.
Mauro Icardi's offside in Galatasaray vs. Manchester United gives us a good illustration of how semi-automated technology will be more accurate and reliable - yet may lead to more goals being disallowed.
This was ruled out on the field, but stay with me.
There's a common misconception that handball starts at the bottom of the sleeve.
This isn't the case.
It's the arm point level with the armpit - if you had it by your side - around the whole arm.
Basically, the area of the arm which can't increase body size if you move it.
The starting point for offside (and handball) is therefore an imaginary line on the arm.
With the old tech, the point on the attacker and defender is plotted manually by the VAR and operator.
This obviously has to cause inconsistencies, and it's why there's a tolerance level.
This is what happened with the Luis Diaz "goal" which Liverpool had disallowed vs. Tottenham.
There will be a deeper dive in the Monday VAR thread, but in simple terms the VAR took the wrong onfield decision - it led to the goal being disallowed.
So the VAR, Darren England, checked offside thinking the onfield decision was "goal."
It was a quick offside check because it was clear Diaz was onside, so he told the referee "check complete".
In telling the ref "check complete" he is saying the onfield decision was correct.
So the "human error" by the VAR team is getting the onfield decision wrong. Not by failing to draw lines etc.
The lines were drawn and Diaz was clearly onside.
The huge, quite unbelievable error was misunderstanding the onfield decision.
So the dust has settled on the first VAR audio show of the year with Howard Webb.
Time for a little old-school VAR thread to go through it.
I'll include the video clips.
We got 2 of the 3 big errors in the Premier League this season - the penalty not given against Andre Onana vs. Wolves + the offside goal Man City scored against Fulham.
It didn't include Alexis Mac Allister's red card, which has been the main point of complaint in my comments.
It would have been better to include that Mac Allister red, especially as it was overturned on appeal.
But then if you include Mac Allister, you drop something else (Zaroury?). And you absolutely have to include the examples of good process to show where VAR works.
Getting lots of comments about Lee Mason's return to PGMOL, and they're fair. I'm surprised too.
But he isn't working in the Premier League, he will be a coach in League One and League Two.
PGMOL is reducing the ratio of coaches to referees, so a lot of roles have been created.
Bottom line is everyone who is appointed as a coach is going to be a former ref, and Lee Mason was obviously vastly experienced.
I've no idea if he will be good as a coach, after a pretty dismal end to his career on the pitch and in the VAR room, but understand the reaction.
Howard Webb said: "We're going to be ensuring that [Lee Mason] is exposed to all the upskilling that our professional coach workforce needs. He went through a pretty thorough assessment process alongside others that have come in as well into this enhanced coaching group.
FIFA publishes the top 10 international player transfers by total transfer fee in 2022.
Includes:
Luis Diaz, Darwin Nunez to Liverpool
Antony, Casemiro to Man United
Erling Haaland to Man City
Alexander Isak to Newcastle
Raphinha to Barcelona
(list is not in fee order)
The domination of English football in the transfer market laid bare.
The top 5 country-to-country transfer routes are all to England.
France to England the most lucrative market in 2022.
Man United the biggest spenders on transfer fees in the world in 2022.
Of the top 10, 7 are Premier League clubs.
Leeds 10th.
Nottingham Forest 14th.
Everton 15th.
Chelsea (16th) might be a bit higher next year.....