Video evidence (soccer)

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The icon of the VAR that will appear on the screens during the verification process.

The video evidence in soccer should avoid wrong decisions . In addition, the Video Assistant Referee (VAR), known in German-speaking countries as a video assistant, sits far away from the field in the so-called Cologne basement . He watches the disputed decisions of the chief referee on a television in repetition and, if necessary, in slow motion and communicates his view of things to the latter via radio. Video evidence was introduced in the 1st Bundesliga in the 2017/18 season , and in the 2nd in the 2019/20 season . Since the introduction of video evidence, there has been a controversial discussion about the VAR's raison d'etre.

Game situations

There are four types of judgments that are checked:

The referee is connected to the video assistant by radio. He can also view certain scenes himself on a monitor on the edge of the field, which he shows with a hand gesture of a rectangle.

history

Discussions about the usefulness of video evidence regularly arise after wrong decisions by the referee, such as B. an unrecognized foul in the penalty area, a missed penalty or an overlooked handball when scoring a goal. Conversely, a swallow in the penalty area can be falsely recognized as a foul, an offside situation can be overlooked before the shot on goal or a red card can be wrongly (not) given. It can also be controversial whether the ball has completely crossed the goal line.

There were also several specific incidents, including:

  • In the round of 16 between Germany and England at the 2010 World Cup in South Africa , the ball was in goal. TV pictures clearly showed (through slow motion , different camera angles, etc.) that the ball was well behind the goal line for fractions of a second before it jumped up to the crossbar and was caught by the German goalkeeper Manuel Neuer . The referee decided here on “no goal”, as the situation was unequivocally recognizable to him and the linesman . (The official instructions of the DFB on the football rules state: "If there is any doubt as to whether the ball was completely in the goal, the referee should let the game continue.")
  • During a Bundesliga match in October 2013, a ball shot by Stefan Kießling flew sideways through a hole in the net into the goal; the referee wrongly recognized the hit (see phantom goal ).
  • In the DFB Cup final on May 17, 2014 between Borussia Dortmund and Bayern Munich there was a hotly debated wrong decision. Dortmund's defender Mats Hummels scored the alleged 1-0 for his team, the ball completely crossed the line, but was knocked back into the field by Bayern's player Dante . The referee Florian Meyer let the game continue, which finally ended 2-0 aet for Bayern Munich. This factual decision to the detriment of Dortmund re-fueled the discussion about the introduction of video evidence, the majority of which two months earlier had been voted on by the clubs of the Bundesliga and the 2nd division , among others. a. for cost reasons, had been rejected.

Goal-line technology

In football, video evidence was not approved by FIFA until July 2012. Then - shortly after Euro 2012 - she decided to introduce goal-line technology, i.e. support through technical aids to determine whether the ball had completely crossed the goal line. The permitted systems are goal cameras ( Hawk-Eye and GoalControl ) for monitoring the line, as well as a radio chip in the ball (GoalRef system).

Introduction abroad

After a four-year test phase, the Dutch football association KNVB introduced the video evidence with the approval of the IFAB. In 26 cup games in the 2016/17 season , an additional official was able to intervene in controversial game-changing situations (penalty, expulsion, goal from a possible offside position). This happened for the first time on September 21, 2016 at the game Ajax Amsterdam against Willem II Tilburg . After a foul by Anouar Kali on Lasse Schone warned referee Danny Makkelie him with a yellow card. The video assistant Pol van Boekel examined the scene again and corrected the decision due to the severity of the foul, so that Kali was sent off.

On August 13, 2016, the video assistant was used for the first time in a United Soccer League game. ( United States and Canada ).

In addition, the aid was used for the first time in the Australian A-League on April 10, 2017 .

In 2018, video assistants were introduced to the rules of the game by the International Football Association Board (IFAB) after testing in several competitions (including the Confederations Cup and Bundesliga ) .

Introduction to Germany

For the season 2017/18 the video evidence in German was Bundesliga introduced. The Video Assist Center is located in the DFL headquarters in the so-called Cologne basement . A video assistant intervenes via radio contact if the referee makes a clear mistake. In practice, intervention should be limited to goals, red cards (but not yellow and red cards ), penalties or mistaken players. On November 2, 2017, it became known that the DFB had changed its instructions to the referees in consultation with the DFL. Accordingly, the video assistant may intervene in the game even if the lead referee has not made a clear wrong decision. However, the DFB revised this "course correction" on November 6, 2017. Rather, the rule is that the video assistant is only switched on if there is a perception error in crucial scenes and thus a clear wrong decision by the referee. How a controversial scene is ultimately assessed is still a matter for the referee on the pitch. Since the 2019/20 season, the video assistant can also be used in the 2nd Bundesliga .

Newer inserts

On March 3, 2018, the IFAB decided at a conference in Zurich to include the video assistant in the rules of football (“Laws of the Game”). The decision was made unanimously. It is up to the national associations whether they also use the technically and financially expensive video evidence. On March 16, 2018, the FIFA Council confirmed that the video evidence would also be introduced at the World Cup in Russia .

In September 2018, the UEFA Executive Committee announced that, from 2019, the referee would also be able to communicate with the video assistant via radio in the Champions League and from 2020 during the international matches at the European Championship should a game situation arise.

In the Europa League , the video assistant was used for the first time at the 2019 Europa League final in Baku . The widespread use of video evidence in the Europa League should take place in the 2020/21 season.

Debate about the VAR

Since the introduction of the VAR, there has been a controversial discussion about the pros and cons of the video assistant.

Since its introduction, the long time it took to analyze the video, the lack of transparency for the spectators in the stadium and, as a result, "that the technology robs football of the soul" and "the football is destroyed" has been criticized. There were also allegations of manipulation and "the term video evidence [...] suggests an objectivity that is by no means always given".

Further points of criticism are, for example, obvious offenses by a player in which the video assistant does not act. Conversely, it is questioned why the video assistant intervenes if the referee has not made a clear wrong decision. The long time it takes to finally evaluate a game situation is also criticized.

According to a survey from September 2019, in which 150,000 people were interviewed by "FC Fair Play!" And "Kicker", half are in favor of the video evidence, while 40% are against the VAR. The main point of criticism is the implementation, the 71% as "bad 62% are of the opinion that the video assistant takes the emotions out of football.

Technical problems

A Bundesliga referee who wanted to remain anonymous reported to WDR in 2017 about problems in connection with the video evidence. This was largely designed by Hellmut Krug, and the video assistant is not in a TV car at the stadium, as in most other countries, but in the Cologne basement . As a result, Krug was personally present as a supervisor at every third game. The anonymous referee complained that the image quality was "insufficient" and not in HD. Operators help with the preparation of the videos; they often have neither “professional experience as operators” nor “a feel for football”. The radio link “between the video assistant and the referee [on the pitch]” is neither bug nor tamper-proof and there are occasional failures.

Evaluation of the VAR

Evaluations of the VAR came to different results. It was shown that the number of offside situations, the number of fouls and yellow cards decreased significantly due to the introduction of the VAR in the Bundesliga and the Italian Serie A. In addition, it was concluded that the probability of scoring chances through the VAR has increased, since referees now intervene less often in tight offside situations, as they rely on the VAR and thus more offensive runs for strikers arise. It was also found that situations are more severely punished by referees when viewed in slow motion. The VAR also had an impact on how competent the arbitrator is perceived. If the referee made the decision without using the VAR, he was perceived as more competent, whereas the use of the VAR in contentious situations had a negative effect on the perception of his competence.

A study by Professor Werner Helsen, which was carried out on behalf of UEFA and examined matches in seven countries, concluded that the video evidence was used in approximately 1,200 out of a total of approximately 3,500 games observed and that the decisions were for the most part either the wrong decisions corrected or confirmed correct decisions of the referee. The DFB also drew a positive balance after the 2018/19 season and concluded that 82 wrong decisions were corrected. In the 2017/18 season, chief referee Lutz Michael Fröhlich had prevented around 80% of the wrong decisions by the VAR.

Web links

Commons : Video assistant referee  - collection of pictures, videos and audio files

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Video Assistant Referee (VAR) Explained. International Football Association Board , May 17, 2018, accessed June 3, 2018 .
  2. ↑ The video evidence sparked discussions: There were four interventions in two games of the Confed Cup. At the end of the discussion, however, all judgments were correct. Südkurier , June 20, 2017, accessed June 9, 2018 .
  3. ↑ Anti-Wembley goal provokes dispute over video evidence . In: Der Spiegel , June 27, 2010.
  4. ↑ EM 2020 football rules, technical aids: video evidence & goal-line technology , accessed on February 24, 2020.
  5. ↑ a b Fifa allows technical assistance for referees. In: Süddeutsche.de , July 6, 2012.
  6. ↑ Thomas Kistner: Covered with artificial stupidity. In: Süddeutsche.de , October 20, 2013.
  7. ↑ Premiere: For the first time video evidence in competitive game. In: Kurier.at , September 22, 2016.
  8. ^ VAR - First in-game use of Video Assistant Referee. YouTube , August 13, 2016, accessed June 3, 2018 .
  9. ↑ Video Assistant Referee used for the first time in the A-League. YouTube , April 10, 2017, accessed June 3, 2018 .
  10. ^ Historic step for greater fairness in football. International Football Association Board , March 3, 2018, accessed June 3, 2018 .
  11. ↑ Historic Moment - First VAR Review in the Bundesliga. YouTube , April 10, 2017, accessed June 3, 2018 .
  12. ↑ Video assistants: DFL unveils the headquarters of the Bundesliga referees in Cologne. Express.de , July 23, 2017, accessed June 9, 2018 .
  13. ↑ Questions and answers about the video assistant. In: dfl.de , November 2, 2017.
  14. ↑ Martin van de Flierdt: This is how the DFL plans the video evidence . In: sport1.de. Sport1 , January 25, 2017, accessed March 19, 2017 .
  15. ↑ Thomas Roth: Rules, referees, payment: This is new in the Bundesliga. In: kicker.de . August 17, 2017. Retrieved August 18, 2017 .
  16. ↑ DFB modified video evidence. In: faz.net , November 2, 2017.
  17. ↑ Fröhlich heads the project video assistant. In: dfb.de , November 6, 2017.
  18. ↑ 2nd division introduces video evidence for the coming season. In: kicker.de. Kicker Sportmagazin , March 21, 2019, accessed on April 28, 2019 .
  19. ↑ IFAB records video evidence in football rules. In: sportschau.de. March 3, 2018, accessed March 3, 2018 .
  20. ↑ europapokal.de: Video evidence in football: Where is the video assistant already in use? Article of April 19, 2019.
  21. ↑ Oliver Fritsch: Video evidence: The pictures lie . In: The time . May 9, 2018, ISSN  0044-2070 ( zeit.de [accessed December 11, 2019]).
  22. ↑ a b Vinzent Tschirpke: Get rid of the video evidence! In: Magazine 11 Friends . December 3, 2019, accessed December 11, 2019 .
  23. ↑ Survey on video evidence: "Good in itself, but ..." In: Kicker . September 5, 2019, accessed December 11, 2019 .
  24. ↑ Javier Cáceres: Video evidence: Even Germany's best referee doubts. December 5, 2019, accessed December 11, 2019 .
  25. ↑ WORLD: Schalke 04: suspected manipulation against video evidence boss Hellmut Krug . November 5, 2017 ( welt.de [accessed August 26, 2019]).
  26. ↑ Alex Feuerherdt: Why the "video evidence" is not proof. In: n-tv . May 25, 2018, accessed December 11, 2019 .
  27. ↑ The league is annoyed and Rudi Völler on the palm. In: Welt.de , August 28, 2017.
  28. ↑ DER SPIEGEL: VAR survey: video evidence divides football fans - DER SPIEGEL - sport. Retrieved February 22, 2020 .
  29. ↑ WORLD: Video evidence: Referee confirms quirks and mishaps in video evidence . October 30, 2017 ( welt.de [accessed August 26, 2019]).
  30. ↑ Referee complains about problems with video evidence. WDR, October 28, 2017, accessed on April 3, 2018 : "After Manuel Gräfe's criticism, another referee corroborated the allegations against the referee leadership and complained about problems with the implementation of the video evidence.
  31. ^ Application of Video Technology in Football Refereeing - VAR. Retrieved December 20, 2019 (UK English).
  32. ↑ Jens Meifert: Study brings clarity: video evidence is better than its reputation. September 26, 2019, accessed January 19, 2020 .
  33. ↑ Fröhlich: Video evidence prevented 80 percent of the wrong decisions. June 4, 2018, accessed January 19, 2020 .