Video evidence in football is one of the most controversial innovations in recent years – and is hotly debated almost every week. Too hot, as referee spokesman Alexander Feuerherdt thinks. He also uses data to promote greater acceptance of the VAR.
Probably every regular stadium visitor has experienced it in the recent past: a whistle from the referee, a rectangle drawn in the air, the run to a monitor on the side of the pitch. VAR or Video Assistant Referee, in short: the decision-making aid for the referee via video evidence.
Video evidence accompanied by whistles and abusive chants
Frequent accompaniments to this process in German stadiums are whistles and insulting chants against the German Football Association (DFB). Many people seem to have the feeling that VAR is too much of an intervention in the game – and does not bring any real improvement to decisions in football. DFB Schiri GmbH is trying to counteract this impression with data.
In the Bundesliga, 88 of 94 interventions by the video assistant were correct on the first 22 match days of this season, according to statistics presented by the referee society at an event in Berlin this week. “Overall, this is a good rate, which is roughly in the same range as we have had in previous seasons,” explains Feuerherdt, who has been in office since July 2023, in an interview with NDR.
VAR prevents one in every third game Wrong decision
The VAR failed to be switched on eight times, even though it would have been correct. In six cases there were incorrect interventions – four times without the final decision being wrong, twice with a wrong decision. In about every third game, a wrong decision in Germany’s top division is prevented by the VAR.
A cut that also occurred last season when, according to the data, 112 incorrect evaluations by referees were averted. “You can see that the video assistant filters out a whole series of wrong decisions,” says the referee spokesman.
In the 2nd league there were 77 interventions by the “Kölner Keller” on the first 22 match days of the current season. The main reason for the lower number of interventions: There are fewer cameras in the second division venues. 65 wrong decisions were prevented in the current season in the lower house – here too in an average of every third match.
“That’s all within reason, we won’t be able to achieve a 100 percent quota.”
— Alexander Feuerherdt, spokesman for DFB Schiri GmbH
With regard to the criticism of the VAR coming from many directions, Feuerherdt said that the discussions in other countries were no different. “There are also a lot of myths that the worst video assistants are always the ones in your own country, but that’s not true.” The German referees and video assistants are in a “good position” in comparison – also in terms of the number of interventions and the duration.
The current statistics are all “within limits, and we won’t be able to get a 100 percent rate.” This is because “people are at work and people make mistakes. People can also have different opinions.”
That’s why he rejects the repeated criticism from players or club officials: “It was the clubs that wanted the introduction of the video assistant.”
VAR decisions take an average of 83 seconds
He also does not accept the accusation – made especially by fans in the stadiums – that the decision-making process takes too long. “All in all, you have to say: it’s happening pretty quickly.” A VAR decision in the Bundesliga takes an average of 83 seconds – but in a huge time span of 12 to 225 seconds.
According to statistics, the quickest decisions are for penalties (74) and red cards (75), but it can take significantly longer to decide whether it is a goal or not (99).
“We won’t be able to easily go from 83 seconds to 50 or 60 seconds.”
—Alexander Feuerherdt
The least amount of time is spent on handball (74), while it takes longer for foul play (81) and offside (98). Feuerherdt sees the greatest potential for improvement in the latter. In general, “the duration of the checks cannot easily be accelerated extremely. We can talk about a few seconds. But we will not be able to easily go from an average of 83 seconds to 50 or 60 seconds.”
Feuerherdt therefore sees the potential above all “in checking offside positions when scoring goals through the introduction of semi-automatic offside technology, as we already know from European competitions”. “A lot could be saved there,” as a lot of things are currently done by hand, “the moment the ball is released and also the offside position. The calibrated lines have to be created by hand.”
Are stadium announcements coming?
In order to introduce semi-automatic offside technology, “the clubs would have to actively decide and pay for it,” says Feuerherdt. In the event that they do that, “we would not turn a blind eye to it.”
In order to explain the decisions more transparently overall, stadium announcements could be an option. For the referee spokesman, however, this would be subject to one condition: “If it is to happen, from our point of view it is very important that there is also the possibility of showing the pictures at the same time in the stadium. That is not yet possible, otherwise in FIFA and UEFA competitions.”
Just as is sometimes the case in US sports, for example. The associations have control over the stadium management during their competitions, said Feuerherdt. Things are different in the Bundesliga. And is therefore currently not a possible step to help the VAR become more accepted.
This topic in the program:
Mar 6, 2024 | 11:17 am
