It was the second match of Nigeria, against Iceland in the ongoing World Cup, in Russia. I got trapped and was forced to make a detour to watch the game while on transit. I veered into a roadside joint in an area housing students of tertiary institutions for the purpose.
The place I made to sit down and watch the game got filled up with young women who left their students hostels to view the match in a rainy evening. I was the only man on ground at the venue. I briskly walked into the relaxation spot to have a chair and demanded for chilled liquid following the tension drilling the body system.
Apparently disturbed by the avalanche of the young women, who I suspect became emergency soccer enthusiasts overnight because our darling super Eagles was playing, I went into a recluse at a particular corner to be part of the crowd.
While, the unimaginable number of the girls who shunned academic assignments that evening to watch the game stunned me because I haven’t be able to witness such in the past, their reactions, and wearish interpretation of referees decisions found to be against players of Nigeria was disturbing, as it showcased paucity of knowledge of the laws of the game.
More conspicuous in their bland display was the awarded against Nigeria. In the course of the game, a Super Eagles defender, Troost Ekong, while holding an Iceland player Mandzukic, in the process dragged him down at the penalty area of during a set piece, even as they were not contesting for the ball. Initially, the referee of the match, turned a blind eye to the incident. As a trained Referee I spotted the offence and immediate cognition forced me to shout out “penalty against Nigeria” considering the post incident review of incidents trending in the World Cup system, courtesy of VAR.
Immediately, one of the ladies who perhaps worried at my silence all through and inability of joining them to jubilate the goals scored earlier by Nigeria shouted at me “Holy Ghost Fire” over my intuition. Another of the ladies, reverberated with “Get Behind Me Satan” comments while , others chorused in Igbo language “ Obara Jesus, Obara Jesus” (blood of Jesus) be this. All eyes focused on me over the penalty comment, though I focused attention on the TV screen. Even one jokingly said “Oga, if no be say you be guy I for don mama you here now for that comment”.
While the lost concentration of events on the field of play by trying to focus on me over the penalty remark, the next they saw was the referee after considering the TV replay stationed at the Reserve Technical area for a penalty kick against Nigeria.
The decision of the referee to award a penalty against Nigeria prompted another round of name-calling against me and the man at the centre of the field. One of the ladies who looked another way but indirectly referred to me said “a witch is here and the witch is working in concert with the referee to rob Nigeria”.
I kept my cool despite the tantrums openly thrown against me. There was a comic relief of a sort however when the Iceland kicker missed the resultant penalty kick. One of the jubilating ladies blessed with rich chest region rushed to me from behind to nod my back with bubbling boobs. She asked me to stand up and join the cheering news of loss of the kick by Iceland, except I am not a Nigerian and supporting Super Eagles.
Though, the match ended in praise for Nigeria, I seized the opportunity to discuss with few of the ladies on the rudiments of the rules guiding football and why my penalty submission after the incident came up while sharing a drink with them afterwards. I informed those willing to listen about the VAR and review of incidents warranting change of decision by referees that as a referee, sentiments about sides irrespective of nationality, tribe or section do not apply adding that, what remains sacrosanct is the 17 laws of Game, hence my reason to stand on the side of the referees for correct interpretation of the Laws of the Game during games.
A similar scenario repeated itself on the last day of preliminaries involving Nigeria and Argentina on Tuesday evening. Again, I was in a midst of some folks who got jolted about referees decision to award a penalty kick that enabled Super Eagles to equalize and also allow play to restart accordingly without considering that a cross from Musa of Nigeria was handled by Markus Rojoh after he headed the ball to clear it. For majority of the viewers, it should have resulted to a penalty kick for Nigeria since it occurred in the penalty area of Argentina.
A pressure from Nigerian players on the field of player induced the referee to consider a VAR review. The Turkish referee, to the chargrin of Nigerians after due considerations ruled otherwise and allowed ball to play to continue from where it stooped.
In my capacity as the National Publicity Secretary, NPS, of the Nigeria Referees Association, NRA, observations and public reactions concerning the new soccer rules method, made it imperative to use this medium to highlight on the latest refereeing technique called VAR.
VAR was first tried in the United Soccer League in the United States during a match between two reserve teams of MLS clubs – New York Red Bulls II and Orlando City B – in August of 2016. It has since been brought in by the A-League in Australia and MLS itself.
In addition, FIFA has got a closer look at the system at a number of its international tournaments, such as last year’s Under-20 World Cup and Confederations Cup. Germany, Italy and Portugal introduced it for the 2017-18 seasons in their top-flight competitions, while the Copa Libertadores had VAR from the semi-final stage onwards in 2017.
However, it was officially use in England in November 2017 when the Three Lions faced Germany in a friendly, and then made its competitive debut on January 8 as Brighton & Hove Albion took on Crystal Palace in the FA Cup.
Its use in Major League Soccer has greatly impressed former Champions League and World Cup final referee Howard Webb. The use also tickled the retired referees who called for its trial in Russia
“We’ve been satisfied with the way it’s gone,” Webb told ESPN . “We always knew that it was a big undertaking for any competition that decides to implement VAR.
It was the successes record in its use that made the Referees Committee of FIFA under Piergulini Collina of Italy to consider it for the World Cup.
“It’s a big thing to implement, and a lot of work goes into both training our people and preparing our stadiums. Me personally, I’ve been really impressed by the way that’s been put together by MLS.”
FIFA president Gianni Infantino who approved its use in the World Cup was confident it will prove a positive addition to the tournament despite some of the criticism of its use at the Confederations Cup – more on that later – and reaffirmed his commitment to the system having seen it in action.
“Nothing is standing in the way of using VARs [at the World Cup], as far as I’m concerned,” Infantino said before the Confederations Cup final. “So far it has been successful. We are learning, we are improving, we are continuing the tests.”
He added: “Without the VARs, we would have had a different tournament. And a tournament which would have been a little less fair.”
Collina, the legendary referee in charge of FIFA referees, is also happy. “We are in a sort of work in progress,” the Italian said. “We see the very positive result we had but we are aware that we can improve. This is normal.”
The use of VAR at the World Cup was eventually confirmed in March, and Infantino believes that it will lead to a “more transparent and fairer” game.
FIFA’s rule-making panel approved the addition of video review to the laws of the game, following a trial period, clearing the way for its use at the World Cup.
The IFAB panel voted unanimously to begin updating the sport’s written rules to include video assistant referees (VAR) and let competition organizers ask to adopt it.
VAR, which can overturn a “clear and obvious error” involving goals, penalty awards, red cards and mistaken identity, has been used throughout the league season in many countries on a trial basis, including the Bundesliga, Serie A, Portugal’s Primeira Liga, MLS and the A-League. It has also just been introduced in Brazil and La Liga will use it next season.
“As of today, video assistant referees are part of football and this is certainly very important news,” said FIFA president Gianni Infantino, who chaired the meeting. “Together with our colleagues we have taken some very important decisions today.
“We had, as you can imagine, a very intense morning, fully aware of our responsibility to take an important decision for football.
“This topic was discussed and debated for decades. VAR is good for football, is good for refereeing, it brings more fairness in the game and, for these reasons, we have decided to approve VAR.”
An IFAB statement read: “This landmark meeting, chaired by FIFA President Gianni Infantino, represents a new era for football with video assistance for referees helping to increase integrity and fairness in the game.”
FIFA has already used the technology at the Club World Cup last December, and Infantino said a decision on VAR at the World Cup “will be taken at next FIFA Council meeting on March 16 in Bogota.”
So what is VAR?
VAR stands for video assistant referee. It is actually a team of three people who work together to review certain decisions made by the main referee by watching video replays of the relevant incidents.
That team is comprised of the video assistant referee himself (who will be a current or former referee), his assistant and a replay operator. They are situated in a video operation room which is essentially a bank of monitors offering different camera angles.
Four types of decisions can be reviewed using VAR: goals (and violations in the build-up to them), penalties, red cards and mistaken identity in awarding a card. For a decision made on the pitch to be overturned, it must be a “clear error”.
The process for reviewing a decision can work in two ways; either the referee can request a review after making a decision or the VAR team can recommend one. In the latter situation, if the VAR judges that there is the potential for a clear error to have been made he or she can notify the referee.
The referee then has three options: they can immediately overturn the call based on the VAR’s advice, review the incident themselves on a monitor on the touchline or stick with their initial decision.
Common Factors To Be Considered
When is VAR used?; Three main incidents (plus one administrative) have been identified as game-changing.
GOALS: The role of the VAR is to assist the referee to determine whether there was an infringement that means a goal should not be awarded. As the ball has crossed the line, play is interrupted so there is no direct impact on the game.
PENALTY DECISIONS: The role of the VAR is to ensure that no clearly wrong decisions are made in conjunction with the award or non-award of a penalty kick.
DIRECT RED CARD INCIDENTS: The role of the VAR is to ensure that no clearly wrong decisions are made in conjunction with sending off or not sending off a player.
MISTAKEN IDENTITY: The referee cautions or sends off the wrong player, or is unsure which player should be sanctioned. The VAR will inform the referee so that the correct player can be disciplined.
How does video assistant referee (VAR) work? STEP 1: Incident occurs .The referee informs the VAR, or the VAR recommends to the referee that a decision/incident should be reviewed.
STEP 2: Review and advice by the VAR. The video footage is reviewed by the VAR, who advises the referee via headset what the video shows.
STEP 3: Decision or action is taken. The referee decides to review the video footage on the side of the field of play before taking the appropriate action/decision, or the referee accepts the information from the VAR and takes the appropriate action/decision.
The laws of the game in the latest amendment in law 5: the referee has item 4 video assistant referee (VAR) it states as follows:
The use of video assistant referees (VARs) is only permitted where the match/ competition organizer has fulfilled all the VAR protocol and implementation requirements (as set out in the VAR Handbook) and has received written permission from The IFAB and FIFA.
The referee may be assisted by a video assistant referee (VAR) only in the event of a ‘clear and obvious error’ or ‘serious missed incident’ in relation to:
- goal/no goal
- penalty/no penalty
- direct red card (not second caution)
- mistaken identity when the referee cautions or sends off the wrong player of the offending team
The assistance from the video assistant referee (VAR) will relate to using replay(s) of the incident. The referee will make the final decision which may be based solely on the information from the VAR and/or the referee reviewing the replay footage directly (‘on-field review’).
Except for a ‘serious missed incident’, the referee (and where relevant other ‘on-field’, match officials) must always make a decision (including a decision not to penalize a potential offence); this decision does not change unless it is a ‘clear and obvious error’.
REVIEWS AFTER PLAY HAS RESTARTED
If play has stopped and restarted, the referee may only undertake a ‘review’, and take the appropriate disciplinary sanction, for mistaken identity or for a potential sending-off offence relating to violent conduct, spitting, biting or extremely offensive, insulting and/or abusive gesture(s).
Far from eliminating debate around refereeing decisions, however, the new system resulted in more discussion and controversy over officiating than would be expected as normal.
Overall, there has been good and bad moments for VAR – as it has come to be known – and it is sure to continue to be a talking point as the competition enters the knock out stages.
It is my humble pleasure that this piece will further enlighten non referees who may be at loss over the VAR issue that has opened a new vista in the rules guiding football officiating.
