We have already been introduced to the VAR system for quite a while now. The debates about its usefulness can fill out tons of volumes. Especially about the delays that result from checking an instance over and over to make the correct ruling, particularly about players being in offside positions. Not to mention the clear and obvious errors that have been overlooked, leading to a consideration that even what is supposed to be neutral, can be manipulated by the powers that be. Now, FIFA has decided to release another such endeavor for those who cannot afford VAR. The Football Video Support.
The need for the cheaper system
It’s not only that Video Assistant Referee costs could a lot to install in the first place (more than 16 million dollars). It also needs a rather hefty cost of maintenance (1.5 million dollars). FIFA has received a lot of complaints about this from federations and national associations that simply cannot afford these amounts. In an effort to address the issue, the ruling body has decided to implement a much cheaper solution. Enter the Football Video Support.
In a few words, it deploys a number of cameras that can be used upon a challenge from the coach of a team in the same 4 instances as VAR. A possible goal or red card, a penalty, or a mistaken identity of a player that is disciplined. After a challenge is submitted the match is stopped under the same prerequisite condition as the Video Assistant Referee, and the instance is examined via video footage.
The objective is fairness
We used to say that the officials on the field were in a touch spot. They had to make split second decisions about various incidents during a match without the benefit of technology. Since it is also a fact that humans are made to err, wrong calls were more or less acceptable. However, now that they have the means to correct those errors, the question becomes inevitable. Are they too little?
The point is to make a football game to be played under the same rules for both sides. While it is true that VAR has contributed greatly to that effect, while the technological issues will be faced one way or the other in the future, the debate comes down to a different question. When technology can interfere at only 4 aspects of a match, is it really making it fairer?
The example of American Football
Why can’t VAR and FVS be adjusted to equal what’s happening during a match of American Football? First of all, the referee declares what was the call for any incident at all times. Then, every scoring situation is carefully scrutinized whether there is a suspicion that something was wrong or not. Lastly, the coaches can challenge just about every decision. Especially this last aspect is only covered through Football Video Support and only for the four aforementioned issues.
Perhaps the greatest difference lies on who has the final authority for the call. In American Football, any decision made on the field can be overturned by a decision from those who make the review. In both VAR and FVS, the final decision remains at the hands of the official on the pitch. And it is quite clear that this system has made the sport quite fair with only a few decisions being questioned for being correct or not.
The debate about football
Lately we have witnessed many occasions where the referees can actually manipulate Video Assistant Referee by actually not making specific calls during the game. Calls that pertain to issues that the system cannot interfere. And that adds fuel to the engine of those challenging the adequacy of the installation of such an expensive array. And there are plenty of suggestions on how it can become a lot better.
Ostensibly, the right to challenge any decision is not enough. Coaches must be able to protest a call that was not made and had an impact on the outcome. That’s the proposal where most people agree upon. Then, there is the suggestion of adding more sensors, similar to those used at goal lines, to determine immediately if a player is in an offside position, or if the ball has crossed any line. Lastly, more and more people are asking for intervention at more aspects of a match, to make it a lot fairer and take out human error as much as possible.
While it is rather certain that in the years to come, some, or all, of the suggestions above may come to pass, the fans and the bettors must always think that the sports that they are following are conducted in the purest manner possible. To open an account at any betting software carries with it the responsibility that there is no manipulation of the outcomes. Otherwise, people will just turn their backs and look for other sorts of entertainment.
