Chamber setting: how the video replay system works and how much it costs at the World Championships. How the video replay system will change Russian football

New precedent

In the France-Spain friendly match at the Stade de France, chief referee Felix Zweier twice used the video replay system. Decisions made on the basis of technical conclusions radically influenced the course and final score of the meeting.

Firstly, Zweier canceled Griezmann's goal due to offside, in which the French forward's partner, Laven Kurzawa, was.

Secondly, the referee counted the ball from Spaniard Gerard Deulofeu, although the linesman signaled for offside. It took 40 seconds to make the final decision.

In both cases, Zweier was given tips by his compatriot, the famous referee of the 90s Helmut Krug, who worked behind special video equipment. Spain won away - 2:0.

Where it all began

Last year, the International Football Association Board (IFAB) made a number of changes to the rules of football. The main change is the introduction of the VAR (video assistant referee) system. The technical element is designed to assist the main referees in making decisions on four controversial issues: goals scored, deletions, penalties and determining the degree of guilt of the football player who should receive punishment.

The system was first tested in a United Soccer League match between American and Canadian clubs. A month later, in September, VAR was used in a friendly match between Italy and France. In particular, the referee had to make a request for technical assistance in the episode when the Italians appealed that the Frenchman Kurzawa played with his hand after De Rossi's kick.

“You may have noticed that the match referee stopped the game for a few seconds, during which time the specialists in charge of video replays checked whether it was worth giving a penalty. We witnessed a historic moment in football. The calendar is 2016, so it’s time to try,” concluded Gianni Infantino, FIFA President.

How VAR works

In order for VAR to function fully, the stadium must be equipped with a huge number of cameras - to clearly depict the controversial episode from many angles. Special video referees work with the system. The main referee of the match has two options to choose from - receive a direct hint or independently view and evaluate the episode using a device that visually resembles an iPad. True, for this the referee must approach the edge of the field in the area of ​​the center line.

Now, as part of the experiment, two schemes are being worked out: 1) the main arbiter asks for help; 2) the video referee independently signals an error. An option in which each team has a certain number of possibilities for requesting a video replay - in the future.

First failure

VAR was actively used during the 2016 Club World Cup. And if in the match between the Colombian Atlético Nacional and the Japanese Kashima, Victor Kashshai worked accurately with the video assistant, then the next day there was an embarrassment.

“Real” played against Mexican “America” and won – 2:0. But! During stoppage time, Cristiano Ronaldo scored the second goal and celebrated it in his signature style. The chief referee pointed to the center of the field. While the Mexicans were preparing to play the ball, the video referee intervened, who suspected that KR7 had scored from offside and reported this to the main referee. For a minute there was nervous anticipation in the stadium. In the end, another review of the episode proved the assumption wrong and Ronaldo's legitimate goal was returned.

After the match, Zinedine Zidane, the head coach of Real Madrid, criticized the video replay system, and Luka Modric said that such a technical innovation has nothing to do with football.

VAR prospects

More than ten football leagues almost immediately agreed to test the system. In particular, the English are going to work on VAR in the FA Cup and League Cup matches. We will also see the video assistant in some MLS matches this season. The new product will appear in the German Bundesliga starting with the 2017/18 season. Well, the climax will come in 2018. Gianni Infantino really wants to use VAR at World Cup matches in Russia.

The VAR test at the 2018 World Cup was successful. “One month is a normal flight” is the meaning of FIFA’s official opinion. But does everyone have such an unambiguously positive attitude towards VAR? Let’s not get too far ahead of ourselves, but will tell you everything in order: how VAR arose, how VAR was tested, and about its future in big-time football and beyond.

VAR system: what it is and how it works

The VAR system, or we will also denote it by the international English abbreviation VAR (VideoAssistant Referee - video assistant referee system, video assistant referee), is a new technology in football that helps the referee on the field make decisions in controversial game situations thanks to video replays.

The VAR system consists of a set of video cameras that transmit video to monitor screens, which are located in a separate room, where specially trained people (assistants) view the recording. The need for help may arise:

• at the request of the referee if a controversial moment occurs in the game;
• at the initiative of the assistants themselves, if they detect a violation on the screens that the referee did not notice. In this case, they notify the referee via earpiece.

Here is a list of questions for clarification of which, according to the developers’ idea, it is advisable to seek help from the VAR system:

• How was the goal scored and was there a violation that preceded it?
• Has there been a serious foul that should (or should not) result in a penalty?
• Was the decision made regarding sending a player off the field correctly?
• Who broke the rules and who should be punished?

How VAR was tempered

Perhaps one day we will find out the real name of the inventor of the VAR system. Today, all that is known is that the Spaniard Francisco Lopez has claimed the rights to develop a project for the use of video replays. He claims that back in 1999 he submitted the corresponding idea to the Spanish ministry, and hopes to receive royalties from FIFA for its use.

The introduction of the VAR system in football is reminiscent of our era of domestic voluntary-compulsory computerization of the 1990s: a lot of opponents, even more skeptics, a tenth of supporters and a few enthusiasts. But the reality is that technology is conquering the world, including football. Not joining the revolution means being left out of the game. Therefore, even UEFA, which until recently resisted the use of the VAR system, in the person of its president Aleksandar Čeferin, recognized the inevitability of the process, although not so soon and only after a careful study of the experience of the 2018 World Cup.

World Cup 2018 under the sign of the VAR system

On its official website, FIFA proudly reports on the results of using the VAR system at the 2018 World Cup in Russia:

• 64 matches;
• 20 controversial situations resolved using the VAR system;
• 455 incidents viewed on video replays (average 7.1 views per match).

FIFA curator for promoting the VAR project in football Zvonimir Boban, as well as FIFA President Gianni Infantino himself, did not hide their satisfaction with the implementation of the VAR video arbitration system at the World Cup. They personally and FIFA as a whole were pleased to see it widely accepted by players, coaches and football fans at the 2018 World Cup, as well as by the press.

But “widespread acceptance” does not mean complete unanimity. The network is full of skeptical assessments of the operation of the VAR system, both from football fans of the 2018 World Cup and from well-known personalities in the world of football. The most picky critics are sure that the new video replay technology had a negative impact on the outcome of the final match of the World Cup. And they have good reason.

Let us at least remember the match between Spain and Russia. Having seen the handball of the Spanish player Pique on the video replay, the referee awarded a penalty against the Spanish team, which equalized the score and became the basis for a series of post-match penalties. Or the final match between the national teams of France and Croatia, where again the ball hitting the hand of the Croatian Perisic was interpreted by the judge after watching the video replay as a gross violation of the rules and grounds for a penalty kick. All the same, football experts believe, this was the final match, and it was impossible to award such a very controversial penalty in it.

Many fear that paying close attention to technical details and viewing the game under a microscope (that is, under video cameras) could lead to the destruction of what makes billions of people interested in the sport - the “beauty” of football. One can only imagine football players running around the field in straitjackets so that their hands do not accidentally hit the ball and the VAR system does not change the fate of the match!

However, there is one issue that, following the results of the 2018 World Cup, does not cause controversy either among football fans or professionals, including referees. This is the use of the VAR system to combat malingerers. Brazilian Neymar became the first player in the history of the championships to be caught cheating and unsportsmanlike behavior, and his frequent falls on the field became a meme. In such cases, video replay technology can serve as a good service in the name of fair play like nothing else.

The International Football Federation (FIFA) has already announced that the VAR (video assistant referee) system will be used at the 2018 World Cup, but errors with its use have not stopped. “Sport Day by Day” spoke with a FIFA referee, who in 2013-2016 held the position of deputy head of the RFU refereeing and inspection department, who has been working at Lokomotiv as a team manager since February 2017, Stanislav Sukhina, to find out the usefulness of video assistance in modern football.

─ Are you for or against the VAR system?
─ In general, I’m in favor. It involves avoiding obvious mistakes by referees. There are situations when a judge sees an episode from the wrong angle and makes an erroneous decision, which greatly affects the result and outcome of the championship. This is important because there is more money at stake. If previously three rubles were played out, now we are talking about millions. The price of a mistake can cost you getting into the Champions League, and this is already a loss of 20-30 million euros.

The purpose of the VAR system is clear - so that the referee’s actions do not affect the result, but it is still crude. It’s not clear what to watch, how much to watch. It is also important that the final decision is still made by a person. The referee is sitting at the controls. And there are “gray” situations that five people will watch, but will not make an unambiguous decision on the episode.

─ Do you have an understanding of which specific controversial issues require watching on repeat?
─ The most important thing today is scoring goals. We do not take into account the system that is already in use, Goal-Line Technology. This is the simplest thing that defines an automaton. The second point is whether there was a violation of the rules when the goal was scored. Here, too, it is not clear at what point you need to watch the replay. Suddenly there was a violation in the middle of the field, and the goal happened only 10 seconds later. Is this worth rewinding or not? Until the end, no one gives an answer to this question. The VAR system is damp. The Confederations Cup confirmed this. There were situations when the referee looked at obvious moments, showing his beautiful gesture that he would watch the screen. At the same time, the judge ignored the more necessary moments. The offside rule is also difficult to watch even on replay. There are different situations that cannot be clearly defined. So for now it’s all a bit complicated.

─ How do you feel about the idea, like in tennis, that each team, say, has three opportunities to request a replay?
─ How correct this is will only be determined experimentally. Using three attempts, you can skip the fourth ─ the most obvious and understandable moment. The team has already used its replays, which means that again the wrong decision of the referee will affect the fate of the game.

─ Does the VAR system make the work of referees easier? Maybe it relieves a certain burden of responsibility?
─ We started working with this system, tried something, but not in Russian championship matches. That is, where the hype and the cost of a mistake will cost less. In any case, the referee makes several dozen decisions per game, in addition to those when he uses video replay. It is wrong to think that technology will allow the referee to relax and run around a little just to break a sweat. All the same, the responsibility remains on the shoulders of the judges; the approach to matches must be serious. It is dangerous to rely only on the video replay system. The main thing is that during the match there is no noticeable bias in the arbitration in one direction. The judge must maintain a balance in the interpretation of episodes for both teams. Then difficult moments with the same goal will be perceived by teams more adequately.

─ During testing (almost three years have passed), technical errors in the operation of VAR systems have already been repeatedly identified. Either the offside line was drawn unevenly, or the connection between the video assistant and the main referee was lost. Even the automatic goal detection system malfunctioned. Is football ready to introduce new technologies or should it wait?
─ I don’t think we need to sit still and wait for an ideal system that will protect us one hundred percent from mistakes. We are at a time when all this is being tested. Now football is going through these mistakes. In Italy, demonstrations by fans even began, in the opinion of whom this system unfairly took away points from the team. We follow the path of experimentation, so mistakes are inevitable. I would like for us to get by with little blood and football not to lose the entertainment and interest that it already has, and that with the help of new technologies the game will become cleaner and less dependent on one referee’s whistle.

SE expert on refereeing issues - about various technologies used during the experiment with video referees, their cost and possibility of use in Russia

Judging by the controversy that has unfolded in football circles over the experiment with video assistant referees (VARs), not everyone understands what the new technologies used during tests in different countries and tournaments are. Let's talk about the details of the innovation.

WHAT EQUIPMENT IS REQUIRED

Very little is needed to carry out the tests.

1. Cameras of the main broadcaster who has entered into a contract with the organization hosting the tournament. It is clear that two or three points are not enough to provide the required number of video repetitions made from different angles. In Italy, for example, they count on a minimum of eight.

2. Communication system for communication between the video assistant/video assistants and the referee.

3. Software and hardware provided by the seller or creator of a particular VAR system. With their help, game episodes are analyzed at the final stage.

4. Some of the developers offer their cameras in addition to those installed by the main broadcaster.

WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP LEGACY

None of the above can go to the Russian Football Union for free after the end. The cameras will, of course, remain with the broadcaster. But you have to pay for equipment and technology. Perhaps with some kind of discount. But pay.

We will only get experience for free. And only if our referees are among the judges of the tournament.

So far the brigade is on the list. But if in the new season they start using him only in the first division and do not return him to the Premier League, the referee will instantly lose international practice and the opportunity to work at the 2018 World Cup.

DEVELOPERS

Several systems have already been created in the world, proposed for use or already used in tests with video assistants. Someone (like, for example) preferred Hawk Eye (Smart Replay). The same developers supply equipment and programs for goal detection systems (GLT - goal line technology), which have long been used at major tournaments and in leading leagues in Europe.

Who- That chose Broadcast Solutions (Video Referee), Colosseo, Chyron Hego (Tracab), EVS (Xeebra), Evertz…

There are enough offers. Because there is demand. In tennis, handball, rugby, volleyball, hockey, American football. Interest in football is gradually increasing.

Let me remind you that at first tests began to be carried out at tournaments held in the USA, Holland, Australia, Brazil, Germany and Portugal. In 2017, VAR services began to be used in FIFA (Junior World Cup in Korea, in Russia, Club World Cup in the UAE), Australia (in the final matches of the A-League), Belgium (in the match for the country's Super Cup), Brazil (in the final games championship of one of the states), France (in the play-offs of teams of the second and third divisions), Germany (in all matches of the 2017/18 championship), Italy (at the youth team tournament), Holland (in the Cup final and play-offs), Poland ( in the Super Cup match), Portugal (in the Cup final), Korea (in several K-League matches), USA (in 25 matches in one of the lower divisions), as well as in friendly matches France - Spain, France - Paraguay, Italy - Uruguay , France - England.

The federations of the Czech Republic, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey also expressed their desire to participate in the experiment.

We, unlike others, are going to go our own way: to take not one match (cup final), not the entire tournament (championship or championship), not four games (play-offs, between leagues), but one stadium where 15 home matches will take place in the Russian Premier League. I wonder what FIFA will say to this?

HOW IT WORKS

There are technical differences, but in general the whole chain works as follows. The broadcaster is broadcasting. The operator uses a television camera to record the match. Information is transmitted in real time to the server/servers. The user (video assistant) or users (video assistants) monitor the broadcast and analyze recordings of controversial episodes. The referee, if necessary, views the replays on the pitchside monitor.

System capabilities vary. But, I think, if you wish, you can discuss any “filling” with the developer. Modern versions allow you to save a recording for later analysis or erase it immediately after the end of the match or after a short time. You can create short videos and share them with many users. Some allow you to study a controversial episode, including in three-dimensional space.

There are many nuances. Each of the proposed systems should be studied, and then, if necessary, modified and adjusted to suit the video assistants’ own requirements and requests.

PRICE

According to representatives of Hawk Eye, their GLT (the goal detection system used by FIFA) is much more expensive than those products that have already been developed for VAR. And, they say, since the first has been used in football for a long time, there is no need to think long about introducing the second.

According to our British colleagues, the installation of goal detection systems in the Premier League cost approximately five million pounds. The arithmetic is simple. It cost £250,000 to install 14 cameras (seven per goal) at each of the 20 stadiums. The pleasure is not cheap, considering that every season there are fewer controversial issues related to the need to understand whether the ball has crossed the “ribbon” than there are fingers on both hands (and often on one).

The approximate cost range for introducing new VAR technologies, which will be useful in every match, is from one to three million euros. For the entire championship. For example, Portugal, Malaysia, Italy or Germany.

He said about ten million. This amount seems inflated, but the RFU president did not explain how it was formed.

WHAT IS THE PRICE COMPOSED OF?

It is clear that considerable costs will be incurred on the equipment and software supplied by the developer of the VAR technology.

But it is also necessary to take into account the costs of those who will directly participate in the experiment. We are talking about judges and technical specialists who will have to be involved during the tests.

And, of course, you need to spend money on those who will train arbitrators, if these costs are not included in the package offered by the developer.

DEADLINES

VAR is an innovation that our referees have not encountered. You cannot decide today to use video assistants and then immediately start testing in the Russian Championship tomorrow.

In Holland, for example, they first trained video referees, depriving them of communication with the referee on the field. Two or three people sat in a minibus, stuffed with special equipment, and carefully watched the game, noting all controversial issues and decisions of the referee. After the match, this kind of viewing team came to the referee's room and shared the collected information with the team of referees, analyzing specific episodes.

After a while, having received the appropriate experience and permission from FIFA, the Dutch launched tests online. In this case, VARs finally had the opportunity to contact the referee and give him advice and advice.

WORKPLACES

In our country they managed to come up with a name for the place where the VAR work - “secret room”. And decide that this is one of the rooms in the stadium.

In fact, the workplaces of video assistants can be located anywhere - in a mobile television station near the arena, in a minibus on a treadmill near the field, in the office of the football federation, and even in the SE editorial office. There would be a desire and technical capabilities.

Developers of VAR technologies, as a rule, propose the creation of two, maximum three, workplaces - that is, they provide the possibility of simultaneous operation of two or three video assistants.

According to my information, there is a certain secret room at the UEFA headquarters in Nyon, Switzerland. But it is used not to host video assistants (UEFA does not intend to use them yet), but to watch matches of its tournaments (for national teams and clubs). The appropriate technique allows you to see this or that moment in detail and give an assessment to the judge. This is probably where his deputies often watch football from there.

PARTICIPANTS

In addition to the referees and their video assistants, technical specialists may or may participate in the tests. Ideally, as the product developers say, the video referee should not need or depend on the broadcast director. He must be able to independently select the necessary repetition, a recording made from the desired angle, process it and draw a conclusion. However, someone may need an assistant - a technical expert who will respond to VAR requests and work with the recording, performing the actions necessary for the video assistant.

It is clear that in such a situation the cost of tests will increase, since it will be necessary to attract additional participants.

Initially, it was said that the judging panel would include one or two video referees. However, at the Junior World Championships in Korea and the Confederations Cup in Russia, their number was increased to three.

Responsibilities among the VARs were distributed as follows. The second video assistant was responsible for studying episodes related to offside determination. And the first assistant monitored the correctness of actions in other moments - the assignment of penalty kicks, the removal of players, and the scoring of goals. While he was busy watching the video, he was protected by a third specialist from the video team, who continued to monitor the television broadcast.

FIFA was trying to kill two birds with one stone in this way. Firstly, keeping the 2018 World Championship in mind, I tried to give practice to as many judges as possible. Secondly, it sought to test the feasibility of increasing the number of VARs.

As far as I understand, in most countries only a referee working at championship matches can become a video referee. In the case of Russia, a referee of the highest group allowed to officiate at Premier League meetings (excluding assistants). But in Korea, they decided to use veterans as VARs - three dozen former referees who know modern interpretations of the rules of the game.

Of course, the psychological compatibility of the referee with his video assistants and the ability to understand each other are important, even if the test participants represent different countries and English is not their native language. According to my data, during the Confederations Cup situations arose when, under stress, the judges could not explain themselves properly. And it happened that the video referees did not help, but rather prevented the referee from doing his job on the field as he saw fit.