Monday’s elite league spherical was additionally marked by VAR controversies. A latest survey exhibits that just one in 4 gamers within the Eliteserien consider that video refereeing in the present day is optimistic.
Tuesday 21 Could at 04:57
The quick model
- Nearly half of the elite league gamers consider that VAR is damaging for Norwegian soccer.
- The NISO gamers’ affiliation performed a survey which confirmed that 45.9% had a damaging expertise with VAR, 26.5% optimistic and 27.6% had no concept.
- The pinnacle of NISO, Kristoffer Paulsen Vatshaug, means that referees ought to specialize extra in VAR to enhance the system.
Sea view
– It is worrying that he cannot see it. He will get two probabilities to take action. Simply scrap this VAR-system if it could possibly’t see it on it. Then it will get tough.
Molde star Magnus Wolff Eikrem was devastated after Molde’s 2-4 loss to Sarpsborg 08 on Monday night.
Molde did not get the penalty which referee Marius Lien later conceded they need to have had. As a substitute, the away group got here ahead and determined the entire sport:
VAR didn’t appropriate a choice that was fallacious. Now Wolff Eikrem isn’t the one one who’s bored with the video referee.
The gamers’ affiliation NISO performed a survey among the many gamers within the Eliteserien in mid-April. The query was easy: What’s your expertise after the introduction of VAR?
The solutions:
- Constructive 26.5%
- Unfavorable 45.9%
- No concept 27.6%
So: About one in 4 gamers are optimistic about video referees. Nearly half of the respondents are damaging.
– It isn’t good to fret an excessive amount of about this. The gamers know that selections can go for and towards, it all the time is, the one query is whether or not VAR makes soccer higher or safer, says Kristoffer Paulsen Vatshaug, head of NISO.
head of NISO
The investigations additionally allowed the gamers to elaborate, in line with NISO. Listed here are a few of the responses to the nameless survey:
- “It is not adequate now, it must be developed additional.”
- “VAR is the best way now, the upside is larger than the upside”.
- “VAR is correct, however those that work with it have to be extra competent, each on the pitch and within the VAR room”.
- “Extra confidence that the choices might be fairer, however essential of the referee”.
- “It takes away the potential for spontaneity”.
– In our conversations with representatives from the participant teams in February and early March, we really feel that what’s written above can be constant, says Vatshaug.
The next is a suggestion for enchancment from the NISO supervisor:
– One of many calls was that the judges must be extra specialised. The very best referees ought to referee matches and VAR referees within the VAR room ought to specialize on this.
– Ought to VAR be placed on maintain till it really works higher?
– I’m very optimistic concerning the expertise. Then the query is whether or not we’re in a position to make use of the expertise correctly. Nearly everybody desires a completed line expertise. After which the query is: Do we want VAR? I do not know if the VAR system we now have in Norway ensures the functioning of the video games properly sufficient, Vatshaug discusses.
– Additionally it is necessary to contemplate whether or not VAR supplies higher referees in Norway or whether or not the assets may very well be used in a different way. One thing that might elevate the extent of judges in some departments and in each sexes, famous the pinnacle of NISO.
Henrik Udahl helped pour Bodø/Glimt on Monday. HamKam’s face has been concerned in lots of conditions and there are delicate drawbacks.
– I’m in favor of utilizing VAR for the proper factor. When it is marginal, particularly on the skin, then it is foolish. Then I feel you must let the decide’s resolution stand. The appropriate use of VAR might be good, however in the intervening time it’s not fairly optimum, Udahl tells VG.
It seems like you’re discussing the feedback from football players regarding Video Assistant Referee (VAR) technology. The statistics show a mixed response: 26.5% of players are constructive about VAR, while a significant 45.9% have unfavorable views, and 27.6% reported no specific opinion.
Kristoffer Paulsen Vatshaug, the head of NISO (Norwegian Players’ Union), emphasizes that players recognize the inherent unpredictability of referee decisions, which have always existed in football. The discussion around VAR centers on whether it enhances the quality and safety of the game.
From the players’ anonymous feedback, several key themes emerge:
- Need for Further Development: Many believe VAR is not yet sufficient and requires further improvement.
- Overall Positivity: Some players agree that VAR has the potential to be beneficial, outweighing its downsides.
- Competence of Officials: There is a strong suggestion that the officials must be more skilled, both on the field and in the VAR room.
- Fairness Concerns: Players express hope that VAR could increase fairness in decisions but remain critical of the referees.
- Impact on Spontaneity: There is concern that VAR affects the natural spontaneity of the game.
Vatshaug also mentions that during discussions with player representatives, these sentiments were echoed consistently.
A notable suggestion for improvement from the NISO manager advocates for specialization among officials, proposing that the best referees should focus on on-field officiating, while those in charge of VAR should hone their skills specifically for that role.
The concluding question seems to address whether VAR should be put on hold, hinting at ongoing debates about its implementation and efficacy in enhancing the game. The overall sentiment points towards a need for continuous assessment and refinement of the VAR system.