VAR is employed on a per competition basis. Fourth officials are used on a per competition basis. Displaying the amount of added time to a half is used on a per competition.
What this means is these are additions that are decided upon beforehand based on the competition (World Cup, Gold Cup, Euros, FA, Champions league, etc.)
They are not FIFA laws or even suggestions. Otherwise VAR would have to be used for every under 8 game in Botswana.
The World Cup is directly under the auspices of FIFA (because it’s an international competition) so they will govern the rules for things like VAR. Whereas the FA Cup, for example, is run by the FA which is responsible for deciding on things like VAR or a goal-line camera. The FA’s decisions on these things much of course work under FIFA’s Laws of the Game but they are additions on a per competition (or per league) basis. They are not changes to the Laws.
The VAR protocol, as far as possible, conforms to the principles and philosophy of the Laws of the Game.
The use of video assistant referees (VARs) is only permitted where the match/competition organiser has fulfilled all the Implementation Assistance and Approval Programme (IAAP) requirements as set out in FIFA’s IAAP documents, and has received written permission from FIFA.
[Bolding mine]
As you can see here, VAR rules are not part of the Laws but must “confirm to the principles and philosophy of the Laws of the Game”. The VAR rules have to conform to the Laws or else they aren’t legal.
But again: we can see that VAR is not part of the Laws because it is not used at every level of the game (youth to professional).
The interplay between the Laws of the game overall and various league or tournament rules is complicated and opaque. I’ll admit it is difficult to follow and be sure about.
These are a bit like how various (criminal & civil) legal decisions help set precedent for future decisions but these interpretations are not added to the Laws… the Laws don’t change.
You are correct. I didn’t know that VAR had been added to the Laws and the other cite I looked up (see last post) indicated by its language that it wasn’t. It’s a bit of a surprise to me. Thanks for bringing it up.
Soccer timekeeping is weird. It’s kind of like Schrodinger’s cat, in that it’s both continuously running, and not. On the one hand, there’s a totally public 45 minute clock that ticks up, that everyone can see, which absolutely never stops for anything.
And people love it! How many people in this thread have mentioned how much the absolutely continuous nature of the clock is something truly fundamental to the nature of soccer?
But, if there was a continuously running clock, then that would open the game up to all sorts of abuse, where players could waste time by feigning injuries, taking forever to take throw-ins, celebrating after goals, etc.
But, fortunately, that’s not an issue, because the officials note this and add stoppage time. So, nothing there to worry about. The clock is certainly NOT continuously running when that would be bad.
Do any of the Old Soccer Fans hate hate hate that now we get informed how many minutes of stoppage time there are? Did that ruin the game? Did that cause riots? Because, honestly, all that’s being proposed here is a more precise version of that. (Assuming that there’s still official’s discretion as to when to literally blow the whistle, and they wouldn’t do so during an attacking opportunity, within reason.)
It’s not a big enough thing to worry about. I don’t know any actual or professional soccer players who do. The fact the approximate time is posted is good, gives the crowd some idea and largely prevents abuse or large error. If you want the time to be very specific, say you are the type of bloke who gets mad if you put $50.02 in the tank by mistake, this will cause the 1978 situation to occur more often since time will sometimes run out just as scoring opportunities are present. It is not an important enough detail to much concern me. I don’t think think think of it at all. But I also don’t think anyone who plays really considers this to be a problem in need of a complex solution.
I personally think soccer timekeeping is dumb, and would like to change it, but not to “game ends at time X no matter the situation”. Instead, I think there should be some level of objectivity/transparency in how stoppage time is calculated, when it’s being added, etc.
I don’t really have an opinion one way or the other about whether rolling-on-the-ground-and-being-slow-to-get-up should or should not eat time off the clock. I think it’s just ridiculous that no one actually knows or can know or is even allowed to ask or discuss it.
All of that said, I do like the “once the official has decided it is time for the game end, it is entirely in their discretion when to actually blow the whistle, and they almost always wait for a moment when there is not an attack imminent” approach. But there’s no reason you can’t have that along with vastly more transparency into what does and does not cause stoppage time, and how much.
Well, both NFL and rugby union can play past the point when time expires. They are allowed to finish the ‘play’ provided is started before the clock runs out (rugby union is a bit different in how it describes ‘continuity of the play’, but basically it’s the same deal - play until the ball is dead.
But in soccer there are long periods where a team may be in possesion 80 yards from scoring, and it is possible to score in a continuous ‘play’ that could last 3-4 minutes, without the ball ever being dead. And the opposition can take the ball off them and they could score - still without play coming to a halt or the ball being dead.
I don’t think a ref in soccer would let the losing team slowly work the ball from their side of the pitch to the other over several minutes after stoppage time ends. I just meant an active attack, like how it sounds rugby does it.
I don’t think losing teams slowly work the ball forward much anyway during stoppage time. It feels in my mind more like a power play situation in hockey, where most of the action takes place closer to the goal of the team that’s ahead, and the pace may be a little more frantic than normal play.