VAR could be installed at Haverfordwest County AFC stadium
A CALL to site VAR Video Assistant Referee cameras and works at Haverfordwest County AFC's football ground has been submitted to Pembrokeshire planners.
In the application to Pembrokeshire County Council, the Football Association of Wales seeks permission for the installation of a VAR video operations room and associated works at Bridge Meadow Stadium, Bridge Meadow, Haverfordwest.
A supporting statement through agent Wardell Armstrong says: 'The Football Association Wales has recognised opportunities to strengthen, improve and build the standard of football and the image associated with Wales's top football league.
'The launch of the Cymru Premier Strategy 2024-2030 has detailed plans to improve the standard of the Cymru Premier League's club facilities, brands, and awareness, alongside strengthening the Cymru Premier 'on pitch' product over a six-year period.
'The implementation of VAR as part of this plan will allow referees to perform at the highest possible level, providing quality decision-making to benefit players, fans and television audiences.'
It says VAR 'comprises of a Video Assistant Referee who is a qualified official that watches video footage of the game with access to multiple screens, angles and replays with the purpose of assisting the on-field officials to come to the correct decision,' adding: 'VAR is used globally, currently assisting referees in associated football leagues of over 70 countries to minimise the risk of human error and to enable the referee to make the correct decision using video technology.
'VAR Light will be deployed in the Cymru Premier from season 2025/2026 covering all Cymru Premier matches. VAR Light works on the same principles as VAR – with a Video Assistant Referee but without a replay operator.'
It goes on to say: 'Imagery from VAR camera installations will be sent to a self-contained Video Operations Room, where the VAR will be situated. The match referee will undertake any recommended on-field reviews in a designated Referee Review Area adjacent to the pitch, where a monitor will be installed on match days.
'A review of the infrastructure at the Ogi Bridge Meadow Stadium has concluded that the Video Operations Room cannot be provided within existing buildings and as such it will be necessary to provide new additional accommodation.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Courier
5 hours ago
- The Courier
Dundee and VAR: Willie Collum insists ref was right on Ross County penalty that relegated St Johnstone
Willie Collum says Nick Walsh was right to award the penalty kick that denied Dundee a crucial victory over Ross County and relegated St Johnstone. Heading into stoppage time in the penultimate fixture of the season, the Dark Blues were leading 1-0 at Dens Park. A win would see the Dee safe from relegation and would also give Saints the opportunity to overtake the Staggies on the final day. However, ref Nick Walsh controversially punished Antonio Portales for handball and Ronan Hale equalised from the spot. The decision was branded 'an absolute disgrace'. However, head of refereeing Collum has backed his official. In the monthly VAR Review from the SFA on YouTube, audio from the incident has been released. After the ball brushed Portales's arm, VAR Andrew Dallas said: 'I need to check that.' Referee Nick Walsh: 'Penalty. Handball. I think the arm is above shoulder height.' VAR: 'Slight touch on his head and then it hits off the hand. VAR: 'Nick, it's Andrew. We're just going to check the APP (attacking phase of play). Just to tell you his team-mate's headed it and [Portales] has his back to him. 'But the arm is above the head, above shoulder height. It's close proximity but it does hit his hand and it's above shoulder height. 'There's no impact from the attacker on the defender. 'Confirming on-field decision of penalty kick. Check complete.' Willie Collum defended the decision but admitted interpretation of the handball law may change for next season. He said: 'We have listened to a lot of the perception of the decision. I won't ever just defend decisions in this show. 'I'll be open and transparent. 'In terms of the laws of the game, this is a correct interpretation because the arm is far too high above the head. 'The referee is right in his judgement to award the penalty kick. 'There is nothing in the law to say it should be ruled out. It says that anybody with an arm high in the air runs the risk of being punished. 'The referee was very clear, the VAR discuss the situation so when that is clarified there is no reason to bring the referee to the monitor here. 'People have said that but why? 'In terms of law this season, that is a correct interpretation. 'I would say we think we are in a better place in terms of handball. We looked at a lot of clips from last season to learn. This is a clip we need to look at again. 'We have a lot of discussion post-season with this kind of incident. 'There's a possibility next season [it isn't given]. We will listen to people's views. There are a lot of ifs and buts but in terms of law nobody can say that isn't given.' The VAR Review also covered two other controversial decisions that went against the Dark Blues. Collum admitted he was 'disappointed' in VAR's process to review a push by Kilmarnock's Kyle Vassell on Simon Murray not because it was a foul but because it was outside the area. Another involving Antonio Portales proved far more controversial. The Mexican had already volleyed in one beauty against Motherwell and struck another into the top corner to put Dundee 2-0 up. However, offside was given against Clark Robertson in the build-up, a decision then-Dee boss Tony Docherty blasted as a 'disgrace'. Again Collum backed the decision but admitted the referee should have been brought to the monitor to review it personally. He said: '[Clark Robertson] comes out to challenge the Motherwell player and moves his leg to challenge. Making that challenging motion, that was enough for the VAR team to say this was impact. 'We shared this clip far and wide. The KMI panel looked at it in detail, we looked at it with the referees. 'It was probably 60-40 in favour of offside. That means we want to review it, look at it in the close season with the clubs, players and coaches as well as the match officials to think about our direction of travel moving forward. 'We are content with the decision. Where we are not content is the process. Categorically, the referee should have been brought to the monitor. 'This is not a factual decision. It is factual that the player is offside, but subjective whether he impacts the move. 'That should be left to the on-field match official.'
The National
11 hours ago
- The National
Collum explains key decision that went Celtic's way vs Rangers
The Irish striker thought he levelled up the match in the second half, only to see the linesman's flag raised as he wheeled away in celebration. After communication with VAR, however, a factual overturn was recommended, and Brendan Rodgers' men equalised. Read more: Initially, an offside was given for Daizen Maeda's run in behind Rangers' backline. The Japanese forward was also subsequently the subject of another check for perhaps obstructing Liam Kelly's view. There was adjudged to have been no wrongdoing, though, and the goal was given. "It's the correct decision for us in the end," said Collum on the SFA's VAR review show. "The first offside is what the assistant referee is punishing. He believes that the Celtic player who is out wide is in an offside position. That is not the case. "There's a correct delay [of the flag] to allow the move to come to a natural conclusion. "A goal is then scored. Then they award the initial offside out wide. The VAR quickly checks that and come to the conclusion it's onside. "I want to mention again we would prefer these decisions are correct on field, but VAR is there for that reason. "Then there is good on-field comms from the referee because he mentions that there is a potential second offside. I think it's the Rangers goalkeeper who also claims for that. The VAR are then allowed the opportunity to check that. "You can see they come to a conclusion, correctly, that there is no impact in any line of vision. "This is a factual overturn, and there is no need for the referee to come to the monitor here. "We're really pleased with that."
Glasgow Times
a day ago
- Glasgow Times
Collum admits 'good chance' ball over line in Rangers goal incident
The Scottish FA referee chief conceded that Nico Raskin's effort at Easter Road may have crossed the line before being cleared by Rocky Bushiri. This incident was followed by a lengthy VAR check after Hibs had raced up the park and equalised. However, Collum supported the decision not to award the goal due to the lack of a definitive camera angle proving the ball was over the line. In a candid discussion on the VAR Review show, Collum suggested the ball was likely in but defended the VAR and AVAR for adhering to protocol amidst criticism for their handling of similar situations in the past. Collum said: "Let's go back to two incidents this season first—Hibs vs Celtic, possible ball over the line, and Dundee United vs Hibs, possible handball before it goes into the goal. "We were criticised for both of those decisions, and rightly so, because ultimately, there was no conclusive evidence. "I know people who would look at this decision and say 'that camera angle, for me, is conclusive.' "But the reality is, that camera angle is at an angle looking in the way, there's nothing directly in line there." He referenced a similar incident from a World Cup match, where an angled camera shot suggested the ball was over the line, but a direct view proved otherwise. He continued: "Can the VAR and the AVAR there categorically, 100 per cent, say the ball was over the line? "Not for us. "Do I think it crossed the line? "I think there's a good chance it did. "But can I be absolutely certain of that? "No." Collum acknowledged the challenging nature of the situation, noting the difficulty in making a definitive call as the ball was off the ground in the final frame before being cleared. He said: "What doesn't help in this scenario is that the ball is not on the ground. "I think you could make a call here if the ball was on the ground, well over, there was loads of grass between it. "In terms of that camera angle, in terms of the ball being mid-air, can we be 100 per cent? "We don't think we can be."
