Rohit Saggi says that the referees could use the TV screen in the stadium more often last year. This year the list for that will be lowered.
Fredrikstad
Tuesday 2 April at 12:26 p.m
The short version
- The use of TV screens in the stadium can be used more often in the Eliteserien this year, according to referee Rohit Saggi.
- Norway has had the lowest VAR involvement in Europe, according to Saggi, which can change with a new instruction.
- 32-year-old Saggi nevertheless believes it was a mistake by VAR to send him to the sidelines to study TV images during Fredrikstad-Bodø/Glimt.
View more
The can mean more interruptions in the game in the Eliteserien, which VAR opponents are unlikely to be satisfied with.
– If you look at the UEFA countries, Norway is the lowest in terms of numbers “interventions”VAR interference. It means that we have been good on the pitch, it’s fair to say, but referees have been a little too good at supporting each other. The times we made mistakes last year, we could have used screens more often, says Saggi after Bodø/Glimt’s 2-0 win in Fredrikstad.
He reveals the following about the new instruction:
– When the rules are clear and you have clear pictures, then the VAR judge should not look for reasons to support his friend. Then we have to be loyal, then we have to be shown on screen, says Saggi.
By “his friend” he means the head judge.
The 32-year-old, who refereed Fredrikstad – Bodø/Glimt in the series opener, still believes it was wrong for VAR to send him to the sidelines to study TV images at Fredrikstad Stadium.
Saggi picked up the yellow card for Stian Stray Molde for illegally stopping Nino Zugelj in the first half. In the VAR room, it was believed that the FFK defender prevented an obvious scoring chance, and that he should therefore have been sent off.
– In that situation, VAR believed that there were enough criteria, and that there were “clear and obvious” images, that it was a red card, says Saggi.
– I spar with them, and say that I don’t see any new criteria other than those I have already assessed. For me, this is not “clear and obvious”, so I choose to stand my ground. “Yes, but then you do it,” is the message I get back, says the judge.
The situation took almost two minutes for Saggi to assess.
– It is very important that you use the time you need. If I had rushed, I might have been more loyal to the recommendation, says Saggi when asked if it is right to spend so much time on the situation.
– In the evaluation, we will discuss whether it is enough to go on screen, and then I think we will jointly come to the conclusion that it is not.
