After the DFB boss reinhard grindel put his foot down, the german soccer association has made further improvements to its secret modification of the video evidence and formulated clear guidelines for the future.
"The video assistant is not a referee. The referee has the say on the pitch – and that will not change," grindel told the deutsche presse-agentur on friday.
After an internal debate, referee boss lutz michael frohlich apologized in another letter to the clubs for the "misleading formulations" in last week’s letter that had caused irritation and raised questions, according to the german football association (DFB).
In the letter to the bundesliga clubs dated 25. In october, the DFB announced in agreement with the german soccer league that, contrary to the guidelines laid down before the start of the season, the video assistant would in future also intervene when there was no clear error of judgment on the part of the referee.
This caused a stir at the association’s headquarters in frankfurt, because grindel had not been informed about it. "This letter was not coordinated with me. I’m not happy about it," he told NDR info. The DFB had not informed the clubs until five weeks after the controversial course correction, which had already been made in mid-september after the 5. Game day was made, informed.
"The letter to the bundesliga clubs is worded in an unfortunate way," grindel complained on friday. "I assume that essentially nothing will change with regard to the use of the video assistant. It remains the case that the referee makes the decisions on the green pitch."
This was confirmed by the DFB in a press release in the evening. "Even if there is an intervention by the video assistant, the final decision remains responsibly with the referee," it said. The task of the video assistant is to "prevent the referee from making clearly wrong decisions or to assist him in incidents that happen outside his field of vision.".
Only if the referee makes errors of perception in decisive and close situations, which also influence the result of a match, should the colleague in front of the screen intervene and draw the referee’s attention to them. "As a kind of human safety net," as grindel put it.
In the case of subjective decisions such as the assessment of match incidents, e.G. In the case of duels or handball, the video assistant should only intervene if the referee’s decision seriously contradicts the available visual material. After an exchange of impressions, the final decision on the matter "ultimately rests with the referee alone".
Bundesliga coaches had recently increasingly missed a clear line in the use of the video assistant. "I think there’s a lot still wrong with video evidence, it’s far from being the justice tool that was widely touted before the season started. On the contrary, there are many more controversial situations, so I’ll wait and see how things develop," RB leipzig coach ralph hasenhuttl said on friday.
Bayern coach jupp heynckes spoke out clearly against the increased intervention of the video assistant. "The referee is the supreme authority on the playing field. You shouldn’t cut down the referee," said the 72-year-old coach. For peter bosz, coach of borussia dortmund, transparency is paramount: "i’ve said from the start that it’s always good if it’s honest. It is important for the players and the fans that it becomes clear."The DFB has now ensured this with its clarification.