VAR

[duncanidaho]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-9456995/Fans-rage-VAR-Liverpools-Roberto-Firmino-denied-goal-marginal-offside.html

[StudentOwl]

4 minutes ago, duncanidaho said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-9456995/Fans-rage-VAR-Liverpools-Roberto-Firmino-denied-goal-marginal-offside.html

The line is touching his head. Don't stop looking at the elbow, keeping following the line up. Clearly flush with the side of Firmino's head...

 

The ridiculousness of the decision is up for discussion, sure, but that's not a line to his elbow. It's a line to his head.

 

Any other examples?

[andym1]

3 hours ago, duncanidaho said:

Which pro's do you get?  you see pundits who are ex forwards lean towards attacking play and ex defenders and goalies have a different opinion.  

 

 

Midfielders.

[duncanidaho]

1 hour ago, StudentOwl said:

That literally never happens. It's any part of the body that can legally play the ball. No official anywhere has ever used an elbow. A shoulder maybe, but they're different parts of the body...

 

If y'all can find me one instance where the elbow was used, I'll retract my statement immediately

TBH, it makes no difference if someone is offside with their hand/wrist/elbow/arm.  the goal would be ruled out for handball so what advantage are you gaining by your arm being in front of the offside line?

 

[duncanidaho]

27 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

The line is touching his head. Don't stop looking at the elbow, keeping following the line up. Clearly flush with the side of Firmino's head...

 

The ridiculousness of the decision is up for discussion, sure, but that's not a line to his elbow. It's a line to his head.

 

Any other examples?

the line continues going up so maybe spider cam or a pigeon is offside?

 

Arsenal Denied Penalty By VAR Because Nicolas Pepe's Elbow Is Offside In Baffling Decision (sportbible.com)

[duncanidaho]

3 hours ago, duncanidaho said:

remember the decision on harry kane having a goal disallowed?  he was pointing where he wanted the ball to be played and his hand was offside.

just come up with something sensible as to which bit of the body is offside...

 

for the pedants, just remembred it was patrick bamford not harry kane....

[StudentOwl]

1 hour ago, duncanidaho said:

TBH, it makes no difference if someone is offside with their hand/wrist/elbow/arm.  the goal would be ruled out for handball so what advantage are you gaining by your arm being in front of the offside line?

 

That's what I'm saying. The rules state that they measure from any part of the body that can legally play the ball. An arm being 'offside' doesn't count. In that first image you shared, the line was touching the attacker's head. This was the alleged bit of him that was offside; granted I could go on a fair bit why VAR saying someone's head is an inch offside is basically immeasurable at the framerate the camera's go at...

 

As for that second article you shared, looks like shité line drawing to me, but you've made inadvertently made my point for me. The commentator in the clip even says "that line should be going from the shoulder, not the elbow" because them's the rules... bits that play the ball legally (shoulder) is where you're meant measure from, not the arm. No-one has been called offside because their arm was off... unless people don't know the rules or can't draw a line to the rules.

 

For the record, I'm at the risk of sounding like I support how VAR has been implemented... and yikes that isn't the case. The current application/rules aren't fit for purpose... the camera speed, the ambiguity of where the part someone can legally play the ball from (Bamford's, that you cite, being a prime example... how can anyone tell from the pixilated image exactly where his chuffing shoulder ends under a t-shirt and thermals?)... but my original point stands: The rules are that it's anywhere someone can legally play the ball from. No-one should be given for offside because their arm is offside, which was my whole point in the first instance. 

[Night King]

They had a really interesting debate on this on the totally football show today. Basically saying us as fans and them as journalists are partly responsible because we can’t get our heads around the fact that most decisions in football could or couldn’t be a foul and that we always want those decisions to go in our teams favour.

[duncanidaho]

20 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

That's what I'm saying. The rules state that they measure from any part of the body that can legally play the ball. An arm being 'offside' doesn't count. In that first image you shared, the line was touching the attacker's head. This was the alleged bit of him that was offside; granted I could go on a fair bit why VAR saying someone's head is an inch offside is basically immeasurable at the framerate the camera's go at...

 

As for that second article you shared, looks like shité line drawing to me, but you've made inadvertently made my point for me. The commentator in the clip even says "that line should be going from the shoulder, not the elbow" because them's the rules... bits that play the ball legally (shoulder) is where you're meant measure from, not the arm. No-one has been called offside because their arm was off... unless people don't know the rules or can't draw a line to the rules.

 

For the record, I'm at the risk of sounding like I support how VAR has been implemented... and yikes that isn't the case. The current application/rules aren't fit for purpose... the camera speed, the ambiguity of where the part someone can legally play the ball from (Bamford's, that you cite, being a prime example... how can anyone tell from the pixilated image exactly where his chuffing shoulder ends under a t-shirt and thermals?)... but my original point stands: The rules are that it's anywhere someone can legally play the ball from. No-one should be given for offside because their arm is offside, which was my whole point in the first instance. 

i'm impressed you are so sure that no-one has ever been called offside because their arm was offside.  a quick google before you make such statements would help...

this is my point with VAR, it has been so poorly implemented it isn't doing what it was supposed to do.

 

Patrick Bamford pointing where he wants the ball played.

 

 

[StudentOwl]

19 minutes ago, duncanidaho said:

iPatrick Bamford pointing where he wants the ball played.

 

 

 

Dude...

 

44 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

... (Bamford's, that you cite, being a prime example... how can anyone tell from the pixilated image exactly where his chuffing shoulder ends under a t-shirt and thermals?)... but my original point stands: The rules are that it's anywhere someone can legally play the ball from. No-one should be given for offside because their arm is offside, which was my whole point in the first instance. 

 

[latemodelchild]

I've said all along that the miniscule margins they look at to determine offside are ridiculous when we never see where they've frozen the action. When is a ball deemed to have been played? Is it when it fully leaves the boot or when the boot first makes contact? When a player strikes a ball the ball compresses around the foot then springs back into shape as it starts it's journey. How can they be sure that the action is being stopped at the right frame? 2 players running in opposite directions, ie defender playing offside trap and attacker going past him will be in very different positions within 1 frame of film. We concentrate on the action but are they looking at it right? For that reason there needs to be some leeway. 

[Tommy Crawshaw]

1 hour ago, latemodelchild said:

I've said all along that the miniscule margins they look at to determine offside are ridiculous when we never see where they've frozen the action. When is a ball deemed to have been played? Is it when it fully leaves the boot or when the boot first makes contact? When a player strikes a ball the ball compresses around the foot then springs back into shape as it starts it's journey. How can they be sure that the action is being stopped at the right frame? 2 players running in opposite directions, ie defender playing offside trap and attacker going past him will be in very different positions within 1 frame of film. We concentrate on the action but are they looking at it right? For that reason there needs to be some leeway. 

 

They can't. At 50 frames per second an object/person travelling at 30 Km/h will have moved nearly 20 cm. from one frame to the next.

 

It's all guesswork, same as the lines they overlay on the image for offsides. It's not accurate to centimetres, yet they are deciding important decisions based on millimetres.

[Big Malc]

4 hours ago, Night King said:

They had a really interesting debate on this on the totally football show today. Basically saying us as fans and them as journalists are partly responsible because we can’t get our heads around the fact that most decisions in football could or couldn’t be a foul and that we always want those decisions to go in our teams favour.

Absolutely this.  The likes of Mark Hughes and Sam Allardyce who banged on week after week how poor refs were without once ever looking at the shiite they were churning out.  They were losing because they were shiit, not because refs were incompetent.
 

Always someone else’s fault, always a bias.

 

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again:  VAR has simply moved the opinion of the ref on the pitch to a ref in a room.  And football fans can’t cope with an opinion different to their own.  

 

Shiit decisions happen.  If they’re happening constantly then consequences and re-training should be happening.  Not this b0110cks currently masquerading as football.

[S36 OWL]

53 minutes ago, Big Malc said:

Absolutely this.  The likes of Mark Hughes and Sam Allardyce who banged on week after week how poor refs were without once ever looking at the shiite they were churning out.  They were losing because they were shiit, not because refs were incompetent.
 

Always someone else’s fault, always a bias.

 

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again:  VAR has simply moved the opinion of the ref on the pitch to a ref in a room.  And football fans can’t cope with an opinion different to their own.  

 

Shiit decisions happen.  If they’re happening constantly then consequences and re-training should be happening.  Not this b0110cks currently masquerading as football.

 

You can forgive a ref or lino making a mistake when they have to make a decision during live play, but a highly qualified and experienced ref, with half a dozen screens in front of him showing the incident from every angle, and with slow motion, rewind and fast forward at his disposal has no excuse getting it wrong. Those decisions this weekend were a disgrace. 

[Tamworthowl]

21 hours ago, beswetherick said:

Cricket as a sport has a much better approach to the use of video technology. Obviously by nature it’s much more stop-start than football, but still. 
 

Personally I think a review system would add a bit of extra drama — used both your reviews up in the first half and the opposites have just scored a dodgy last minute winner? Deal with it

If a team has to “deal with” a dodgy decision because they’ve used their appeals, then why not just scrap VAR and “deal with” all the dodgy decisions from the first minute?
VAR is there to correct erroneous decisions by the pitch ref, from start to finish. It might be failing at the moment, but limiting its use by appeals isn’t the way forward. Getting VAR to learn what “clear and obvious” means, is.

[Tamworthowl]

12 hours ago, Tommy Crawshaw said:

 

They can't. At 50 frames per second an object/person travelling at 30 Km/h will have moved nearly 20 cm. from one frame to the next.

 

It's all guesswork, same as the lines they overlay on the image for offsides. It's not accurate to centimetres, yet they are deciding important decisions based on millimetres.

So what do you suggest? Defining offside as “no more than 20cm between the last defender and the attacker”?

 

This just moves the argument. “He was only 20.1cm offside”, “How does the technology determine the 20mm?”

 

Like it or not, the current offside rules are as near black and white as they can be. We could change the definition of what body part constitutes offside to be just the foot, but that still leaves the “toenail issue”. If we are accepting of grey areas we should just go back to the linesman (who tended to get the vast majority of decisions right) and deal with it when he gets it wrong.

 

My issue with VAR for offside is the time it takes. Semi autonomous systems are being trialled soon which should reduce the time taken over a decision. With enough cameras, some clear programming, and fast computers, it should be possible to fully automate [most] offside decisions. 

[beswetherick]

39 minutes ago, Tamworthowl said:

If a team has to “deal with” a dodgy decision because they’ve used their appeals, then why not just scrap VAR and “deal with” all the dodgy decisions from the first minute?
VAR is there to correct erroneous decisions by the pitch ref, from start to finish. It might be failing at the moment, but limiting its use by appeals isn’t the way forward. Getting VAR to learn what “clear and obvious” means, is.

Well yeah, ideally VAR would be scrapped, but unfortunately it’s here to stay

[punkskaphil]

26 minutes ago, Tamworthowl said:

So what do you suggest? Defining offside as “no more than 20cm between the last defender and the attacker”?

 

This just moves the argument. “He was only 20.1cm offside”, “How does the technology determine the 20mm?”

 

Like it or not, the current offside rules are as near black and white as they can be. We could change the definition of what body part constitutes offside to be just the foot, but that still leaves the “toenail issue”. If we are accepting of grey areas we should just go back to the linesman (who tended to get the vast majority of decisions right) and deal with it when he gets it wrong.

 

My issue with VAR for offside is the time it takes. Semi autonomous systems are being trialled soon which should reduce the time taken over a decision. With enough cameras, some clear programming, and fast computers, it should be possible to fully automate [most] offside decisions. 

 

The problem at the moment is that the video footage doesn't have a combined resolution and framerate of a high enough quality/speed for the graphic overlays. The coloured lines are accurate and sharp, but they're being overlaid onto video footage that's subject to significant motion blur and lack of clarity. Because of that disparity, it cannot provide the accuracy needed for a black-and-white rule.

[flo]

They shouldnt have the pitchside monitor, it just makes the ref over cpmpensate if its debateable if they got it wrong. Just have one or two VAR refs who decide all the reviews. 

[Tamworthowl]

4 minutes ago, flo said:

They shouldnt have the pitchside monitor, it just makes the ref over cpmpensate if its debateable if they got it wrong. Just have one or two VAR refs who decide all the reviews. 

The pitch side monitor is superfluous if VAR is competent. As a prem ref, it should be beyond question that he's competent.

 

VAR says to pitch ref: "I think you got that wrong. Have a look ". Think? If VAR isn't certain then it isn't clear and obvious so carry on with pitch ref's decision.

VAR says to pitch ref: "You got that wrong mate. Have a look." So it is clear and obvious. Why then waste time getting the pitch ref to watch a replay and then agree with VAR?