I ask myself the same question quite often. All those projections don't look too realistic, although in theory, knowing the camera's positions, you should be able to do a 3D model of a pitch and generate those lines live.Is there any mathematical approach behind these offside decisions? Like a programm that analyzes the picture?
I`m asking because the way it looks to me is that the var guys just paint style put two lines random in the picture and that`s that.
If the offsides call overrides the Pickford challenge then defenders can attack strikers whenever they are penalized for being offsides
Ehm, what? It's allowed, so why does the amount of goals scored should matter? Not many goals are scored with players backsides, for example, should we not count them in offside decisions?Wow, I am in total support of this new rule!!! After all, a truck load of goals are scored with players’ armpits every season!
(not taking the piss out of you, but the rule)
Meh. Still think VAR needs to be binned.Ehm, what? It's allowed, so why does the amount of goals scored should matter? Not many goals are scored with players backsides, for example, should we not count them in offside decisions? And it's not a new rule at all.
Is there any mathematical approach behind these offside decisions? Like a programm that analyzes the picture?
I`m asking because the way it looks to me is that the var guys just paint style put two lines random in the picture and that`s that.
So how do you define the boundary on where it should be applied and where it shouldn’t?VAR should be used to avoid Maradona's goal against england, or Henry, or criminal offsides and stuff like that.
I've predicted all this shitshow before the implementation of VAR, because I actually watched its test-phase in CWC 2017, where they called the softest penalty just for the sake of showing off the new toy.
Eh? Offsides are "criminal" in a game.VAR should be used to avoid Maradona's goal against england, or Henry, or criminal offsides and stuff like that.
I've predicted all this shitshow before the implementation of VAR, because I actually watched its test-phase in CWC 2017, where they called the softest penalty just for the sake of showing off the new toy.
But everyone disagreed with me. Naah, lets use VAR for all interpretative matters. Well, you lot got the shower of shite you deserved.
Another correct prediction by me..
So how do you define the boundary on where it should be applied and where it shouldn’t?
Highlights from Youtube
Pause the video at 1:42 and look where Kane is when the goal kick is taken, then look who wins the ball back
Na, i wish it was wrongly given by VARThat’s fecking harsh, even on Pool.
There’s always that to hope for next week.Na, i wish it was wrongly given by VAR
That’s fecking harsh, even on Pool.
People ranting about Mane offside is frustration and not controversy.Remember when VAR was going to take away the controversy and pundit talking points
Undoubtedly. Potentially more than once.Unfortunately for non-Liverpool fans it's a decision we'll all see given against us at some point.
But what if the next offside is slightly ahead of todays but at a neglible level so its even further offside? How can you give option b offside and not a? Where is the advantage and where does that stop?Common sense.
People are too obsessed with turning everything into black and white, I see no problem in just letting the refs use their common sense and flow of the game..
Trying to turn every law into black or white has gotten us into this handball shit show of now.
Why is it madness? They are factual decisions and we now have the technology to be certain. I don’t see what the issue is.Technically the pen and the goal were both offside, but think its madness thats what football has come to.
Clear red for pickford as well
It's not as certain as you think. Which is why these millimeter judgments are ridiculous.Why is it madness? They are factual decisions and we now have the technology to be certain. I don’t see what the issue is.
Because those tight tight decisions weren't an issue. It was glaring mistakes people wanted fixed.Why is it madness? They are factual decisions and we now have the technology to be certain. I don’t see what the issue is.
At what point are the referees too embarrassed by all this to keep it up?
The millimeter interpretation of offside is specific to England and they keep at it despite Having been instructed this is not the intent of VAR, as "clear and obvious also applies here."
What really annoys me is that they clearly don't operate with a concept of error margin in VAR and when to favour the attacker.
IFAB chief Lukas Brud raised eyebrows at the start of the week when he appeared to suggest referees in England were implementing VAR incorrectly on offside by not using the "clear and obvious" qualification and being "too forensic."
But now Brud has clarified his remarks and confirmed that when calibrated lines are being used, as they are in all major European leagues and competitions with the Hawkeye system, the decision must be based on the result of the technology and not be subjective.
"If the images with calibrated lines and the perpendicular line show that there is an offside position, the video assistant should continue to report," Brud told sportschau.de. "Even if it is only a centimetre. Offside is offside."
It’s either off or on. It’s a fact.It's not as certain as you think. Which is why these millimeter judgments are ridiculous.
The technology has a 13 cm margin of error. That's in addition the arbitrary situation we have here where it seems they picked a frame where the ball had already left the foot.The camera is both elevated and not on line so you can't tell with the eye, have to trust the technology which has been tested to be accurate.
No it's not. There is a margin of error for the software. It's this misconception that skews the whole thing. The software is not accurate enough to justify this type of decision-making.It’s either off or on. It’s a fact.
