Refs & VAR 2020/2021 Discussion

Whats happening now? All the football guys on my twitter going of
 
Maybe we should implement a mic on refs for VAR decisions like they have in rugby.
Also, feel like there needs to be margin for error, especially for offside. Similar to cricket on LBW decisions, if the gap is miniscule, as in under a certain number of centimetres, the original decision stands.

Handballs and penalties should also allow VAR to use common sense.

Players are going down for breaths of air ffs. Also seems like players are trying to kick the ball at the arms of opposition players.

It's becoming a very despicable game.
 
arnie_ni said:
Whats happening now? All the football guys on my twitter going of
Click to expand...

Aston Villa had a goal disallowed for offside... Due to Barkley standing in front (ish) of Leno. Probably the right call because - even though Leno would never have saved it - the ref isn't allowed to predict that.
 
Liverpool may not spend that much on players, but how much do they spend on the FA?
Sterling gets nothing, but on the counter seconds later, Mane is awarded a pen for an identical challenge. Where is VAR?
Later in the match, Mane tackles from behind on a counter, gets nothing. Then moments later, Laporte gets a yellow for a 50/50 duel on Salah. Refs are atrocious one match after another. I think VAR has only made it worse.
 
Anustart89 said:
And then a guy scores with his head and you're going to complain that his head was offside and he scored with it.
Click to expand...
Ive explained why i think feet vs feet is best, as have others, its all in the last couple of pages.
 
Annihilate Now! said:
Aston Villa had a goal disallowed for offside... Due to Barkley standing in front (ish) of Leno. Probably the right call because - even though Leno would never have saved it - the ref isn't allowed to predict that.
Click to expand...
Similar to Everton vs us last season then
 


Since we're talking so highly of VAR in other countries

Ball is hammered at goal from what, 7 yards out, player tries to move his arm into his body while leaning into the path of the shot to block it, penalty and a second yellow card
 
Anustart89 said:
And then a guy scores with his head and you're going to complain that his head was offside and he scored with it.
Click to expand...
You can’t really gain an advantage by your head or your arm leaning over the line though. The offside rule was brought in to stop goal hanging, it was never meant to be dealt with in Millimetres.

bamfords goal is perfect example of this, his feet are 2 yards onside but because he’s leaning forward and his arm is stretched out he’s deemed “offside” but how on earth is he gaining any advantage from that? He didn’t. That should never be given offside and the rules need a big rework.
 
UncleBob said:


Since we're talking so highly of VAR in other countries

Ball is hammered at goal from what, 7 yards out, player tries to move his arm into his body while leaning into the path of the shot to block it, penalty and a second yellow card
Click to expand...

Yeah but Spain were harsh on these things even before VAR. They're consistent about it. That is a clear penalty according to the rules however. If you're blocking a shot on goal it's always a pen no matter what and results in a straight red, not a second yellow.
 
My opinion is they need to decide on a very narrow list of what VAR can adjudicate. We don't need it for absolutely every decision. Refs and Linos have made marginal calls for ages and we've got on with it. There's howlers that get talked about for years, like England's goal against Germany at the World Cup. Stuff like that should be rooted out by VAR. Absolutely no one in the football world would have had a problem if McGinn's goal stood. Indeed people were wondering what they were checking. It just looks like they're examining every little thing and finding a reason to make a decision or disallow a goal. Not necessary. Let the game flow for goodness sakes!
 
“Do you watch cricket? They have an umpires call which is their allowance, meaning its to close to over ride so they go back to the umpires original decision.”

No words for that illogical drivel.
 
“Handballs and penalties should also allow VAR to use common sense.”

I’m expecting Jeremy Beadle to jump out at any point. “Handballs” and “Penalties” should allow VAR to use common sense?
No words
 
Adam-Utd said:
You can’t really gain an advantage by your head or your arm leaning over the line though. The offside rule was brought in to stop goal hanging, it was never meant to be dealt with in Millimetres.

bamfords goal is perfect example of this, his feet are 2 yards onside but because he’s leaning forward and his arm is stretched out he’s deemed “offside” but how on earth is he gaining any advantage from that? He didn’t. That should never be given offside and the rules need a big rework.
Click to expand...

That was so ridiculous. He's only offside because he pointed. If he's not off if he doesn't point then he's not off.

And even then it's only because they changed the handball rule to include the oh-so
-scientific definition of the part of your arm that's normally covered by a t-shirt.
 
Snow said:
Yeah but Spain were harsh on these things even before VAR. They're consistent about it. That is a clear penalty according to the rules however. If you're blocking a shot on goal it's always a pen no matter what and results in a straight red, not a second yellow.
Click to expand...

It's shit.
Consistently shit
 
Adam-Utd said:
You can’t really gain an advantage by your head or your arm leaning over the line though. The offside rule was brought in to stop goal hanging, it was never meant to be dealt with in Millimetres.

bamfords goal is perfect example of this, his feet are 2 yards onside but because he’s leaning forward and his arm is stretched out he’s deemed “offside” but how on earth is he gaining any advantage from that? He didn’t. That should never be given offside and the rules need a big rework.
Click to expand...
When every spectator can re-watch the situation on slow motion replays from multiple angles, there is no other way but to make the offside a factual rule about the body parts that can actually score a goal. You cannot revert back from that because then you have people complaining how a goal was allowed when it was obvious that the part of the body that scored the goal was behind the line.
 
MikeeMike said:
“Do you watch cricket? They have an umpires call which is their allowance, meaning its to close to over ride so they go back to the umpires original decision.”

No words for that illogical drivel.
Click to expand...
Not sure what you mean here. What i stated is fact.
 
arnie_ni said:
Not sure what you mean here. What i stated is fact.
Click to expand...
Yes. Each team has a set number of challenges but In football VAR has an actual frame of video and ball trajectories are not used.This is clear cut. Video does not have a margin of error.Yes , sure ,sometimes it is a mm decision but it is what it is.
 
georgipep said:
When every spectator can re-watch the situation on slow motion replays from multiple angles, there is no other way but to make the offside a factual rule about the body parts that can actually score a goal. You cannot revert back from that because then you have people complaining how a goal was allowed when it was obvious that the part of the body that scored the goal was behind the line.
Click to expand...

I don't think anybody who watched that would say it's offside apart from the referees.
 
MikeeMike said:
Yes. Each team has a set number of challenges but In football VAR has an actual frame of video and ball trajectories are not used.This is clear cut. Video does not have a margin of error.Yes , sure ,sometimes it is a mm decision but it is what it is.
Click to expand...
We're on to another dicussion now, but how does football not have a margin of error, especially offside and determining the frame to use, ie when the ball was passed?

Im sure in some of these mm ones, if you seen the frame before or after it could be onside.

Im actually not in favour of a "stay with the on field decision" in football but there is definitely a margin of error in football.
 
arnie_ni said:
We're on to another dicussion now, but how does football not have a margin of error, especially offside and determining the frame to use, ie when the ball was passed?

Im sure in some of these mm ones, if you seen the frame before or after it could be onside.

Im actually not in favour of a "stay with the on field decision" in football but there is definitely a margin of error in football.
Click to expand...
Well maybe we should agree to disagree. If decision is so tight , down to the mm, it is still a mm and can be used to make the decision.
 
Jus this weekend in the premier league there was..
A ridiculous Bamford offside where there’s no way that’s 100% accurate.
The two hand ball penalty incidents that were hard as a defender to avoid.
The Fulham conceded goal that was offside.

whether it’s the rules changed to make var calls simpler or changed just because, they’re a joke and they’re clearly ruining the enjoyment of football.

it’s more like coronation street these days, all manufactured drama to supposedly create more excitement. How anyone can defend any of those decisions is beyond me
 
Adam-Utd said:
Let's ask them after the match now they know they've won. Bet they agree it's a stupid decision.
Click to expand...
You can't ask them after the fact. That's the whole point. When there is a lot at stake you make the decision by the book. And because there is always a lot at stake (theoretically) you always make the decision by the book.
 
MikeeMike said:
Well maybe we should agree to disagree. If decision is so tight , down to the mm, it is still a mm and can be used to make the decision.
Click to expand...
I even said as much in my own post... "Im actually not in favour of a "stay with the on field decision"
 
arnie_ni said:
And thats what we are arguing. Its quite silly your sleeve should be given offside.

Hence 3 or 4 posters calling for feet only so simplify it.

And yes we know there would still be close calls using feet.
Click to expand...

I think if they are going to persist with this line drawing stuff it definitely should be based on position of the feet. The players are in motion so if 90% of their bodies are level, it makes no sense to say someone is offside because they are leaning further forward or they're pointing.

To be honest they should probably just scrap the lines. Watch the replay and if the player is obviously off it's off and if it's too close to call then they are on. The spirit of the law isn't being served with the current system.
 
Withnail said:
I think if they are going to persist with this line drawing stuff it definitely should be based on position of the feet. The players are in motion so if 90% of their bodies are level, it makes no sense to say someone is offside because they are leaning further forward or they're pointing.

To be honest they should probably just scrap the lines. Watch the replay and if the player is obviously off it's off and if it's too close to call then they are on. The spirit of the law isn't being served with the current system.
Click to expand...
The issue with the replays is that camera angles are never dead straight so they can always give the optical illusion of being offside. Look at the Greenwood v Leipzig goal, we all thought he was off initially.

I do agree though that they arm pits and lines blurring into each other is just too stupid to make a tight call.
 
Why didn’t they draw a line up from the defender who was behind Bamford? He looked like he had just as much chance of playing him onside. Was it because they couldn’t get any reference points from that defender? What a mess
 
Adam-Utd said:
The issue with the replays is that camera angles are never dead straight so they can always give the optical illusion of being offside. Look at the Greenwood v Leipzig goal, we all thought he was off initially.

I do agree though that they arm pits and lines blurring into each other is just too stupid to make a tight call.
Click to expand...

Yeah I'd not taken that into account... Ugh.

Feet is the fairest way in that case, although we're still going to get an attackers toenail being off-side.

What constitutes a material advantage in that situation?
 
Withnail said:
Yeah I'd not taken that into account... Ugh.

Feet is the fairest way in that case, although we're still going to get an attackers toenail being off-side.

What constitutes a material advantage in that situation?
Click to expand...
I don't think we can accept to rule it by the feet only when players score a ton of goals with their heads. I don't see any problem with the current system and as long as they frickin agree on the shirt sleeves, we can all get on with it and move to the real problems of VAR:
  • Lack of consistency in similar situations
  • VAR still being the subjective as one referee is looking at the replays
  • VAR to be used in only a fraction of the situations
  • The stupidity of 'clear and obvious error'
Offsides are fine. People moan because their teams get goals disallowed or conceded. Be onside and/or defend better.
 
georgipep said:
I don't think we can accept to rule it by the feet only when players score a ton of goals with their heads. I don't see any problem with the current system and as long as they frickin agree on the shirt sleeves, we can all get on with it and move to the real problems of VAR:
  • Lack of consistency in similar situations
  • VAR still being the subjective as one referee is looking at the replays
  • VAR to be used in only a fraction of the situations
  • The stupidity of 'clear and obvious error'
Offsides are fine. People moan because their teams get goals disallowed or conceded. Be onside and/or defend better.
Click to expand...

The point about the feet has nothing to do with the fact that you can score a goal with your head.

If you are running alongside someone and, for example, due to the difference in running styles your head is marginally in front of them but your feet are level/behind theirs when the ball is kicked, you're not actually gaining any material advantage.

Similarly, if you are pointing and the upper part of your arm is ahead of the defender you're not gaining a material advantage.

The ball still has a fair distance to travel after it is kicked. If isn't like a first past the post photo-finish.
 
Adam-Utd said:
You can’t really gain an advantage by your head or your arm leaning over the line though. The offside rule was brought in to stop goal hanging, it was never meant to be dealt with in Millimetres.

bamfords goal is perfect example of this, his feet are 2 yards onside but because he’s leaning forward and his arm is stretched out he’s deemed “offside” but how on earth is he gaining any advantage from that? He didn’t. That should never be given offside and the rules need a big rework.
Click to expand...
Just wait until someone pings a cross onto an outstretched arm for a perfectly legitimate goal. Then people will give it large about that.

I agree that Bamford shouldn’t be offside, but that’s because I think that handball should mean that you can’t play the ball with your arm (not even part of it!). I think it’s fair to judge offside by goalscoring parts of the body. The end of the sleeve is such an arbitrary measure brought in because referees couldn’t agree on what a shoulder is, which is idiotic.
 
Withnail said:
The point about the feet has nothing to do with the fact that you can score a goal with your head.

If you are running alongside someone and, for example, due to the difference in running styles your head is marginally in front of them but your feet are level/behind theirs when the ball is kicked, you're not actually gaining any material advantage.

Similarly, if you are pointing and the upper part of your arm is ahead of the defender you're not gaining a material advantage.

The ball still has a fair distance to travel after it is kicked. If isn't like a first past the post photo-finish.
Click to expand...
I don't see how tracking feet is any better though. Not only running style but the exact moment in one's movement during running can change things drastically in terms of the offside rule, if that is to be measured. Depending on the starting position, one's foot can be further behind their knee. Should we ignore that too? I just don't see the benefit of using the feet instead of the parts of the body which are legally allowed to score a goal.
 


Supports the complaints a lot of people have with marginal offside calls.

Though the fact that they will be introducing an entirely different gps system for offsides in coming seasons means these particular problems are short-term. We'll have to see how accurate the new system is when that comes along.
 
sullydnl said:


Supports the complaints a lot of people have with marginal offside calls.

Though the fact that they will be introducing an entirely different gps system for offsides in coming seasons means these particular problems are short-term. We'll have to see how accurate the new system is when that comes along.
Click to expand...


I'm intrigued by this GPS technology thing... Surely it can't be that accurate? I mean are they putting chips over a whole body or something?

Interesting that the PL wanted an allowance and FIFA basically want them to treat tech as 100% accurate.
 
sullydnl said:


Supports the complaints a lot of people have with marginal offside calls.

Though the fact that they will be introducing an entirely different gps system for offsides in coming seasons means these particular problems are short-term. We'll have to see how accurate the new system is when that comes along.
Click to expand...

So basically most of us were right. There is a margin of error but the pl were forced to remove it by fifa and if they were allowed what they wanted quite a few disallowed goals eg bamford and mane would have stood?

They even go onto say its totally up to the var ref what camera angle he uses and what line he plots, going further and saying it looks like bamfords line was drawn wrong?

Seems like a complete shambles.
 
Annihilate Now! said:
I'm intrigued by this GPS technology thing... Surely it can't be that accurate? I mean are they putting chips over a whole body or something?

Interesting that the PL wanted an allowance and FIFA basically want them to treat tech as 100% accurate.
Click to expand...

It's a good question. It sounds like they're still weighing up bids from several different tech providers but this is what at least one of them was suggesting:

One of the main challenges in the development of an advanced offside technology is the accurate and automated detection of the kick-point. The technology provider informed the group about possible solutions like tracking data from sensor technology or video data from camera systems.

Furthermore, a system has to correctly identify which body part places a player onside or offside. Accuracy tests have shown that human operators tend to pick different body parts for offside lines. Strides have been made in that area as well, with the automated system presented learning to correctly model a player's skeleton. In the future, the developed algorithms of the system should be able to automatically identify which body part placed the player offside and by what distance.

https://www.fifa.com/who-we-are/new...-demonstration-of-advanced-offside-technology

Sounds fancy but I'm sure we'll hear more about the actual accuracy closer to the time.

Still, it should remove the current inconsistencies about which frame is chosen and which parts of the body lines are drawn from. Plus it will apparently be an awful lot quicker, with the VAR getting an alert for offsides in much the same way the ref currently does when the ball crosses the goal-line.

According to Johnson the plan is/was to roll it out for the 2022 world cup, so we won't be waiting too long to see.
 
There are two issues with the Bamford decision. Firstly I believe the line for the nearest defender should be at the edge of his sleeve by definition. Secondly the leg of the defender behind Bamford could be absolutely anywhere beyond the line, just hidden by Bamfords body.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.