Anything under 10. But they’ll also check the 13th pass before a goal under the “Unlucky for some” rule.
VAR Decisions - PL 19/20 Season
- Thread starter edcunited1878
- Start date
Anything under 10. But they’ll also check the 13th pass before a goal under the “Unlucky for some” rule.
Are you 9?
In my very first post on this today I mentioned the time it took to get to the decision. NOT THE DECISION ITSELF.
By the time var has faffed around with its stupid lines and freeze frames that are not accurate enough, yes players have celebrated.
It needs to be quicker and on a ref watch beeper or something AND more accurate, obviously that’s just my opinion.
You seem to read and take what you want from it. You’ve had your fun trying to be condescending though so I’m sure you’re happy enough.
You’ve also, in every single post you’ve quoted and replied to me, ignored the other points I make about similar goals being not given offside and blatant penalties not being given, so, what does your fairness and ‘illegalness’ think of these if that’s all that matters?
That’s fair and I agree totally the linesman missed it and it should have been offside straight away, there must be a time limit to this set out though, what if the offside happened just twenty seconds earlier? Or a minute, or 2?
As someone posted earlier the guidelines are far too vague.
Just put a chip in the t-shirts, in the same location, for example in the PL crest and call the offside automatically on referee's watch.
This offside calling on millimetres is ridiculous when from a frame to another, there is a different result. All these fancy projections, why?
You just need one point of reference on the body. You still have to control the ball and get yourself in a scoring / passing position. The legs can't run without the body. If you go for precision, then you should take that out of human hands.
This offside calling on millimetres is ridiculous when from a frame to another, there is a different result. All these fancy projections, why?
You just need one point of reference on the body. You still have to control the ball and get yourself in a scoring / passing position. The legs can't run without the body. If you go for precision, then you should take that out of human hands.
I'm not into the celebration argument; there was 4 passes in that play, one is the header for the goal.
On the one today the goalie and one Liverpool player touched the ball, and about 5 passes before the ball into the box.
What happens if Liverpool huffed the ball it bounce off Salah and went in?
I just think it's inconsistent which isn't good, you can see that Liverpool had two chances to reset the play.
Because the linesman are told to leave tight decisions to VAR so not to halt play with an incorrect decision. Basically all offsides that don't lead immediately to a goal would never be called. This is a more than fair compromise, you should never score from the benefit of being offside.
The officials aren't psychic.
For me it's a bit pointless to debate offsides down to inches, as if it matters on the outcome of the situation if Son's shoulder, or anyone else for that matter, is a few inches on the wrong side. Not to mention that I'd love to know what the level of uncertainty actually is, I find it difficult to believe that the level of accuracy is high enough to be able to correctly judge situations like the one with Son.
Personally I'd prefer a rule change where there has to be air between the opponent or the majority of the body has to be on the wrong side.
Personally I'd prefer a rule change where there has to be air between the opponent or the majority of the body has to be on the wrong side.
I'm gonna be a bit snarky here.
Basically it's crap** isn't it? Although I will say again, that I think player behaviour is better.
But the pro VARs are now asking us to wait for it to get better & it is good very occasionally, honest
**the list of crap
offside is a mess, we aren't sure the frame chosen is giving the right decision
they won't overrule anything - however obvious that it probably should be
refs make fewer decisions knowing it will get palmed off on to the VAR
very close offsides take an age to get decided
some people don't like the disruption to their celebrating
it's helping Liverpool too,
Where exactly are all the correct incredibly fair decisions we were promised with it being no more annoying than the refs are already.
I am finding the on-field refs less annoying (except Oliver, obviously) but that's only because the useless twats are sidestepping involvement in anything contentious now, they leave it for VAR to feck up.
Basically it's crap** isn't it? Although I will say again, that I think player behaviour is better.
But the pro VARs are now asking us to wait for it to get better & it is good very occasionally, honest
**the list of crap
offside is a mess, we aren't sure the frame chosen is giving the right decision
they won't overrule anything - however obvious that it probably should be
refs make fewer decisions knowing it will get palmed off on to the VAR
very close offsides take an age to get decided
some people don't like the disruption to their celebrating
it's helping Liverpool too,
Where exactly are all the correct incredibly fair decisions we were promised with it being no more annoying than the refs are already.
I am finding the on-field refs less annoying (except Oliver, obviously) but that's only because the useless twats are sidestepping involvement in anything contentious now, they leave it for VAR to feck up.
Hmm, players rarely do score with other body parts. Even if they did score with their head who cares, we need to simplify the rules. It is called football, so just rewrite the rules for offsides to apply only with regards to the placement of their feet. Put the chip in the shoes, problem solved down to the decimals.
Not a terrible idea, in theory.
And more work for recently retired refs on the Stockley Park Chip Offsides Analysis Team (COAT) which they'll like, I'm sure.
And more work for recently retired refs on the Stockley Park Chip Offsides Analysis Team (COAT) which they'll like, I'm sure.
There's a possibility that Wijnaldum was offside before he barged onto Azpi and the referee gave a foul against him.
I actually really like this idea.
Oh and yeah, how they managed to review Noble's tackle on AWB and decide it's not a red card is miles beyond me
This highlights the total inadequacy of the offside mechanism as it is currently implemented. The methods are now so accurate that they are never right.
Because they don't want to overrule a ref's decision. You might ask, well what is the fecking point of having VAR then? To which the anser is: so we can rule out 0.000001 mm offside goals of course! Glad they got their priorities right.
I fully support both VAR and the rules. VAR was introduced to deal mainly with those marginal decisions which are difficult for the ref to spot. A player is either offside or he is not, and if he is, even by a mm, the goal she be disallowed . It's totally unfair that teams shd benefit or suffer from bad ref decisions. Other sports have moved forward and wholly embraced VAR whilst football has been dragging its feet and lagging behind.
It wasn't. It was introduced to correct clear errors or serious missed incidents, not marginal decisions. A missed offside resulting in a goal is a serious missed incident of course, but if that marginal offside is measured using questionable techniques (just look at the picture a couple of posts higher), it's overshooting the mark by quite some distance. It's certainly bemusing how that is considered a VAR worthy missed incident while Mark Noble's lunge not resulting in a sending-off is not considered a clear error.
If there were no VAR and the linesman had correctly flagged offside in the Chelsea game, everyone would be praising him for making a good call. In that sense VAR did its job. The annoyance stems from the delay and the fact that the players had already celebrated and lined up for kick-off again. So the question is what we value as more important - getting the decisions right or keeping the natural flow of the game so to speak. I tend towards the former.
I think there is also a correlation between how annoyed people are by VAR and how close the decision was. If Mount had been miles offside and the assistant missed it for some reason, surely everyone would be in favour of overturning it, no matter how much time has passed and how much Chelsea have celebrated in the meantime.
I think there is also a correlation between how annoyed people are by VAR and how close the decision was. If Mount had been miles offside and the assistant missed it for some reason, surely everyone would be in favour of overturning it, no matter how much time has passed and how much Chelsea have celebrated in the meantime.
It’s somewhat amusing that you, apparantly, fully support VAR and the rules, but you dont understand how its used
Anyone seen these very tight mm offside decisions in other leagues using VAR?
I can't recall any similarly tight decisions from games I've watched.
Are they just not bothering for such marginal calls?
I can't recall any similarly tight decisions from games I've watched.
Are they just not bothering for such marginal calls?
The captions and maths on that are incorrect. 50 frames per second is what's on the cameras used for broadcast. VAR use a camera with a much higher frame rate.
link ?
I'm not 100% sold on VAR. I've been finding myself a bit reluctant to celebrate goals on occasion just in case they get ruled out and that worries me a bit because to me, that's a big part of what I love about the game. An idea I've been mulling over for a while is that referee should be explaining why they gave key decisions. Perhaps the day after a game if they re-watched the game and wrote a couple of sentences explaining why, for example, even on VAR Review, Noble wasn't sent off then we'd all know exactly what constitutes a red and what's a yellow. Sure, it would still be down to referees and VAR's interpretation in the heat of the moment but at least the next day when the 'heat of the moment' has settled it would be clear why they made the decision.
http://hottechgadgetnews.com/var-how-many-cameras-are-used-for-turf-technology/
120fps is the figure I've generally seen quoted on twitter and reddit too, though why it's even that low I have no idea given hawkeye seem to use much higher frame rate cameras in other sports:
https://www.espn.co.uk/football/story/_/id/24233730/var-teething-troubles-take-heart-cricket-drs
https://www.harrodsport.com/advice-and-guides/hawkeye-technology-in-sport
Anyway, I just tried doing the maths on what margin of error you'd get from a 120fps camera and it melted my head so I'll let you work it out.
Thanks!
Interesting as there aren’t actually rules in football ( pedantic I know) but they are laws. Irrespective being in an offside position doesn’t actually mean your offside.
Having said that Mount was indeed in an offside position and indeed offside at the point he played the ball however play continued. Liverpool were already set in their defensive shape meaning it would be impossible for them to re set. Alonso actually played the ball toward his own goal ironic really because not three weeks ago , Gallagher on Sky Sports said that once the ball was played backwards then a new phase of play started.Another claim made was that if the defence had an opportunity to clear then that again was a factor.
I doubt very much the asst ref would have been able to see the offside so in this instance it was unlikely he saw it indeed normally when the do believe there is an offside they would eventually raise the flag. He didn’t!
So for me the confusion wasn’t so much about the offside it’s more about about how far back a phase of play goes on for in truth the published guidelines are far too vague and as a consequence for me having been at SB yesterday annoyed because to date the PGMOs interpretation of how to VAR operates is certainly not offering up improvements
Last edited:
Oh I see it now. Definitely agree with you, benefit of the doubt should always go to the attacker and the trigger happy flagmen must be extinguished.
But they're not. They're told to wait for the play to end before making the decision, but they're still supposed to decide
Bottom line with football in general is that it's absolutely hell bent on protecting referees. It's why if a referee admits they saw something and decided it wasn't a foul, even if it was a blatant red card, there'd be no retrospective action. It's why todays penalty wasn't given.
Referees have no accountability for their mistakes and the rules do everything they can to protect them.
Referees have no accountability for their mistakes and the rules do everything they can to protect them.
Ref was correct as was VAR, linesman deserves sacking for that, you could see De Gea stopped because of the flag. Something needs to be done about those decisions though because that was clear as day the linesman cost United a goal.
Goal shouldnt count. Once the linesman raises flag, it shouldn't count because the players stop. He should have waited and then raise it once it goes in or out.
EPL's version of VAR is the shittiest implementation of anything ever.
Surely you play to the whistle? The players shouldn't stop, braindead though the linesman was.
The penalty?
Abysmal refereeing.
The Auba goal is what I'm referring to just now.
I know, I'm asking your thoughts on the penalty.
Oh sorry, I didn't see that, my stream is atrocious, keeps sticking.