VAR, Refs and Linesmen | General Discussion

saivet said:
So no lines, not because the technology fecked up...they just didn't check?!
Click to expand...

Did the linesman flag at the time? Firstly I thought they're told not to, and these days carrying on for a few seconds can risk a booking.

Or even weirder, did the officials just decide it was offside afterwards?
And then no-one checked.

Weird.

Bet there's plenty of conspiracies knocking about on the Pool forum
 
C'est Moi Cantona said:
The technology is the issue, as unlike the goal line technology it is leaving humans to decide the outcome still, so errors are always going to be made, which is a bit mad when its purpose is the total opposite.
Click to expand...

They need to get chips on players and the ball, and map the ground out with hawkeye and suchlike.
Then get a computer to instantly give an offside or not, rather than have a bunch of retired refs having a jolly in a portable cabin miles away.
 
Castia said:
Nah he’s bang on

Im certain the Garnacho one was onside and people thought ETH was crazy for suggesting they used the wrong camera angle
Click to expand...

He wasn't crazy for suggesting the wrong angle was used, he just didn't seem to know how the system works. The entire point of the tech aspect is that it compensates for the camera angle, so what ETH argued simply didn't make sense. The only way the "wrong" angle could be used is if they couldn't actually see the relevant body parts.
 
Castia said:
Its just mind boggling isn’t it

Neville said it’s been off all season, the camera angles everything aren’t right. He can hear the VAR discussion in his hear and they just passed the incident up in seconds

Remember when ETH said the Garnacho was onside and the camera angle was wrong? people thought he was insane…..
Click to expand...
This doesn't have anything to do with the camera angles though and even if it it did Diaz looked onside.
 
Sandikan said:
They need to get chips on players and the ball, and map the ground out with hawkeye and suchlike.
Then get a computer to instantly give an offside or not, rather than have a bunch of retired refs having a jolly in a portable cabin miles away.
Click to expand...

What happened to the semi-automated stuff that FIFA were trialling?
 
C'est Moi Cantona said:
The technology is the issue, as unlike the goal line technology it is leaving humans to decide the outcome still, so errors are always going to be made, which is a bit mad when its purpose is the total opposite.
Click to expand...

What part of the technology played a part in todays games? The VAR person gets to choose to intervene or not and thats the key part.

They cornered themselves with that statement of “not re refereeing a game”. There was a moment today that a ref gave a goal kick on Garnacho when it was a corner, it would take a VAR official one second to radio that info to the ref but they dont want to use it for that.
 
saivet said:
This doesn't have anything to do with the camera angles though and even if it it did Diaz looked onside.
Click to expand...

Well they’ve opened themselves up for questions now the camera angle is a massive deal if they’re not checking properly which they clearly aren’t like they’ve shown today

Martinelli against Everton and Garnacho against Arsenal have happened in previous weeks and have been called out to be the wrong decision based on the angle used
 
Last edited:
Why are Liverpool getting immediate apologies and rescinded red cards?
What about the other 19 clubs?
 
90 + 5min said:
It is not about technology.

However VAR has nothing to do in football.
Click to expand...
The Epl one is dropping lines and spending an age to come up with a decision. Also needs human intervention instead of automatically checking all goals for offside.
 
Sandikan said:
Did the linesman flag at the time? Firstly I thought they're told not to, and these days carrying on for a few seconds can risk a booking.

Or even weirder, did the officials just decide it was offside afterwards?
And then no-one checked.

Weird.

Bet there's plenty of conspiracies knocking about on the Pool forum
Click to expand...

Linesman flagged after it went in.

Seemed like the VAR just looked at the image and for some reason decided that he was so clearly off that it wasn't even worth checking.
 
Mickeza said:
It seems they just didn’t check which is truly glorious :lol:
Click to expand...

Its funny because it’s Liverpool but they’ve just completely opened themselves up to be questioned about every single decision, the technology is fecked now.
 
sullydnl said:
He wasn't crazy for suggesting the wrong angle was used, he just didn't seem to know how the system works. The entire point of the tech aspect is that it compensates for the camera angle, so what ETH argued simply didn't make sense. The only way the "wrong" angle could be used is if they couldn't actually see the relevant body parts.
Click to expand...
But that’s what fans were saying? They used the harder angle to get the points form rather than the straight in angle they skipped over?
The only way it was offside was because the defender twisted himself up to get a freak decision, how the camera angle behind them was used is still ridiculous
 
So predictable they tripped over themsleves to get that statement out as soon as they could. Meanwhile the dug their heels in over the Romero and Garnacho incidents. The Press still have the gall to keep suggesting the refs favour us.
 
Jev said:
Let's agree to disagree. Though I remain convinced that you'd be saying the opposite if it had been against a United player :)
Click to expand...

I’d like to on record for at least being consistent. I also argued that Casemiro’s red card was correct.

Although finding myself defending two VAR decisions feels weird. I hate the fecking thing and would love it be mothballed.
 
So the monkeys in charge of using the technology just didn't actually bother using the technology? :lol:

Caf: this is why the technology is shit.
 
Mickeza said:
How? They just didn’t check it. So it has zero relevance on ones they checked. Neville is talking bollocks.
Click to expand...

Well how can they just not check it?? It was a goal ffs. That’s as bad as it gets, it’s borderline corruption at that point

They’ve made a glaring error how do we know other errors aren’t being made
 
sullydnl said:
He wasn't crazy for suggesting the wrong angle was used, he just didn't seem to know how the system works. The entire point of the tech aspect is that it compensates for the camera angle, so what ETH argued simply didn't make sense. The only way the "wrong" angle could be used is if they couldn't actually see the relevant body parts.
Click to expand...

They put the line off the defender's shoulder when the head was further forward, they used an image at least 10 frames after the ball is played where two relevant players were travelling in opposing directions and each frame of inaccuracy represents enough distance to affect the decision and they used the least ideal camera angle (which would have shown correct defender body part to use and that Garnacho was onside).

The line technology is also not infallible. It has a margin of inaccuracy, so even if they have to use the less ideal angle they did, there is even more importance on correct frame identification and body part.
 
ThatsGreat said:
The Epl one is dropping lines and spending an age to come up with a decision. Also needs human intervention instead of automatically checking all goals for offside.
Click to expand...
And still they can't make it right like we have seen in our games. Horrific decisions game after game and I'm still amazed that our club haven't issued a statement about this. We just let them. So there is no point having VAR. It makes you wonder how and why they can still make those decisions when millions of people see it differently. Technology is not wrong. People using it are. VAR is not for football because people are using it.
 
RedStarUnited said:
What part of the technology played a part in todays games? The VAR person gets to choose to intervene or not and thats the key part.

They cornered themselves with that statement of “not re refereeing a game”. There was a moment today that a ref gave a goal kick on Garnacho when it was a corner, it would take a VAR official one second to radio that info to the ref but they dont want to use it for that.
Click to expand...

The technology can be as accurate it likes, but if it has to call on humans to interpret what it is saying then it is becomes the problem, it's clear they're not up to it by now, and are just making a wrong call look even worse than is was before it was there.

The only thing that doesn't need humans after the decision is made the goal line technology so that's the only part I'd keep for now.
 
Spurs boss gets it.


Spurs boss Ange Postecoglou added: "I've never really been a fan of it [VAR]. It complicates areas of the game that I thought were pretty clear in the past. We have to deal with it.

"The biggest problem we have is that no form of technology will make the game errorless. We always accepted that mistakes were part of the game, people are human beings, but many parts of out game aren't factual so officials will make mistakes the same as players and managers make mistakes. If we have such a high bar, invariably it's going to fail."
Click to expand...
 
C'est Moi Cantona said:
Unless everything can be as accurate as the goal line technology then it's not going to work.

They've tried it, and now it's time for someone with some big balls to admit it hasn't worked and scrap it.
Click to expand...
This is where I am with it. Just sack it off until they can find a way to not make a pigs ear of it.
 
How do you forget to check?
It's literally the thing you're there to do...
 
cyberman said:
But that’s what fans were saying? They used the harder angle to get the points form rather than the straight in angle they skipped over?
The only way it was offside was because the defender twisted himself up to get a freak decision, how the camera angle behind them was used is still ridiculous
Click to expand...

As long as they could see the relevant body parts in the angle they used (which they could) then the offside lines are the same as they would be from any other angle they could have used. Again, that's the entire point of the tech, it compensates for the angle. Arguing they used the wrong one is nonsensical.
 
Mickeza said:
How? They just didn’t check it. So it has zero relevance on ones they checked. Neville is talking bollocks.
Click to expand...
It questions what they actually look at and how closely they do. This isn’t just getting it wrong but a complete breakdown in protocol.
In the last month we’ve had one ref say he didn’t intervene because he didn’t want his ref mate on the pitch to eat shot and now this
 
You must log in or register to reply here.