It’s awful. I really miss the pre VAR days.
So fecking mental that that is enough evidence to rule out a goal. Why are we taking this shit lying down?
VAR, Refs and Linesmen | General Discussion
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Jamie (@Vault Dweller) are here to celebrate rare back-to-back victories for Manchester United! They analyse the late win in the Europa League vs. Rangers and then try and find things to analyse in a pretty dour game vs. Fulham. They also chat about the latest Marcus Rashford news, and look at the latest transfer news.
Pogue I'm probably the whiniest bitch on this website when it comes to referee injustices but this just ain’t one of them. He was visibly offside before any lines were drawn.
So fecking mental that that is enough evidence to rule out a goal. Why are we taking this shit lying down?
But if the technology shows a player 0.51m offside we can be reasonably confident that they were offside. But if the technology shows them 0.10m offside there is no way it's that accurate.
Even goal line technology has a margin of error albeit small and that's a system with a single static line and perfect camera angles.
How accurate do you really think a system with a constantly moving line with imperfect camera angles and a timing we essentially have to have a best guess at is?
Actually it's you might be offside, you might not be. We don't no so we're gonna let an inaccurate piece of technology make the decision for us. Might as well flip a coin in all honesty.
Again...If you allow a player to be 0,50m offside and not a cm beyond that, you'll still have debates about the differences between 0,50 and 0,51
It’s not referee injustice here though. I’m sure they’re doing the best. Whatever poxy device they use to desperately find a way to rule goals out probably did show he was offside. It’s still bullshit though. Football shouldn’t be like this. And that’s from me on my sofa. Even more excruciating for the poor bastards who slogged it all the way to west London on a Sunday night.
Do you know what would have happened if there wasn’t VAR? The linesman would have put his flag up and we’d be looking at images with no lines having the same discussion.
How do I know this? Because the linesman put his flag up on Garnacho the other week and everyone had the same discussion.
The linesman didn’t put his flag up tonight though, did he? Because it was far too close to call.
I can’t remember the Garnacho incident. Did he also have a goal ruled out for offside?
No he was clearly about a yard onside and the linesman put his flag up and stopped a very promising attack.
My point is that without VAR, the linesman would more than likely raised his flag. He didn’t because the guideline is to leave it to VAR if it’s not clear and obvious.
In those incidents they put the flag up when the ball goes in the net. They didn’t, on this occasion, so there’s no reason to assume they would have flagged the goal.
I remember that now. Seems odd but possible he came back from an offside position. If the linesman thought he was off, fair enough. 30 years of watching football has taught me that linesmen are seriously good at their job. And what happened the other night was an infinitely preferable scenario to what happened tonight. Early flag, clear decision, we move on. None of this calling it back and making us wait several minutes while a man draws vague lines on a screen. Absurd that we have to put up with that shit.
@Pogue Mahone
Against Liverpool.
Worst of all this was in the 93rd minute of extra time at 2-2 and it turned over possession and put the pressure back on us.
Against Liverpool.
Worst of all this was in the 93rd minute of extra time at 2-2 and it turned over possession and put the pressure back on us.
That Garnacho one wasn't as clear cut as everyone made out. There was no actual footage of his position when the ball was kicked. He could have run ahead of the play and tried to get himself back on.
Yeah, I remember it now. I felt ever so slightly bothered for maybe 10 seconds. Not even close to how irritated I am by what happened tonight.
I’m completely unbothered by tonight because the correct decision was made.
I’m still pissed off about the above three weeks later.
My agenda is against bad officiating, you’re agenda is against VAR full stop.
Yeah, pretty much.
To be honest, I blame people like you for having this VAR bollox foisted on us. Why on earth do you expect infallibility from officials when we don’t get it from footballers?
Those ridiculous standard are also the reason that you still feel hard done by even in an era of football that’s been wrecked by VAR. Because, ultimately, the whole system will always rely on fallible humans to implement it.
The problem for you is that the genie is out the lamp and despite what Norway might be planning, the chances of the Premier League rolling it back is zero to none.
What we need is complete reform of how it’s implemented and that task needs taking firmly away from Howard fecking Webb. Most of all they need to up the pay of referees to reflect the importance of the job in a multi billion pound industry and then we might attract actually talented individuals rather than the absolute dregs of society that wouldn’t stand a chance in a normal vocation.
I don't see how, the line would start at the same point opposition goal side but go back wider towards your own goal.
I could live with that in the knowledge that under the current rules it would have been a clear offside. As I've said ruling a goal out because someone's shoulder is a few millimetres offside is a nonsense.
Not really I just want the rules changed to benefit attackers.
Let's be Michael cuntface Oliver will do that anyway regardless of what the current rules are.
I'm indifferent as to whether VAR is kept overall. But I would keep the checks for offside. It should be able to be done objectively, it's a binary decision.
Indeed, good post.
People using a fairly quick and correct offside call from VAR as an argument against the entire institution is new.
The complaints about human error and the like are one thing, but "get rid of VAR, it's speedy and correct decisions" is a line of argument I thought was beyond even the most zealous of those that want it gone!
The complaints about human error and the like are one thing, but "get rid of VAR, it's speedy and correct decisions" is a line of argument I thought was beyond even the most zealous of those that want it gone!
another weekend of ridiculousness, from arsenal red to the everton celebration yellow and plenty more in between. Its a mess.
The whole point of the discussion today is how you define “correct”. Hence pages of discussion about margin of error. And I would argue your definition of “speedy” is also extremely generous.
My opinion on VAR has always been that if it means zero errors and all games are held to same standard then fine. But if you are still going to have arguments over whether or not decisions were correct then what is the point. I genuinely don't remember having as many incidents debated per week pre VAR. And we lose the emotion of celebrating goals etc. VAR should imo not be used to rule out the nails being offside. Technology wise surely it was fine to have goal line technology and retrospective punishment of clearly missed red cards etc
Saw one in the CL that was a fraction of a knee cap offside.
If the you look at it and can't see that it's clearly offside then give the benefit of the advantage to the attacking team.
A lot of the time it feels like they are looking for reasons to rule out goals.
Because before VAR there were so many clearly wrong decisions, some not even close, that something had to be done about it.
The problem is that it's the same shit refs on VAR (and stupid guidelines) that are making the bad decisions in the first place.
Yeah that would work, I don't know what I was thinking earlier. How much of an advantage should attackers have, do you think? I think if you gave them too much you'd start having issues playing a high line.
You sound like the type of scumbag that goes around issuing death threats to refs because they missed a handball.
We have the greatest sport in the world, but have ruined it significantly with VAR and all because whining fans couldn't handle a few decisions going against their team.
We all thought VAR would be brought in to cut out refereeing howlers. Instead, it's been used to identify offsides that are scarcely visible to the human eye, and ridiculously harsh "handballs" that were never even considered to be penalties pre-VAR.
And to put the tin hat on it, there have never been as many refereeing howlers since the introduction of VAR. Absolutely farcical.
And to put the tin hat on it, there have never been as many refereeing howlers since the introduction of VAR. Absolutely farcical.
It’s a low scoring game though, referee mistakes can pretty much decide any game.
As per modern football, it was offside and that is what I thought the moment I saw the image, marginally off. If that were given against us, you would be expecting VAR to rule it out, as well.
It's just the nature of the game now. Everything is mathematical and if the computer can prove it's offside by a hair's breadth, then it is.
It's to remove grey areas in the game. There used to be some leeway for marginal offsides, but because that is so hard to quantify and subjective, it's had to become ruthlessly scientific. People would be bleating about whether or not that goal should have counted if the technology was not in place. Fulham's manager would be saying how 'Manchester United get those decisions'.
It hurts because it was a nice team goal and would have given us a bit of a lift at the end of a tough game, but we have to deal with the reality of what football is now. It would have been scrubbed off for any other team and we haven't been done hard done by.
It's just the nature of the game now. Everything is mathematical and if the computer can prove it's offside by a hair's breadth, then it is.
It's to remove grey areas in the game. There used to be some leeway for marginal offsides, but because that is so hard to quantify and subjective, it's had to become ruthlessly scientific. People would be bleating about whether or not that goal should have counted if the technology was not in place. Fulham's manager would be saying how 'Manchester United get those decisions'.
It hurts because it was a nice team goal and would have given us a bit of a lift at the end of a tough game, but we have to deal with the reality of what football is now. It would have been scrubbed off for any other team and we haven't been done hard done by.
Last edited:
The line doesn't need to be massive just enough so that looking at it with the naked eye the attacker would look more clearly offside. Which you then confirm with the lines. Under the current rules it's not so clear, if you have to zoom in on a freeze frame and draw lines to determine whether or not someone is offside. Then clearly the rule was never designed or introduced for those types of situations.
You do understand that refs let the play go in tight situations? It's possible this would be flagged offside without VAR too. In fact, probably it's likely, as visually Amad looks more offside than he actually is.
So fecking mental that that is enough evidence to rule out a goal. Why are we taking this shit lying down?
You can't really argue about offside calls at the moment, because they're being made (generally) correctly as to how the PGMOL has interpretted the rules.
Imo as with all things PGMOL, it starts at the wrong place and completely misses the point of why the rule was created, instead being reducing things and enabling fastiduous adherance to binary things on a pitch.
The point of offsides was to stop attacking teams gaining an advantage by 'leaving' a player up the pitch. Not to stop attacking teams scoring goals because of a hair's breadth of two incredibly fast athletes moving at pace. But, this is where we are, and the rule has been turned into one of the most crucial parts fo defending.
Personally, I like the idea - in the spirit of offsides - of giving the attacker a lot more advantage, such as making the decision on the furthest part of the defender away from goal versus the closest part of the attacker. Yes it would still come down to precise measurements, but it would be in the spirit of football being about scoring goals.
I also think given all the stuff on frame rates, perspective and all that jazz that most of these decisions could genuinely be given either way, depending on how the refs want it to go. Especially with passes from further back, which isolating the exact moment the ball leaves the foot of the passer is virtually impossible.
Imo as with all things PGMOL, it starts at the wrong place and completely misses the point of why the rule was created, instead being reducing things and enabling fastiduous adherance to binary things on a pitch.
The point of offsides was to stop attacking teams gaining an advantage by 'leaving' a player up the pitch. Not to stop attacking teams scoring goals because of a hair's breadth of two incredibly fast athletes moving at pace. But, this is where we are, and the rule has been turned into one of the most crucial parts fo defending.
Personally, I like the idea - in the spirit of offsides - of giving the attacker a lot more advantage, such as making the decision on the furthest part of the defender away from goal versus the closest part of the attacker. Yes it would still come down to precise measurements, but it would be in the spirit of football being about scoring goals.
I also think given all the stuff on frame rates, perspective and all that jazz that most of these decisions could genuinely be given either way, depending on how the refs want it to go. Especially with passes from further back, which isolating the exact moment the ball leaves the foot of the passer is virtually impossible.
I mean you can still be ruthlessly scientific by applying a wider margin that is realistic.
Being the width of a shoulder ahead of the last defender is not gaining a significant advantage. The defender isn’t playing an offside trap here, he’s caught out and it’s just split second timing that gets the call of offside.
Close calls favouring the attacker makes for a better game
Listen, I hate tight offsides as much as the next bloke - but that is just offside. The way we currently do it in this league there is already a tolerance of something like 5cm - so if you're offside by VAR, you're offside.
The automated offsides are going to come in at some point and there will be incidents way worse then this one.
The automated offsides are going to come in at some point and there will be incidents way worse then this one.
Both lines are 5 cm thick, so the tolerance is 10 cm. There is a visible gap between them here, he's probably around 15 cm offside.