VAR Discussion thread

CSF

Weepsie wrote: »

The technology is bs. It's a human coming up with the lines. You can look at the same incident from 2 angles and get a different answer.

Unless the camera is directly in line with play it is not infallible.

Whether you think the technology is perfect or not (I suspect you don’t know and neither do I if I’m honest), if you think your naked eye is a better judge that seems delusional.

If they wanna get rid of this tech to speed up the game, I think that would be good. I really don’t think the time it takes outweighs the perceived benefits of getting the marginal ones right

But this thing where every time they have the VAR make an offside call, you’ve a thousand lads who absolutely know better and yet the standard of officiating in our own national league remains abysmal. Doesn’t add up.

CSF

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

Just give benefit of doubt to attacking team, like the good old days. If it looks onside after a quick (maybe minute or less) review it's on, this slither of shin or toenail being off after a few minutes is tiresome.

With them using technology they’ve approved, for them there is no doubt. You either use the tech and offside is offside by a whisker or a limb, or you get rid of it and use an eye level check.

You can’t continue to use that tech, reach a conclusion but then decide to give benefit to the attacker anyway.

Agent Coulson

They really are just making it up as the go along.

Ohmeha

The "Clear & Obvious" and "Conclusive Evidence" disclaimer for overturning decisions still hasn't been copped on by PL after a few months when similar video evidence has been successfully utilised in other sports for years now

kerplun k

Fact is, even if the decision is right by the law of the game, the way they present an offside decision is complete bollox. Two things need to happen, 1.) A rule change that benefits the attacker. 2.) The presentation of the decision needs to be clearer.

.G.

Solution to the offside problem is simple. Stop drawing lines. VAR has a look at the camera angles, no lines drawn. If the players is obviously off then call it that, if he isn't obviously off he gets the benefit of the doubt applied like the laws of the game currently state.

However this is how it was in the bundesliga and they had to change it to the same as the Premier league because broadcasters started drawing the lines on the VAR pictures showing the incorrect calls on the fractionally offside ones and everyone still complained that the decisions weren't right.

Essentially we just have to decide what we prefer complaining about because there'll always be something.

Agent Coulson

The PL should follow how VAR is done in the MLS.

Would there be anything to be said for changing the offside rule so any part of the body above the waist cannot be offside?

It just seems that the close calls are all ones where a shoulder or ear is beyond the line, so the player is being penalised for anticipating and naturally leaning forward. I think there would be greater acceptance of VAR if it was just looking at the positions of feet and legs.

tanko

Agent Coulson wrote: »

The PL should follow how VAR is done in the MLS.

How is it different over there?

CSF

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Would there be anything to be said for changing the offside rule so any part of the body above the waist cannot be offside?

It just seems that the close calls are all ones where a shoulder or ear is beyond the line, so the player is being penalised for anticipating and naturally leaning forward. I think there would be greater acceptance of VAR if it was just looking at the positions of feet and legs.

Is this not just moving the arbitrary line though? Will this lead to any less freak outs over someone being offside by a toenail?

People largely just love to have an oul complain.

monkey9

I'm pro VAR and technology being used in football. We're heading into the year 2020, of course technology should be used to help the officials.

But when i say technology, i mean simply having an official watching the game on tv as we see it and informing the referee of any blatant errors, it's not rocket science.

There's no need to be calibrating offside decisions. The very fact that there's calibration going on should be your answer, just go with the referee's decision.

VAR should be there for when someone is clearly on or offside and the officials have ruled otherwise. Not whether someone's elbow or big toe is sticking out.
There's no need for any charts and graphs, line drawings or NASA technology. We're not sending someone to the moon.

Just have a look at the replay on tv and tell the ref he's missed something blatant, otherwise there's no need to get involved.

That's all VAR needs to be, an extra offical watching the match on tv as we all are and seeing what the viewers are seeing.

CSF

CSF wrote: »

Is this not just moving the arbitrary line though? Will this lead to any less freak outs over someone being offside by a toenail?

People largely just love to have an oul complain.

I think there might be less to complain about if it's the foot. The argument then is reduced to saying "it was very marginal but correct" as opposed to "how is an armpit even offside" which seems to be the common complaint when a shoulder is beyond the line.

smelly sock

Offside is offside. Does it matter by how much?

.G.

The difficulty with law changes and things like feet only is that its the IFAB that have to make law changes and those changes will apply to the entire game at all levels worldwide. So then, if its feet only for example, that becomes very hard for a lino in a non VAR league to see peoples feet from however far away he is to them.

They just need to stop over complicating it, they said it would be for clear and obvious errors only, none of these millimeter tight offsides are clear and obvious errors so don't examine then, stick with the onfield decision after a quick look at the angles without any lines and move on.

CSF

Deleted User wrote: »

I think there might be less to complain about if it's the foot. The argument then is reduced to saying "it was very marginal but correct" as opposed to "how is an armpit even offside" which seems to be the common complaint when a shoulder is beyond the line.

Think you're underestimating the average human being's desire to complain.

osarusan

Deleted User wrote: »

I think there might be less to complain about if it's the foot. The argument then is reduced to saying "it was very marginal but correct" as opposed to "how is an armpit even offside" which seems to be the common complaint when a shoulder is beyond the line.

But you will have people saying 'sure his hip is just an inch offside, what does it matter?'

Wherever the line is, there will be marginal calls that people will be annoyed about.

I don't see a way around that.

Are there marginal calls that make VAR look a bit silly or overly fastidious? Definitely, and unavoidably. But overall, it has improved the big offside calls being right.

Weepsie

If you've to calculate it down to the absolute mm, then it's not doing its job.

You could then argue, part of a body part is ahead of play bit not the entire body part as it's not explicit in the rules.

If they're going to that much bother it's going to turn people away.


And of course they're going to say its calibrated to be as accurate as possible, but unless they have a direct angle I don't believe it is fallible enough to making these nonsense decisions.

cj maxx

Nunu wrote: »

They said shoulder on sky.

Can you score with your shoulder?
Anyway, I think var should be there, albeit like challenges in the NFL.
Var mentions the ref should look at something, ref looks at it on a monitor while in audio contact with the var ref. Ref sticks or changes his decision. Simples.
Discussions on it are for motd as are others.
Its been mentioned here already and imo I by a mile the best thing

cj maxx

Nunu wrote: »

They said shoulder on sky.

Can you score with your shoulder?
Anyway, I think var should be there, albeit like challenges in the NFL.
Var mentions to the ref he should look at something, ref looks at it on a monitor while in audio contact with the var ref. Ref sticks or changes his decision. Simples.
Discussions on it are for motd as are others.
Its been mentioned here already and imo I by a mile the best thing

Agent Coulson

MLS weekly review of all incidents open and clear for fans to to see the reasons they were given not given.

kingshankly

cjmc wrote: »

Can you score with your shoulder?
Anyway, I think var should be there, albeit like challenges in the NFL.
Var mentions to the ref he should look at something, ref looks at it on a monitor while in audio contact with the var ref. Ref sticks or changes his decision. Simples.
Discussions on it are for motd as are others.
Its been mentioned here already and imo I by a mile the best thing

If the just change it that you calculate by feet only would make it so easier to call

Weepsie

Anyone see the stuff that leads to Everton's goal? Corner, which directly lead to a free kick which lead to their goal. The corner was never in a million years correct. It wasn't even difficult,

If they can go back nearly so far for stuff that happens in play, they should be able to back to that. Or they should be doing a very quick VAR check for all Corners.

CSF

Weepsie wrote: »

Anyone see the stuff that leads to Everton's goal? Corner, which directly lead to a free kick which lead to their goal. The corner was never in a million years correct. It wasn't even difficult,

If they can go back nearly so far for stuff that happens in play, they should be able to back to that. Or they should be doing a very quick VAR check for all Corners.

Hold on, weren’t previously complaining about VAR intervening too much?

Richard Hillman

I think Offside should be judged by the head. The rest just makes it messy.

There are a lot of people dismissing the idea of introducing a margin of error.

Just say the Margin of Error is 30cm. If the player is inside the 30cm margin, then it was probably offside but not conclusive so we'll stick with the original decision.

If the player is 31cm offside, then the margin says he is offside. If a player is 31CM past the offside line, It will be pretty visible it will be enough to say its clear and obvious, a decision can be overturned.

I Dont think people are going to get picky over 29cm v 31cm. 29cm is probably offside, nobody will be saying the goal should stand/ruled out,theyll just stick with the original decision.

Any manager/player whinging about a margin of error is a spoofer

RasTa

https://twitter.com/RobHarris/status/1211250109335457792

So simple. Aussies doing it right. Although they are just copying the rugby format.

dfx-

CSF wrote: »

Hold on, weren’t previously complaining about VAR intervening too much?

and yet to do the job fairly and consistently it should be intervening further for previous phases of play.

No doubt that any changes will be to the laws instead of what it should be, how/when VAR is applied. There is no need to change the offside rule to suit the application of VAR like the attacking handball was.

martingriff

Weepsie wrote: »

Anyone see the stuff that leads to Everton's goal? Corner, which directly lead to a free kick which lead to their goal. The corner was never in a million years correct. It wasn't even difficult,

If they can go back nearly so far for stuff that happens in play, they should be able to back to that. Or they should be doing a very quick VAR check for all Corners.

VAR can not comment on corners as it's a restart so that is why it could not pull it for that

In saying that it needs to greatly amended need to see how it works in other countries. This checking pixel by pixel is stupid. My idea of a video ref was rechecking an incident in real time and maybe once in slow motion to see if it is clear and obvious mistake

smelly sock

Var making a complete **** of liv v wol

Harry Palmr

Another example of clear and obvious being ignored by the people who run VAR.

BorneTobyWilde

The two decisions for Liverpool were correct, even if it's unbearable for others. VAR is very accurate now with Offsides. It was poor earlier in season.
Firmino's armpit decision was a joke, it was a case of where does the arm end and the body begin, hmmm lets just say his armpit was offside, that is going to extremes.
But today the Wolves players leg was off and by some inches. This is what VAR should catch, and it did.

PhlegmyMoses

"VAR is very accurate with offsides"

What about when the player releases the ball? Genuinely not sure how they get that down to the tiny detail they use for the offside line. Could be a method that I am unaware of tbf, but it doesnt seem to have the same level of micro detail as the line drawing.

BorneTobyWilde

Sheffield took lead against Man City, again very tight, But the blue line starts a foot apart from red line, and then the lines merge as they cross the pitch.



Sometimes it feels they are determined to find an offside rather than prove it wasn't

pjohnson

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

VAR is very accurate now with Offsides.

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Sheffield took lead against Man City, again very tight, But the blue line starts a foot apart from red line, and then the lines merge as they cross the pitch.



Sometimes it feels they are determined to find an offside rather than prove it wasn't

I look forward to Borne1's answer to Borne2 re. accuracy :pac:

BorneTobyWilde

pjohnson wrote: »

I look forward to Borne1's answer to Borne2 re. accuracy :pac:

Thought the lines on City one were weird. Could be a very poor picture though, I'll have to see it later on MOTD

.G.

It's exactly the same now as it was earlier in the season. We got our first furore over these lines when Sterling fell foul to them in the first game City played. I don't like it but the decisions are the same now as they were then, they're still sh!te but they are correct according to the current laws and the IFAB VAR offside protocol which all the major leagues follow.

It will have to change and we'll all be moaning about something else next season. Or maybe it won't change at all and we'll just get used to it like everything else.

As seen above, the Sterling one was the first "armpit" effort its just that they never actually said that word until Firmino and everyone has lost their sh!t about it since then. It's not the actual armpit thats off, its just a word to describe the part of the body where the arm joins the torso

j8wk2feszrnpao

smelly sock wrote: »

Var making a complete **** of liv v wol

By being correct on both decisions?
People have lost their minds.

BorneTobyWilde

Rules need changing

No1: Only use the feet to judge offside
No2: Instead of using a line the width of a hair use a 1 Foot line to allow a threshold to be breached.

Leaning players should not come into it, you can't leave your feet behind when you run up to head it in, just use the feet for lines full stop .

BorneTobyWilde

.G. wrote: »

It's exactly the same now as it was earlier in the season. We got our first furore over these lines when Sterling fell foul to them in the first game City played. I don't like it but the decisions are the same now as they were then, they're still sh!te but they are correct according to the current laws and the IFAB VAR offside protocol which all the major leagues follow.

It will have to change and we'll all be moaning about something else next season. Or maybe it won't change at all and we'll just get used to it like everything else.

As seen above, the Sterling one was the first "armpit" effort its just that they never actually said that word until Firmino and everyone has lost their sh!t about it since then. It's not the actual armpit thats off, its just a word to describe the part of the body where the arm joins the torso

If they go only with the feet on that one it's offside for Sterling. It's the position of the feet that give the advantage, as one player might be moving forward, while the other is trying to stop or retreat to win an offside. Should judge them on the position of the feet.

.G.

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

If they go only with the feet on that one it's offside for Sterling. It's the position of the feet that give the advantage, as one player might be moving forward, while the other is trying to stop or retreat to win an offside. Should judge them on the position of the feet.

I was in agreement on this until it was pointed out to me that they can't change the rules just for leagues with VAR. Any rule change applies to all leagues everywhere, VAR or not. Its quite difficult to see feet when your a lino standing 20 odd yards away.

Weepsie

This interpretation of the offside being adopted is surely against the spirit of the rule.

It's designed to prevent any advantage from being offside. A mm or few cm that are so marginal are not what the rule was every designed for.

It's a complete farce how they've decided to officiate it and it's properly spoiling the enjoyment of games as a neutral, never mind the teams it goes against.

.G.

Yeah that I do agree with. The laws of the game are supposed to give the benefit of the doubt to the attacker so when they disallow goals over mm's it's very hard to take. It needs tweaking but there doesn't appear to be any consensus on how to tweak it.

j8wk2feszrnpao

Weepsie wrote: »

This interpretation of the offside being adopted is surely against the spirit of the rule.

It's designed to prevent any advantage from being offside. A mm or few cm that are so marginal are not what the rule was every designed for.

It's a complete farce how they've decided to officiate it and it's properly spoiling the enjoyment of games as a neutral, never mind the teams it goes against.

So, what’s the answer?
Come up with the law that works.
At the moment VAR is technically getting it right. There’s no “spirit” in the law for offside. You’re off or not.
People don’t want tight offsides called and they haven’t come up with the law/protocol that resolves the issue.
Officials are getting offsides wrong, VAR is technically getting it more correct than the officials.
So what’s the answer?

.G.

Don't draw lines, Use all the angles available and the stills and decide with your eyes. None of these tight ones would get called offside doing it that way.

eigrod

.G. wrote: »

Don't draw lines, Use all the angles available and the stills and decide with your eyes. None of these tight ones would get called offside doing it that way.

The closest thing in other sports i can think of is the forward pass in rugby (ie moving passing player, moving ball, moving receiving player all involved) - the ref, his touch judges and the TMO look at it on screen and make a call - ref has final say. None of your lines used there. Sometimes they get it wrong, but their decision is accepted.

Weepsie

munstermagic11 wrote: »

So, what’s the answer?
Come up with the law that works.
At the moment VAR is technically getting it right. There’s no “spirit” in the law for offside. You’re off or not.
People don’t want tight offsides called and they haven’t come up with the law/protocol that resolves the issue.
Officials are getting offsides wrong, VAR is technically getting it more correct than the officials.
So what’s the answer?

But they're not. They can say they are calibrating it all they want, but you can look at the same indicident from 2 angles and draw different conclusions. They could spend hours and still not be 100%. When it's that marginal, I don't believe they should be going against the call on the pitch.

j8wk2feszrnpao

Weepsie wrote: »

But they're not. They can say they are calibrating it all they want, but you can look at the same indicident from 2 angles and draw different conclusions. They could spend hours and still not be 100%. When it's that marginal, I don't believe they should be going against the call on the pitch.

I reckon they are getting more right than the officials. And they are showing that (as marginal as it might be) that they are getting most calls right (even if people don’t like it).
So if someone is a few cm onside, and VAR shows it, the onfield decision stands, even if wrong?
Define marginal? Cause you need that.

Utopia Parkway

For those keeping score. This is from ESPN yesterday.

j8wk2feszrnpao

Utopia Parkway wrote: »

For those keeping score. This is from ESPN yesterday.

If I'm reading that right, it has given as many as it's taken away? And that's the death of football?

beggars_bush

The only way of ending 30 years without the title for Liverpool was to bring in a system that's bent and can be manipulated.
The whole of the country knows it too

Not once this season in the Premier League has a referee gone to a pitchside monitor to view the replays. Joke

Guy:Incognito

Theyre trying so hard to give the title to Liverpool they disallowed a Sheff Utd goal and let the ref assist one for City. Worst cheats ever.