Richarlison

[Baleforce]

Margin of error should always be in the defences favour.

Goals change games.

 

[DTA]

This is such a simple fix man, just make offside determined by the players boot then have a tracker in each boot that will automatically track whether it’s the defenders or attackers boot furthest forward

 

[alekaras]

Amen to that its a ( F)arse.

VAR is not perfection. It's a very good tool that at times is badly used. VAR does not make the calls or set the rules; humans do. It's like saying that a BMW is a brick car, because a bunch of idiots get into accidents driving it.

 

[Kandi1977]

the word "daylight" never appeared in the laws of the game regarding offside

Actually it was. Well not the word daylight, but there had to be a gap between the defender and attacker for it to be offside. I started my refereeing career with those rules, and I think I still have the books from the course, with this visualised with drawings.

 

[Baleforce]

Actually it was. Well not the word daylight, but there had to be a gap between the defender and attacker for it to be offside. I started my refereeing career with those rules, and I think I still have the books from the course, with this visualised with drawings.

so the word “daylight” wasn’t in the rules

would have been crazy to not be offside as the light was artificial and not from the sun

 

[parklane1]

VAR is not my favourite buttplug. It's a very good tool that at times is badly used. VAR does not make the calls or set the rules; humans do. It's like saying that a BMW is a brick car, because a bunch of idiots get into accidents driving it.

It was supposed to make decisions better/ fairer i have been to a lot games this season when the VAR HAS BEEN a Farse. so we will have to agree to disagree. You mention the word "very good tool" and i I can't dance more. And most of the fans i see at games are of the same opinion.

 

[alekaras]

It was supposed to make decisions better/ fairer i have been to a lot games this season when the VAR HAS BEEN a Farse. so we will have to agree to disagree. You mention the word "very good tool" and i I can't dance more. And most of the fans i see at games are of the same opinion.

I respect your expertise in football matters, but in the case of VAR you continuously conflate the tool with the people using it. If you put a blind man behind the wheel of a car and he crashes it, it's not the car's fault. As for the opinion of most of the fans, if they too conflate the technology with the people who use it, then their opinion is meaningless, because it is based on the wrong criteria.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

I respect your expertise in football matters, but in the case of VAR you continuously conflate the tool with the people using it. If you put a blind man behind the wheel of a car and he crashes it, it's not the car's fault. As for the opinion of most of the fans, if they too conflate the technology with the people who use it, then their opinion is meaningless, because it is based on the wrong criteria.

Fully agree however for offsides, which is the area they see the tool the most the tool isn’t currently capable of doing what is needed, so you have double trouble. The same refs making the wiring calls and the tech confusing rather then helping
They used to average line calls correct 98.7% of the time…. That’s an accuracy that’s world class in any organisation. Now they haven’t improved it just made it even more scrutinised

 

[Lilbaz]

VAR is not my favourite buttplug. It's a very good tool that at times is badly used. VAR does not make the calls or set the rules; humans do. It's like saying that a BMW is a brick car, because a bunch of idiots get into accidents driving it.

It's more like an electric car that you have to stop halfway and charge for 15 minutes on your commute to work ever day and back. People won't want it. Because it would be annoying.

 

[Bullet]

This is such a simple fix man, just make offside determined by the players boot then have a tracker in each boot that will automatically track whether it’s the defenders or attackers boot furthest forward

They could just use the sports tracking bras that all players wear; they must all have accurate GPS or whatever. Use that dot on each player to determine where they are.
And use the 'accelerometer in the ball' from the World Cup and that is job done.

 

[Grays_1890]

I respect your expertise in football matters, but in the case of VAR you continuously conflate the tool with the people using it. If you put a blind man behind the wheel of a car and he crashes it, it's not the car's fault. As for the opinion of most of the fans, if they too conflate the technology with the people who use it, then their opinion is meaningless, because it is based on the wrong criteria.

VAR is the term for the entire operation though that includes human element. In your example one element of VAR would be the car and thats the tech, as long as humans are a crucial element of the operation and the guidelines for use are inconsistent its fair to say that VAR in its entirety is extremely clunky

 

[alekaras]

It's more like an electric car that you have to stop halfway and charge for 15 minutes on your commute to work ever day and back. People won't want it. Because it would be annoying.

Most VAR calls are made within 15-20 seconds and don't even interrupt the flow of the game. It doesn't take 2 mins for every single one, but those are the ones that we get fixated about. A better example would have been you take a new train that cuts your commute in half, but one time in 10 it takes you 50% longer.

 

[Grays_1890]

Most VAR calls are made within 15-20 seconds and don't even interrupt the flow of the game. It doesn't take 2 mins for every single one, but those are the ones that we get fixated about. A better example would have been you take a new train that cuts your commute in half, but one time in 10 it takes you 50% longer.

The reason for the fixation is that those that happen for that long, by nature of them should not even be considered. Clear and obvious is not a 2-3/4/5 minute process IMO

It no matter that they might only happen to one game per weekend, its a clear inconsistency in process

 

[Spur of the moment]

You have to draw a line somewhere. No matter how thick. A millimetre over will be offside.

Personally I wish they'd just scrap the lines and use the naked eye the same as the lino used to do. If then within say 10 seconds it's not blindingly obvious, award the goal and cut out all this excruciating time-wasting nonsense that is killing the thrill of scoring.

 

[Raziel]

You have to draw a line somewhere. No matter how thick. A millimetre over will be offside.

The problem is the line itself is flimflam, my reference above

- Basically because you don't know how high/far/angle/quality of camera is, the line isn't even x inches accurate, so slightly thicker/thinner is no difference, add in the frame choice being open to human error, it's not even close to accurate.

Simple answer is either spend the money to make it accurate or the player has to be obviously offside, if you have to draw a line, not obvious ..

 

[Lilbaz]

The problem is the line itself is flimflam, my reference above

- Basically because you don't know how high/far/angle/quality of camera is, the line isn't even x inches accurate, so slightly thicker/thinner is no difference, add in the frame choice being open to human error, it's not even close to accurate.

Simple answer is either spend the money to make it accurate or the player has to be obviously offside, if you have to draw a line, not obvious ..

Thought they had their own cameras that they fit? It's not the same as what you see on tv which sky or bt does themselves.

 

[Raziel]

Thought they had their own cameras that they fit? It's not the same as what you see on tv which sky or bt does themselves.

The bath study specifically says the Cameras used do not have appropriate frame rate and resolution, and the accuracy is heavily impacted by angle (so without cameras always able to provide a consistent angle) human error is highly likely.

My opinion is you would probably need a computer to address the angle/distance (from a known quantity), plus better camera with the frame rate & resolution required.

So it comes back to -> if you admit the system inherently is not accurate, then you need a margin for error, if that is a wide line or just not obvious, admit it. My big problem is the pretense that these lines drawn and making a sub 2 CM call is fudging accurate, and trying to justify delaying a game by 3+ minutes to make a bad decision,

 

[Lilbaz]

The bath study specifically says the Cameras used do not have appropriate frame rate and resolution, and the accuracy is heavily impacted by angle (so without cameras always able to provide a consistent angle) human error is highly likely.

My opinion is you would probably need a computer to address the angle/distance (from a known quantity), plus better camera with the frame rate & resolution required.

So it comes back to -> if you admit the system inherently is not accurate, then you need a margin for error, if that is a wide line or just not obvious, admit it. My big problem is the pretense that these lines drawn and making a sub 2 CM call is fudging accurate, and trying to justify delaying a game by 3+ minutes to make a bad decision,

We've been doing photo finishes for decades. Surely they can get the right cameras or they just being cheap?

 

[Raziel]

We've been doing photo finishes for decades. Surely they can get the right cameras or they just being cheap?

Photo finish is at a "finish line", one place and you don't also have to see 40 yards back (where the pass came from)

But yes, they are being cheap, because you know the FA/UEFA are strapped for cash

 

[alekaras]

VAR is the term for the entire operation though that includes human element. In your example one element of VAR would be the car and thats the tech, as long as humans are a crucial element of the operation and the guidelines for use are inconsistent its fair to say that VAR in its entirety is extremely clunky

It is the entire operation, but the human element has always been there, be it behind the screen or on the pitch. But people complain about VAR, not the VAR officials, and that is a bit disingenuous, because the tech doesn't make the calls. Humans do.

As for the guidelines, they are pretty clear: they're the laws of the game. We may not like them, but technically if you're 1mm ahead of the last defender, you're offside. If the ball just brushes your arm when it's hit from half a meter away and you're jumping for the ball with your back turned to it, it's a penalty. So in this case the issue is with rules, not with the tech. The tech just highlights how ridiculous some of these rules are. It's not the tech's fault.