Refs & VAR 2020/2021 Discussion

TheMagicFoolBus said:
But then how do you account for margin of error in terms of framerate?
Click to expand...

If you know the margin of error, which they fecking should, then that's not a problem. It doesn't matter if it's framerate, or bodypart, or what. You only call it an offside if its outside that margin. If you know the ball has moved 3cm in between frames, the player must be more than 3cm offside to call it.
 
So basically the ref against spurs got it right first time then the VAR got him to doubt himself and change his mind.

I think the refs are shit scared. Doesn't help with Dermot Gallagher saying it was the right decision a day later.

All the VAR does is feck things up.
 
11101 said:
If you know the margin of error, which they fecking should, then that's not a problem. It doesn't matter if it's framerate, or bodypart, or what. You only call it an offside if its outside that margin. If you know the ball has moved 3cm in between frames, the player must be more than 3cm offside to call it.
Click to expand...

Well, the margin of error varies depending on the speed and body angle of the two players. VAR cameras have a framerate of 50 fps, players can move around 8 meters per second (that's a bit under 30 km/hour), so therefore that's a 16 cm margin of error for any freeze frame taken off a VAR camera. Add in defenders moving the other way, the ball being kicked, etc and any notion that it's objective goes out the window.
 
11101 said:
Offsides are an easy one. You are either off, or you aren't. I have no problem with VAR being used for that. Handballs too, now the rules have settled down. It hits your hand in an unnatural position or it doesn't.

The problem comes with the open to interpretation rules likes fouls. An easy fix would be to ban slow motion replays on fouls and possibly handballs. Give the referee a replay but if he can't see it in real time, he can't give it.
Click to expand...

The problem is the VAR is getting involved in things that aren't clear obvious errors for some reason.
 
One of the things that struck me as unfair about VAR decisions after reviewing the McTominay/Son incident is that Son actually fouled McTominay by pulling him back and had there not been a goal at stake it would probably have been ruled in McTominay’s favour as Son pulling McTominay back happened before the accidental hand to face.


So, because you have a goal at stake, there is now no way of including that as part of the entire sequence. Son got a hand in the face because McTominay was shrugging off his foul but VAR doesnt have it within the rules that one foul cancels out another so in that situation only the McTominay foul can be considered. It’s completely unbalanced.
 
Pexbo said:
One of the things that struck me as unfair about VAR decisions after reviewing the McTominay/Son incident is that Son actually fouled McTominay by pulling him back and had there not been a goal at stake it would probably have been ruled in McTominay’s favour as Son pulling McTominay back happened before the accidental hand to face.


So, because you have a goal at stake, there is now no way of including that as part of the entire sequence. Son got a hand in the face because McTominay was shrugging off his foul but VAR doesnt have it within the rules that one foul cancels out another so in that situation only the McTominay foul can be considered. It’s completely unbalanced.
Click to expand...

It's completely arbitrary. Presumably they've done it so VAR isn't wasting fecktons of time and bogging the game down, yet they're perfectly happy to have everyone stand around for 2-3 minutes after every goal is scored.

Is there a single person that thinks VAR has improved the sport? It can't claim to be more objective given the ridiculous rules over when and why it can be utilised.
 
TheMagicFoolBus said:
Well, the margin of error varies depending on the speed and body angle of the two players. VAR cameras have a framerate of 50 fps, players can move around 8 meters per second (that's a bit under 30 km/hour), so therefore that's a 16 cm margin of error for any freeze frame taken off a VAR camera. Add in defenders moving the other way, the ball being kicked, etc and any notion that it's objective goes out the window.
Click to expand...

So that's your margin of error. 16cm (if that's correct). Easy.

It's probably not all that difficult for the system to track the players' speed and calculate it in real time.


TheReligion said:
The problem is the VAR is getting involved in things that aren't clear obvious errors for some reason.
Click to expand...

That's why i think those things should be seen in real time only. If the ref can't spot it without freeze frames and slow motion, its not clear and obvious.
 
11101 said:
If you know the margin of error, which they fecking should, then that's not a problem. It doesn't matter if it's framerate, or bodypart, or what. You only call it an offside if its outside that margin. If you know the ball has moved 3cm in between frames, the player must be more than 3cm offside to call it.
Click to expand...
It's incredible how persuasive these aporias sound in some people's heads, even though it was pointed out countless times that this genius solution has not been applied because it isn't a solution at all. If it must be 3cm offside, that only shifts the focus to all the 2cms offsides who are then judged to be onside because they fall outside the rule by exactly 1cm. The problem remains unresolved, standing exactly as it was before.
 
Buster15 said:
Ok. I was of the view that offside was when the ball was passed.
But anyway, there is scope for small errors, especially when offside is down to tiny margins.
It is a classic case of Unintended Consequences.

I have always believed that football is played by humans and humans should implement the laws.
Click to expand...
I agree with you.

I also think it’s strange it’s taken from when the boot hits the ball as if you imagine a ronaldhino style hold the ball on the foot and spin and flick it off as a pass the offside would be from when he first traps the ball and not when he releases the ball for the pass. It doesn’t seem right. (That’s if I’m right about when offside is taken)
 
Moonwalker said:
It's incredible how persuasive these aporias sound in some people's heads, even though it was pointed out countless times that this genius solution has not been applied because it isn't a solution at all. If it must be 3cm offside, that only shifts the focus to all the 2cms offsides who are then judged to be onside because they fall outside the rule by exactly 1cm. The problem remains unresolved, standing exactly as it was before.
Click to expand...

That's not the case if you are doing it based on a known margin of error.

Or the league could put its hand in its pocket and buy high speed cameras, it's the richest sport in the world after all. 50fps is a joke.
 
11101 said:
That's not the case if you are doing it based on a known margin of error.
Click to expand...
You can base it on whatever you want, specifying an exact measure of how much someone needs to be offside leaves the problem unresolved. The focus is just shifted to the margins of that number.
 
That's an excuse for the VAR 'official'. It was very clear the goal scorer was onside, just overrule yourself you divot.
 
It's absolutely shambolic, couldn't draw a clear line so the call on the pitch stands.. yeah right, my ass.

Didn't even need lines.
 
Seems like they mixed up the black players and are shitting themselves so covered it with some nonsensical excuse
 
sullydnl said:
Yep. It looks like the VAR couldn't make a call (for whatever reason) so the decision stayed with what was given on-pitch.
Click to expand...
Ah well its not so bad in my eyes. If anything it shows why VAR is needed!
What a terrible week for it.
 
arthurka said:
It's absolutely shambolic, couldn't draw a clear line so the call on the pitch stands.. yeah right, my ass.

Didn't even need lines.
Click to expand...
It keeps getting worse week by week. I mean really how hard is it to review that one.. No lines needed, just have a butchers and you know it's onside.
 
sullydnl said:
Was there? Bearing in mind they need an angle where they can measure specific body points, not just one where he looks to be onside.
Click to expand...
At 16:20 there is an angle that clearly shows onside. If the tech can't see that, then that tech leaves much to be desired. If that is a correct saying...
 
Remember the story of a flag in Portugal covering the VAR camera so they couldn't use it?
 
"He looks to have doubled West Brom's lead"

"Cavani believes he's put United 2-1 up."

We're at that point where the commentators cant committ to whether there's been a goal or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.