Refs & VAR 2020/2021 Discussion

[Zlatan 7]

You can see the ball has left his foot, just barely, and of course they're limited by the technology/framerates etc they have but realistically that's probably onside if you're counting the exact moment his foot connects with the ball.

I’d love to see the frame before that. The rule is when the foot touches the ball not when it leaves and that blurry picture does look like it’s just left his foot to be fair.
shame we’ll never get to see the other frame they could pause at.

 

[WeePat]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Berbasbullet]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Do we know that’s the one the refs used?

 

[Pogue Mahone]

That’s far from one of the tightest offsides this season. He looked clearly offside from the first replay.

 

[Beachryan]

Personally, I really think they have to change the offside rule now. It's not fulfilling the reason the law exists.

The rule wasn't introduced to be used in these ultra-marginal scenarios. It was introduced to stop goal-hanging and ruining the sport.

It's all a farce now imo. Given how much rule-enforcement is down the referees interpretation of the 'spirit of the game', having these minutia determine cup final just feels ludicrous.

Review it once, in real time. If it's obvious from a single replay that the player is offside (see Drogba, or that godamn Porto goal Scholes had ruled out) then correct it. If it requires geometry, f*ck that.

 

[WeePat]

Do we know that’s the one the refs used?

I don't know. Some have said it isn't the same as the TV broadcast, but I honestly don't know what they uuse.

 

[Berbasbullet]

I don't know. Some have said it isn't the same as the TV broadcast, but I honestly don't know what they uuse.

It’s annoying that’s there’s a lot of secrecy behind it, and the screenshot makes a great point if they’re measuring from that point then it’s just wrong.

 

[cyberman]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Try kicking a ball, its fraction on fractions from contact to ball moving. Surely its a non factor? That looks as much on the foot as off

 

[Flying_Heckfish]

Granted I am a Leicester fan and might be perceived as bias, I will say what I have always said about offside VAR decisions.

My opinion is that if the decision can be made quickly then it should be made, if it needs several reruns which some decisions do, then go with the on field referee's. In this case they made the decision quickly, and it was clear on the replay it was off. We benefited from it so easy for me to say that, but it is something I have said in the past.

Yeah I agree with this.

This one wasn't close, you could see from ther first replay he was clearly off.

But when it gets down to the millimeter, spending five mins debating it, this does affect the flow of play. It's not 'clear and obvious' at this point, go with the on-field decision - however that should favour the attacker IMO.

 

[WeePat]

It’s annoying that’s there’s a lot of secrecy behind it, and the screenshot makes a great point if they’re measuring from that point then it’s just wrong.

Yeah, I agree. Based on what the broadcast used it isn't offside, and to be honest, that's all we really have to go on. If VAR uses something else to measure it, then OK, they may well have accurately confirmed it is offside, but that can't really be part of the discussion.

 

[WeePat]

Try kicking a ball, its fraction on fractions from contact to ball moving. Surely its a non factor? That looks as much on the foot as off

Well when the offside call is that tight, surely it matters? The ball has clearly left Silva's boot in the image above.

 

[slyadams]

My issue with VAR for offsides is that the various inaccuracies will add up: the frame the ball hits the foot, the calibration and placement of the cameras, hell even the resolution of the picture the use to draw the lines. They then proceed in some cases to come up with results that are literally a centimetre or two offside and I cannot believe the system we have is accurate to that.

I would have no problem using the video some other way, but they are using it in a way that the accuracy cannot support.

 

[sullydnl]

Been differing reports on the frame rates of the cameras VAR use for offsides, so it's hard to know the margin of error (which will be inconsistent anyway based on various factors).

People complaining about the accuracy usually cite that the frame rate they use is 50fps, the same as is broadcast. But we know that a) they have to shoot at a higher frame rate than that, b) the VAR have access to higher frame rate images than are broadcast and c) that the company who run VAR happily use much higher frame rate cameras in other sports and indeed other situations in football. So unless there's some technical reason they specifically have to use the 50fps images for offside....

But regardless, it looked offside to the naked eye, it was confirmed offside by the tech which is the most accurate measure we currently have and it was certainly less close than many other offside calls that are made every week, either by VAR or linesman. So that's fine, I think. Sure, it will be better when the more accurate semi-automated tech is introduced but for now he's offside as far as anyone can tell and that's a good basis for Leicester not to have their win stolen from them.

Not disallowing the Leicester goal for handball in the build-up was the correct call too.

 

[Mrs Smoker]

Whenever the ref goes to monitor, they see what we see in the replays, no some special footage only VAR has.

Think they're using same footage we see for offsides too. They do play with their lines there.

 

[Bobcat]

Personally, I really think they have to change the offside rule now. It's not fulfilling the reason the law exists.

The rule wasn't introduced to be used in these ultra-marginal scenarios. It was introduced to stop goal-hanging and ruining the sport.

It's all a farce now imo. Given how much rule-enforcement is down the referees interpretation of the 'spirit of the game', having these minutia determine cup final just feels ludicrous.

Review it once, in real time. If it's obvious from a single replay that the player is offside (see Drogba, or that godamn Porto goal Scholes had ruled out) then correct it. If it requires geometry, f*ck that.

Could not agree more. I was positive to VAR because i thought it would rid us of diving and playacting, which is has to a degree (unless you are playing Spurs) but these ultra tight offsides are ridiculous.

 

[cyberman]

Well when the offside call is that tight, surely it matters? The ball has clearly left Silva's boot in the image above.

But how much movement can a payer really make between firstly contacting the ball and making ths thing move? Plus its clearly offside in real time anyway, a still wasnt needed.

 

[Hulksmash]

Please change the Offside Rule. It was introduced to stop goal-hanging and now it takes away goals and make Defenders use Offside Trap every Free Kick and Counter Attack. Offside Rule is currently Anti Entertainment

 

[mitchmouse]

I have no idea what the commentator and pundit (was it oaf Jenas?) were on about - I called it offside with the naked eye. This is how VAR should work, making the result of a game correct

 

[mitchmouse]

Could not agree more. I was positive to VAR because i thought it would rid us of diving and playacting, which is has to a degree (unless you are playing Spurs) but these ultra tight offsides are ridiculous.

this wasn't anywhere close to be tight

 

[Longshanks]

Been differing reports on the frame rates of the cameras VAR use for offsides, so it's hard to know the margin of error (which will be inconsistent anyway based on various factors).

People complaining about the accuracy usually cite that the frame rate they use is 50fps, the same as is broadcast. But we know that a) they have to shoot at a higher frame rate than that, b) the VAR have access to higher frame rate images than are broadcast and c) that the company who run VAR happily use much higher frame rate cameras in other sports and indeed other situations in football. So unless there's some technical reason they specifically have to use the 50fps images for offside....

But regardless, it looked offside to the naked eye, it was confirmed offside by the tech which is the most accurate measure we currently have and it was certainly less close than many other offside calls that are made every week, either by VAR or linesman. So that's fine, I think. Sure, it will be better when the more accurate semi-automated tech is introduced but for now he's offside as far as anyone can tell and that's a good basis for Leicester not to have their win stolen from them.

Not disallowing the Leicester goal for handball in the build-up was the correct call too.

It is 50FPS because for offside calls they use the broadcast pictures and pick the best angle they can and then the frame that they deem to be closest to the foot touching the ball.

There is a margin of error for all offside calls using VAR it depends on how fast the players in question are moving lets say for example Chilwell was moving at 5 MPS that means that he would move 10cm in between frames generating a 10cm margin of error. And thats only taking Chilwells movement in to account, the last defender is also moving so there is an added margin of error for him aswell.

 

[Gringo]

I cant believe we're glossing over the fact Perez handballed it

 

[sullydnl]

It is 50FPS because for offside calls they use the broadcast pictures and pick the best angle they can and then the frame that they deem to be closest to the foot touching the ball.

There is a margin of error for all offside calls using VAR it depends on how fast the players in question are moving lets say for example Chilwell was moving at 5 MPS that means that he would move 10cm in between frames generating a 10cm margin of error. And thats only taking Chilwells movement in to account, the last defender is also moving so there is an added margin of error for him aswell.

Why would they use broadcast pictures though when we know the game is shot at a higher frame rate than that and we know that they have access to higher frame rate footage than is broadcast?

I've seen different sources say they do/don't use the broadcast standard images but nobody has ever explained why they would have to.

 

[sullydnl]

I cant believe we're glossing over the fact Perez handballed it

It's not a handball as the ball deflects directly off his knee into his hand. And it's not an attacking handball as the goal doesn't come directly from it.

 

[Thunderhead]

I cant believe we're glossing over the fact Perez handballed it

Read the thread, they changed the laws back in March so accidental handball from a player that leads to another player scoring is not deemed as an offence now

 

[Zlatan 7]

Why would they use broadcast pictures though when we know the game is shot at a higher frame rate than that and we know that they have access to higher frame rate footage than is broadcast?

I've seen different sources say they do/don't use the broadcast standard images but nobody has ever explained why they would have to.

How do we sometimes see the lines being adjusted in the pic we are watching? Isn’t that the Var adjusting the lines in the picture we see? Or is that just for us and they use their own one aswell separately?

 

[ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg]

How do we sometimes see the lines being adjusted in the pic we are watching? Isn’t that the Var adjusting the lines in the picture we see? Or is that just for us and they use their own one aswell separately?

it has to be the same pictures.

the sooner we get some transparency over the decision making process, the better.

 

[Mrs Smoker]

Just now at Alkmaar game back in Dutchlandia they have shown nice view to what the VAR refs are watching on the screens. And all the screens were from the broadcast footage.

Was not offside situation though, but still, if they had different footage, they'd watch it here as well, wouldn't they?

 

[UnofficialDevil]

Offside rule needs to be changed now, it's a joke and it's ruining the game. Should be half a body ahead to be considered offside.

 

[cyberman]

How do we sometimes see the lines being adjusted in the pic we are watching? Isn’t that the Var adjusting the lines in the picture we see? Or is that just for us and they use their own one aswell separately?

Might be same pictures but not same quality.
Hawkeye at cricket uses 340 fps but you dont need a special tv when they broadcast the call for an LBW in briadcast quality.
You can literally watch the same feed, at home, in SD, HD and Ultra whatever the feck HD!

 

[Mrs Smoker]

https://www.premierleague.com/news/1488423

The Premier League is unique in European competition in that the whole process is displayed to broadcasters so fans can see in real time how a decision is reached.

For the Premier League, five cameras are calibrated: the main wide camera, both 18-yard box cameras and both goalline cameras.

Hawk-Eye can also use any broadcast camera to identify the point of contact with the ball by the attacker, and synchronises all cameras for this purpose.

The broadcast cameras operate with 50 frames per second, so the point of contact with the ball is one of those frames inside the 50 per second.

 

[sullydnl]

Just now at Alkmaar game back in Dutchlandia they have shown nice view to what the VAR refs are watching on the screens. And all the screens were from the broadcast footage.

Was not offside situation though, but still, if they had different footage, they'd watch it here as well, wouldn't they?

That may well be the case, I'm just not sure why it would be.

For example, this is taken from FIFA's description of the tech available at the 2018 World Cup:

The video assistant referee team has access to 33 broadcast cameras, eight of which are super slow-motion and four of which are ultra slow-motion cameras. In addition, they have access to two offside cameras. These two cameras are only available to the video assistant referee team.

That seems to suggest that in addition to the broadcast cameras (some of which are ultra slow-motion ones anyway), they have additional non-broadcast cameras specifically for offside. So I don't get why the PL or other leagues wouldn't. Unless there's some technical reason they can't or they were just too cheap to get a better camera system?

 

[Mrs Smoker]

That was World Cup, THE event of football, and first time where VAR was used on any big stage (if I recall correctly). It had to work, and it did work great, I was thrilled with the VAR usage there. But 20 teams, 20 stadiums in Premiership, maybe they really are cheap.

Another reason why I believe what we see is what they see is that there's no clear communication on technology. You don't see any quotes from FA saying they have better cameras but they just don't show us that, no "believe us, we have additional footage and we clicked right when the ball is played" type of quotes. And for instance see above some quotes from the official Premier League page about VAR, they only mention 50 FPS for broadcast cameras, surely if they had anything with more, they would have mentioned it.

I wish there was complete transparency about the VAR, tell us everything, small details about the process. Some of us might be interested.

 

[Longshanks]

Why would they use broadcast pictures though when we know the game is shot at a higher frame rate than that and we know that they have access to higher frame rate footage than is broadcast?

I've seen different sources say they do/don't use the broadcast standard images but nobody has ever explained why they would have to.

Who films the game at a higher frame rate than the broadcasters? Other than the goaline technology cameras.

 

[Longshanks]

Why would they use broadcast pictures though when we know the game is shot at a higher frame rate than that and we know that they have access to higher frame rate footage than is broadcast?

I've seen different sources say they do/don't use the broadcast standard images but nobody has ever explained why they would have to.

Who films the game at a higher frame rate than the broadcasters? Other than the goaline technology cameras.

 

[sullydnl]

Who films the game at a higher frame rate than the broadcasters? Other than the goaline technology cameras.

The broadcasters themselves film the action at a higher frame rate than they broadcast. How can they show you clear super slow-mo shots at 50fps unless they're shooting at higher than that?

You can see these Hi-Motion cameras (which record up to 1000fps) actively advertise themselves as being the ones the Premier League (and others) use.

https://www.nacinc.com/products/hd-ultra-slow-motion-cameras/Hi-Motion_II/

 

[Paxi]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[BeforeKeanetherewasRobson]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Just seen that and about to post

 

[Paxi]

Just seen that and about to post

Quality isn’t it?

 

[RaptorSlo]

Could not agree more. I was positive to VAR because i thought it would rid us of diving and playacting, which is has to a degree (unless you are playing Spurs) but these ultra tight offsides are ridiculous.

It did not though. Now they're searching for slightest of contacts to turn a dive into "legitimate" penalty.

 

[Rob]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

A good example how shit of a thing VAR is.