That’s just ridiculous. Why in the world do they have such confusing vocabulary. What’s wrong with just talking simple English?
VAR and Refs | General Discussion
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) was joined by comedian Ali Woods to look back at the best and worst moments of a rollercoaster season with the annual United Hour Awards.
Has Ten Hag been sacked yet? We're not sure and we hope not, but it's looking more likely as the days pass.
Who should replace him and why is it taking so long to make a decision?
You’re still arguing this despite that video stating to the contrary? The parallel angle looks onside, the angle from behind is clearly a much inferior angle to use so why use it?
Your VAR man has just said the camera angle matters so what are you even arguing here?
What’s confusing about it?
You have to remember that there’s internal phrases and protocols that they’ll go through when doing this. We aren’t even supposed to hear this.
“check complete” makes perfect sense. What should be clearer should be “check complete, goal stands” or something of that ilk.
The worst thing to come from that was the complete lack of care in finding the correct frame for when the ball left Salah's foot.
I understand how the onside/offside problem happened and it shouldn't happen again. But if that is the amount of care taken for the most crucial part of deciding an offside, then that's ridiculous.
I understand how the onside/offside problem happened and it shouldn't happen again. But if that is the amount of care taken for the most crucial part of deciding an offside, then that's ridiculous.
There have been many attrocious calls against Man Utd this season already and a good few last season as well but no apology has ever been issued for any of them and no VAR audio released.
Yes because we haven’t asked for it. The audio was released because Liverpool specifically requested it.
Well atleast we know why we haven’t been privy too live audio during decision making
listening too that in packed stadium would cause WW3
listening too that in packed stadium would cause WW3
This is also true. It really makes every decision they ever have or ever will make incredibly questionable.
"Huh? What?
"Jesus Christ, you'd do better with someone off the streets. Incredible
The angle doesn't matter in that once you've drawn the line from the correct body part, it will map the same from any other angle. So whether the image you see is from an angle that makes it look more/less offside, it's going to be the same result. Perspective doesn't impact the lines.
But obviously they still have to use angles that a) let them see the relevant body parts and b) presents the offside in a clear way.
Isn’t that what nearly everyone does when not being sure with what someone has said?!"Huh? What?
Jesus Christ, you'd do better with someone off the streets. Incredible
we’re being incredibly unfair now come on….
If you look at the exact moment that the VAR team determined to be the kick point, you can see that the ball is already on its way, there's a blur but the 'front' of the ball is already ahead of the main body of the ball.
It is demonstrably a moment after the ball has left Salah's feet, meaning there are not enough frames to capture the exact moment and draw accurate lines in the first place.
VAR has countlessly disallowed goals because an attacker is judged to be offside by millimetres. If they get miss the 'kick point' by centimetres, it simply shows that the technology is not good enough in the first place for very tight calls.
It is demonstrably a moment after the ball has left Salah's feet, meaning there are not enough frames to capture the exact moment and draw accurate lines in the first place.
VAR has countlessly disallowed goals because an attacker is judged to be offside by millimetres. If they get miss the 'kick point' by centimetres, it simply shows that the technology is not good enough in the first place for very tight calls.
The video doesn't say anything to the contrary. They're choosing the best angle to correctly identify which players and which bodyparts to use. When the same players and same bodyparts are used, then the line will show the same result no matter the angle. But, if a bad angle makes them choose the wrong player, or the correct player but the wrong bodypart, then the wrong line will be drawn which can obviously impact the results. That wrong line would also be the same irrespective of the angle.
With the Garnacho call different people made different points.
1) The angle was bad, if they had chosen a better angle then he might have looked onside. This is wrong, the lines would have been the same no matter what.
2) The angle was bad, it made it look like Gabriel's shoulder was the correct point when it was in fact his head. If the line had been drawn from his head, then Garnacho might have looked onside. This is more sensible, because obviously a line drawn from a different point might show a different result, but it's wrong because the correct bodypart was used.
But they changed the angle used before they drew the line.
Yes… so the angle does matter.
Nobody is saying that selecting the same body part from two angles would see a different result. It’s that choosing an angle from behind the play rather than parallel to it means you’re not likely to place the line against the edge of the furthest forward body part which is a big fecking deal.
Who has been arguing 1?
We need to hear recordings from our games against Tottenham, Arsenal and Crystal Palace. We need to hear why we did get those decisions like we did where we lost games.
If they can give recordings now, we need ours to. Or does name of the teams matter? In all this it is important not to forget how we have been treated few seasons now and especially this season. Our club needs to act and demand recordings.
If they can give recordings now, we need ours to. Or does name of the teams matter? In all this it is important not to forget how we have been treated few seasons now and especially this season. Our club needs to act and demand recordings.
Just heard the VAR audio. Fecking hell
Billions of pounds in the game and that's the level of stuff. Shambles
Billions of pounds in the game and that's the level of stuff. Shambles
I was thinking this too, lots on here saying angle doesn’t matter yet there’s the var video guy asking if they need a better angle.
absolute cretinsI just can't understand why they were in such a rush with this one. From the scoring of the goal to the ref restarting play was 35 seconds. Some VAR checks take more than 5 times that.
That's a bit unfair - lemurs are cute. They're more like chimpanzees flinging their shit directly into a teams face.
I've said this in Garnacho case. A goal being taken away and a win given to Arsenal because of this. Garnacho was onside. There is no question about that. Why aren't they releasing recording from that game. Bad question. We now why.
@NotThatSoph explained it better than I did and I just landed at the pub, so I'll let him carry on the discussion.
I find it quite worrying it that a Replay Assistant and a VAR essentially choose which angle they use. It leaves a lot of open ends, it makes me want to see every camera angle of they had of Garnacho's offside. If they chose the best angle, I'd like to see when they identified contact and if that was correct.
The whole environment within that booth doesn't seem to have any real order or leadership.
The whole environment within that booth doesn't seem to have any real order or leadership.
Don’t think it was a rush.
I think from their view it was a piss easy decision (on side / goal) when in fact it was the opposite (offside called on the pitch / disallowed goal)
It was quick because it was an obvious call (if what they thought had occurred, in fact occured)
I think you’re completely misunderstanding or now misrepresenting what the argument has been. If you’re behind the play you don’t have a clear view of what body part is furthest forward, also it’s basic geometry that even if you do have a clear view of the body part, the farthest forward face of that body part is going to be different the greater the angle. They had a perfectly parallel angle for the Garnacho indecent and decided to use an angle from behind which is obviously going to introduce a degree of error.
Same frame though, isn’t it?
So it seems the VAR official thought the onfield decision was onside?
Surely it would be better for the VAR official to give his decision to the onfield ref regardless of what the onfield decision was. That would have avoided this mess.
Surely it would be better for the VAR official to give his decision to the onfield ref regardless of what the onfield decision was. That would have avoided this mess.
That was the biggest take away for me watching that. They are clearly under pressure to get the decision sorted quickly (rightly so), so there will inevitably be times where mistakes are made.
Seemed to be more of a concentration/communication error more than anything else.
It's incredible. Even if there is supposedly some centimetres considered as margin for error when drawing the lines for the scorer, this means that such a precaution would be entirely undermined by the fact that they are a few more centimetres behind in the 'kick moment' frame. This makes me want to scream.
I don't know how people can discus of Garnacho was offside or not. He is onside. It is easy to see. That is why we need recordings from that game. Just like they released this. If they are correct there shouldn't be any problem, right?
As I said, we need recording from Arsenal, Tottenham and Crystal Palac games. I want to hear about situations that were match deciding.
No, I'm not, I've read through this discussion several times. The people saying that the angle didn't matter were saying the exact thing I said. You're using this audio as claiming that they were wrong, when the audio is perfectly consistent with that they (or we, as I was one of them) said. You're just wrong, you won't find a single example in this thread to the contrary.
Well you’ve sort of answered your own question, no? They clearly have a communication protocol which allows for this confusion. It’s clear to me the VAR official thought he was giving the instruction that it was a good goal, but the nature of the wording used allowed the confusion for it to instead appear conveyed as the on field decision was correct / the VAR official got confused about what the actual on field decision was. Of course, even in current protocol, the majority of the time the correct end result would occur. But simpler communication would allow for the correct end result to always occur. It also seems the decision makers have acknowledged this in their statement.
Human error. It happens in all jobs. In some jobs, you get fired if you make such a significant error.
So the question is, do you keep or do you fire the guy who made this decision?
So the question is, do you keep or do you fire the guy who made this decision?
I'd keep him. He ain't ever making this mistake again.
They should do away with VAR until the assistant referee is just ran by artificial intelligence that uses the same strict guidelines and ruleset every game.
It's hard enough having incompetence reffing the game from the middle of a pitch without another idiot watching on screen. We can allow for human error on the pitch-afterall they can't be watching everything all the time, but the VAR refs..pfft.
Some of the problems probably come from the referees monitoring not being great with the hardware and software used as well. A lot of these referees never signed up to do VAR when they trained and I wouldn't be shocked if they had little idea of what the systems they're given access to can do.
I just hate VAR.
It's hard enough having incompetence reffing the game from the middle of a pitch without another idiot watching on screen. We can allow for human error on the pitch-afterall they can't be watching everything all the time, but the VAR refs..pfft.
Some of the problems probably come from the referees monitoring not being great with the hardware and software used as well. A lot of these referees never signed up to do VAR when they trained and I wouldn't be shocked if they had little idea of what the systems they're given access to can do.
I just hate VAR.
That's what confuses me. Surely it doesn't matter if they think the goal was disallowed for offside, or if it was allowed on field. They are looking to see if it was offside or not.
The evidence shows it should have stood regardless of what the on field decision was and they should have made the call.