The tv companies don't broadcast the frame rate that VAR uses. Its not possible for us to see what VAR sees.
Refs & VAR 2020/2021 Discussion
- Thread starter Annihilate Now!
- Start date
Var isn't the Problem ,it's the Offside Rule and the Handball Rule.
Bring on Wengers Idea of Offside ,it will definitely bring more Goals and give lower Teams bigger Chance to win.
Bring on Wengers Idea of Offside ,it will definitely bring more Goals and give lower Teams bigger Chance to win.
What happened to the rule about if the ball hits a hand in the buildup to a goal it's ruled out ?
Why was it not handball for the Leicester goal? surely it's not a different phase of play, we saw a Newcastle goal disallowed the other week when it ricocheted onto the arm before scoring, I've no idea what the law is now on this
The gap is inches not cm's the previous frame is 120th of a second (if they are using 120 fps cameras) earlier, its very unlikely he was onside in the previous frame, this is not one of those ones with a cm or two with touching lines, its not in the 50 closest offside calls this season.
Well said Dom.
I’m seeing a lot of moans on this thread on the grounds that a minimal offside should not be used to make a decision so big as that. This is so wrong because if the goal stands the conceding team would have been robbed, not minimally but substantially.
VAR was brought to ensure correct decisions are made, why do we then moan when the correct decision is made. Should we rather allow an offside goal stand just to see that the spectacle of the game is preserved? I don’t think so. Chelsea were the better side and were very unlucky but it was Leicester’s day so let’s get on with it.
VAR was brought to ensure correct decisions are made, why do we then moan when the correct decision is made. Should we rather allow an offside goal stand just to see that the spectacle of the game is preserved? I don’t think so. Chelsea were the better side and were very unlucky but it was Leicester’s day so let’s get on with it.
this is how I want VAR to be used. He’s offside, it’s a fact.
I think they should ditch most other aspects that require an opinion.
I am with you on that one, it’s either a yes or a no - no room for middle grounds that give rise to strange decisions.
The VAR camera is 50 FPS. Footballers routinely reach speeds of 30 km / hour, especially when moving in opposite directions - that's 8.3 meters per second. So on the VAR camera, that's a ~16-17 cm margin of error from frame to frame. One frame earlier and Chilwell is onside - are you positive that in that 1/50th of a second the ball hadn't left Silva's foot?
Point is these cameras are passed off as definitively correct when they simply aren't. If they were actually infallible then that'd be one thing, but it's infuriating that players on the line are held to millimeter standards when that level of granularity doesn't exist at the other end.
VAR works up to 340 fps. The only source for 50 was a poorly sourced article that thought VAR operated to what Sky could broadcast.
https://www.harrodsport.com/advice-and-guides/hawkeye-technology-in-sport
Considering Chelsea won the title with a Drogba goal when he was 3 yards offside VAR can do no wrong in my eyes
Off the leg then onto the arm arent really given, especially so far from goal
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.
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.
The handball didn’t immediately create a goalscoring opportunity as it went to a player who passed it to Tielemans who then scored from 25 yards, so it had to be judged as a “normal” handball, ie deliberate/natural position/ricochet, and in terms of that I think the right call was made as it wasn’t deliberate and bounced off his knee.
Had the player got the ball under control from the handball and then passed it to Tielemans for the goal I think the “creating a goalscoring opportunity” law would’ve come into effect and it might have been disallowed.
That's fair enough but it's the lack of consistency, it seems to me they're making it up as they go along, it wasn't deliberate we can all see that but it led to a goal in the same phase of play.
A mate on Twitter reckons they changed the laws a couple of weeks ago just like they did after city v villa, it's quite frankly a mess as no one has come out and said definitively what the law is now
Edit
Law was changed on 5th March
https://www.theifab.com/news/annual-general-meeting-2021
Accidental handball that leads to a team-mate scoring a goal or having a goal-scoring opportunity will no longer be considered an offence.
Why can't the live broadcast clarify all this whilst the game is on
See above, it wouldn't, law was changed on 5th march, my point is surely there live broadcasts can clear this up for everyone watching
because the commentators don’t have a clue a lot of the time. It’s professional misconduct (obviously that’s too harsh), but you know what I mean. They should be experts. The viewers are lay people.
Because they dont actually do their job. They tell you what they think should happen if following Neville law but hide behind the nobody knows excuse when its their job to know. How many times do they say in modern football as if laws have been universal for years? Its not even universal over 6 months.
Haha yeah you're probably not far wrong
You are literally referencing goal line technology, which no one has a problem with. VAR doesn't work up to 340 FPS, there are no broadcast cameras that get anywhere near that mate.
Yep, don't expect them to know every law but you'd think they'd at least have a researcher on hand when something like that happens in a showpiece game
hand
Hawkeye gets to 340 fps by using ultra motion cameras. Var uses 8 slow motion and 4 ultra motion cameras. Its so far above 50 fps its not even funny. The margin of error is 1.91 cm.
Edit a technical comment i found.
Exactly, the fact that they can broadcast clear slow motion in 50fps shows that they are shooting probably at least 200fps to get a .25x slow-mo effect
Feel free to provide a citation then - and how on earth are these ultra motion cameras properly calibrated to track the ball when it's passed as well as the last man? Are they on rails in every stadium that has VAR enabled?
If each player is given a sensor to be worn in the toe of each boot that could be used to determine position. Forget about armpits and nose and just go with the foot. It is football after all!
I dont know how technology works, just that its accepted to work. In no way has the reliability of VAR ever been called out by anybody with knowledge of the system. Its so trusted that automated offsides from these very cameras are literally just around the corner with rumours it could be brought in for the next world cup, thats how quick theyre making advances with it. We are so far away from questioning its reliability that its not a factor anymore
I blame the broadcasters, they spend more time crying about VAR than explaining it.
I mean mate blindly accepting that something is infallible isn't a great position to take is it? And come on you're surely not citing rumours about automated offsides being adopted as evidence that this is infallible, are you? Do you genuinely believe that FIFA will be able to definitively determine offsides?
My point is the reliability of it should absolutely be called into question - and this entire discussion could have been avoided by using VAR the way everyone wanted, which is to correct flagrantly incorrect refereeing decisions. Point being, if something is obviously wrong when viewed at normal speed, that's when VAR should intervene.
Its not rumours
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.da...stant-imagery-game-changer-offside-calls.html
I believe the experts, yes. Why wouldn't I? Unless you expect me to book a day at VAR and investigate myself?
So you're solely talking about future iterations of VAR that haven't been put into place yet? Then yes, if every stadium has a system of 300 FPS on-rail cameras that can somehow track play to allow for correct positioning, something approaching objectivity might be achieved. Whether or not that's a good thing is a matter of debate, but what isn't a matter of debate is the current capabilities, which you have done nothing to disprove whatsoever in posting hypotheticals.
Agreed.
Calls for margin of error allowance (which makes zero sense to me).
Calls to allow for frame rate
Calls to ignore if mm decision.
If the video shows offside (1mm) then it is offside. Fans / Media/ TV should quit debating this as it just whips up pointless contention.
A KEY POINT. Imagine if a (common sense , margin or error) call is made but a video snap shot shows the opposite, there would be lawsuits and court cases for sure.
Some plus / minus comments
+It is pretty much eradicating Linesman errors from the past.
- Handball still seems fuzzy and could be defined better
- Taking too long to review
Because the fundamental point is that frame rate limitations have a margin of error? And that using a particular frame as opposed to a different one can paint a very different and therefore arbitrary picture?
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 think VAR is obviously here to stay , no way do we get back to the no technology era. What is needed though is to have a better team in place to try & fine tune the system and get more consistency in decision making. Acknowledge if a mistake is made and then try to work on it to avoid it . They need to get the idiotic ex players who are pundits on board and explain stuff better to them so that they don't create even more confusion in commentary . They need to create an environment of look we don't think this is perfect but we are slowly working on things while being ready to accept that a mistake has been made at times
There should be an agreed standard of offside using VAR technology. If it is inconclusive from the immediate freeze frame image (without zooming in) of when the ball left the players foot, then it’s not off side. Or alternatively if you are not satisfied with that and/or you don’t trust the technology, you may as well scrap it and we all accept human error.
More fundamentally, it continues to be used wrongly rather than the technology being the issue. It should be used as a tool to support the on field referee to help him if he is in doubt. At the moment in football, it is effectively re refereeing the game on behalf of the on field referee. A key issue in its poor application.
More fundamentally, it continues to be used wrongly rather than the technology being the issue. It should be used as a tool to support the on field referee to help him if he is in doubt. At the moment in football, it is effectively re refereeing the game on behalf of the on field referee. A key issue in its poor application.
Yep, hence my post about framerates - if players have a relative speed of 30 km/ph there's effectively a 16 cm margin of error between frames. Why a particular frame as selected by the VAR is unimpingible gospel is beyond me.
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.
Even when they went to the reply the first time without the lines he looked marginally off. I could see that straight away, and so could Robbie Savage. It was offside there is no argument.
No, I've neen telling you what VAR uses today. Frame rate just isnt an issue no matter how much you want it to be! Goalline technology should tell you this alone.
Hardly an impartial source, he was screaming for Leicester all day
.I forgot he played for them didn't he.Hardly an impartial source, he was screaming for Leicester all day
There is more than 16cm between both those lines on field