- Joined
- Mar 13, 2016
- Messages
- 227
- Supports
- Liverpool
There's no goal line technology in lower/amateur leagues either is there?How does this work in the lower leagues? Or do we only change the offside rule for VAR leagues?
There's no goal line technology in lower/amateur leagues either is there?How does this work in the lower leagues? Or do we only change the offside rule for VAR leagues?
But the ball still has to cross the line. It’s not a different rule.There's no goal line technology in lower/amateur leagues either is there?
I think I disagree with you here. I don't think VAR was brought in to sort out marginal calls as much as to minimise egregious injustices. I reckon something like a 5cm margin of error either side of the offside line would be acceptable to the majority; with the onfield decision standing if the player is within that 10cm band. That would mean that if a player was flagged as off VAR would have to determine he was 5cm on in order to overturn the decision. Alternatively to preserve an attacking advantage you could have it that the margin of error is only applicable in situations where no onfield decision has been made.I’ve heard a lot about allowing a margin for error. VAR was brought in to avoid this in the first place. I’m not a fan, this allows for taking advantage of the rule, there will inevitably be inconsistency where players are flagged genuinely offside and will expect the margin to be applied as a leeway.
I'd largely agree with this.Just let the VAR officials watch the replays a couple of times at normal speed, and if it isn't clear from that, then the onfield decision stands. None of this freeze frame, pixel hunting nonsense.
Is this true? It seems the trade off with pens etc and wrongfully given offsides being overruled would negate this?I would have a birdseye view for a start, I'd have a slimmer line than a line the thickness of a players leg
We've gone from arguing about dodgy ref decisions, to dodgy ref decisions being reviewed by more refs with rubbish technology for 5 mins - at least with a dodgy ref decision, you can celebrate a goal, you can carry on play straight away, none of this awkward reviewing.
I also hate how we only seem to rewind and review all the goals. So in essence, you'll end up with much less goals.
I'm an engineer mate, nothing is ever spot on, I can guarantee you there are many millimetres of error in those lines, and on top of that you add in the frame error like you said before, I'd be surprised if the system works to within +/- 50mm. But until they can put a number on it, and put a number on the "offsideness" of it too, it's all absolute bollocks and seems to be mainly being used in favour of the bigger clubs at the moment. I think the implementation of it is fantastically incompetent and quite possibly criminal, I don't believe it's being done honestly frankly.But the lines look spot on, the angles of them anyway so its foolish to assume they aren't. Where they draw the line from on the player is a huge issue as I don't know how they determine the middle of the shoulder or armpit exactly etc..., but they can put lines that match the perspective of a football pitch easily. Honestly I think goals like the Wolves and Sheffield United one today should stand purely because of the possible inaccuracies but the offside rule needs changing anyway, particularly if they are going to implement it the way they currently are with VAR.
Fully agree, I wish more people would read this, especially those who keep repeating offside is offside whether a mm or not.I'm an engineer mate, nothing is ever spot on, I can guarantee you there are many millimetres of error in those lines, and on top of that you add in the frame error like you said before, I'd be surprised if the system works to within +/- 50mm. But until they can put a number on it, and put a number on the "offsideness" of it too, it's all absolute bollocks and seems to be mainly being used in favour of the bigger clubs at the moment. I think the implementation of it is fantastically incompetent and quite possibly criminal, I don't believe it's being done honestly frankly.
Agree with this completely. Trying to engineer an exact science to the offside rule is a falsehood. There are multiple elements which create a margin for error:I'm an engineer mate, nothing is ever spot on, I can guarantee you there are many millimetres of error in those lines, and on top of that you add in the frame error like you said before, I'd be surprised if the system works to within +/- 50mm. But until they can put a number on it, and put a number on the "offsideness" of it too, it's all absolute bollocks and seems to be mainly being used in favour of the bigger clubs at the moment. I think the implementation of it is fantastically incompetent and quite possibly criminal, I don't believe it's being done honestly frankly.
ThisJust let the VAR officials watch the replays a couple of times at normal speed, and if it isn't clear from that, then the onfield decision stands. None of this freezeframe, pixel hunting nonsense.
Youre 100% right there. You can see even some of the decisions in some games are given by VAG and in others they arent. The whole thing is a shambles.Half the problem is still the goons that are in charge of it. Between the referee and the VAR operators they are still trying to exert their own influence and subjectivity based on the context of the match and the season rather than be entirely objective and call it as they see it.
Fair enough dude, Im happy to take a more educated opinion. I still see positives in the technology just atm not in offsides.I'm an engineer mate, nothing is ever spot on, I can guarantee you there are many millimetres of error in those lines, and on top of that you add in the frame error like you said before, I'd be surprised if the system works to within +/- 50mm. But until they can put a number on it, and put a number on the "offsideness" of it too, it's all absolute bollocks and seems to be mainly being used in favour of the bigger clubs at the moment. I think the implementation of it is fantastically incompetent and quite possibly criminal, I don't believe it's being done honestly frankly.
And if their eyesight is not 20/20, we get what excatly?Just let the VAR officials watch the replays a couple of times at normal speed, and if it isn't clear from that, then the onfield decision stands. None of this freezeframe, pixel hunting nonsense.
So you want to change the rules to accommodate VAR.And if their eyesight is not 20/20, we get what excatly?
We have the technology, we just have to have clear rules.
Draw the line at their feet.
Implement special cameras for offside decisions on all PL stadiums, how much can that cost, there is 20 stadiums, that's what, 1000 HD cameras, that's Sterling's week paycheck.
And there has to be a tech fast enough to process the HD images in seconds and make the fair call in 10 seconds max.
Actually yes. It's football. Feet.So you want to change the rules to accommodate VAR.
What about the rules in lower leagues and grass roots. Would the linos now have to watch the players feet? Or is it just a rule change in the premier league?
Actually yes. It's football. Feet.
I don't get why would it matter if your arm was in offside position, like yesterday's decision. It's football we're watching right?
You can't score with your arms.
It would make it easier on the cameras and technology. Measure the feet. End of. Faster.
In two years i excpect the Lower leagues to have the same tech, so, yeah.
Marginally. This season 559 goals have been scored through 199 games. Last season it was 569 through 200Is this true? It seems the trade off with pens etc and wrongfully given offsides being overruled would negate this?
Id love a comparison of last years boxing day table to this but i cant find goals scored in any of them
And thats including Spurs, Arsenal and Citys freefall which would hurt those stats.Marginally. This season 559 goals have been scored through 199 games. Last season it was 569 through 200
Per game that's 2.8 vs 2.84
We cant see the frames they use though. Plus we arent seeing everything theyre seeing.Should be possible to create a virtual rendition like they do with the goal line and hawk eye in tennis. Still the issue is when is the ball played, we don't have high enough frame rate to make the call and even then it could be hard to call a hard kick to a little flick forwards.
The Zaha ruling was very poor, the frame they used had the ball way off the passing foot. Zaha is onside if they had a frame that is more like they use, that's the issue with low frame rate video. You can toggle back and forth one frame and the camera missed the moment you want sometimes.
At least with a virtual creation we can stop with the poor angles. These can be very misleading. You saw a good example of that with Spurs and Chelsea in the trial. You need a side on at least with video, acute video angles should not be used.
2. RelevantAgree with this completely. Trying to engineer an exact science to the offside rule is a falsehood. There are multiple elements which create a margin for error:
Common sense approach needed
- Determining the exact moment the ball is played
- Having a frame available that captures the exact moment the ball is played
- Determining an attacking and defending players forward-most body part based on that frame
- Determining the height of those body parts and drawing a perfectly perpendicular line down to the ground from that point
- Drawing two lines on the pitch that are perfectly parallel to the goal line for comparison
Is there a reason they can show this very quickly for a goal line or for years in a tennis match but it's never shown in VAR?We cant see the frames they use though. Plus we arent seeing everything theyre seeing.
And they do use 3d rendering?
It's the rule they use in Ice Hockey, it makes more sense to me rather than a toe being a mm offside as it currently is in football.Sourness reckons if any part of your body is ONSIDE, it should count
So where would you draw the line? Because it has to be somewhere. I get why they chose the first armpit, because you cant score with the leading arm so it makes sense. You can score with the chest, that would be legal.Any setup that disallows goals like Pukki's against Spurs is clearly not working correctly, and isn't doing anything to actually benefit the sport. I also don't get how "armpits" can be counted, since the shoulder comes down over the armpit and the actual arm "pit" is mostly part of the chest/ribs. Desperately searching molecules to find a way to discount a goal just seems wrong. As said, most people just want obvious errors fixed, i.e if someone was a foot off and the linesman missed it, then fix that. Not actively searching to see if someone's shirt billowed out at exactly the wrong time, or someone just happens to have a bigger cock than the defender and is off by the measure of one full bellend.