Yes. Let’s try and get football atmosphere closer to the stunning spectacle that is cricket and tennis.
VAR Decisions - PL 19/20 Season
- Thread starter edcunited1878
- Start date
And how are those defined or determined? Everything in football is viewed so myopically depending on whether it happened for or against your team (I include myself in this) - as amply demonstrated by Spurs fans yesterday. Somebody's close correct call is someone else's blatant mistake.
The solution is to have strict rules and use technology appropriately; nobody debates goal line technology do they? It's either in or it's not. We are barely a month into the implementation of a new system and already people have no patience to see it evolve and perfect itself. Let's remember that it is replacing a system that has long made horrifically bad decisions anyway.
Cricket and tennis are stunning spectacles for the people who enjoy them.
Exactly my feelings.
They’ve got to give some small leeway with this, the speed the game is played at these days, this was never clear and obvious.
How can they be so sure that this frame shows the exact moment the player’s foot touches the ball for the pass? They’ve not got cameras watching that and people scrutinising it.
I don’t blame the technology, it’s clearly got limitations, it’s the people interpreting the data and applying it that are causing all the problems, and you’ll find these are the same people who have been making refereeing mistakes for years, which has driven the introduction of VAR.
Isn't the rule the overturn clear and obvious errors though? That wasn't a clear and obvious error
Exactly the same as the first day of the season when they ruled out a City goal at West Ham
It was mentioned once or twice before (ok, more like 100 or 200 times), but offsides are not included in "clear and obvious" thingie. It's a objective, factual thing. And technology just might be more precise than you think.
Can anyone explain to me why they use the outside of the dot thingy to measure Spurs line and the inside of the dot to measure Leicester’s? The naked eye tells me the Spurs players shoulder is onside!?!?
And why is Spurs line thicker? Seems odd! If that happens to us this afternoon I’d be fuming. They look dead level to me!
Very likely VAR using better stuff than BT's coverage.
Yep. As usual, people will come up with creative ways to justify their already held positions.
Whilst true, I find it hard that the can be sure that this frame is the exact moment the ball is played forward. The offside call is so close that I don't believe they can be 100% sure this incident is offside.
I don't think there is a football fan alive that thinks the goal yesterday was an obvious mistake. Maybe a time limit on the decisions would help? Finding the goal yesterday was 1mm offside took ages. If you cant tell within about 10 seconds then it isn't blatant / clear and obvious.
But importantly, they are different sports.
Why do we have to change footballs spectacle to be more like cricket & tennis?
That picture of the dotted lines that BT use comes straight from VAR though.. and there are problems within that picture.
The "clear and obvious error" thing has never, ever applied to offsides.
VAR with offside decisions is similar to goal line technology. Either it's offside or it isn't. The laws of the game state that if any part of the attacking player (apart from his hand or arm) is closer to the goal line than the 2nd last defender, then he is offside. It makes no allowances for 'daylight' or any other interpretation which is why the VAR has to be so strict.
As a referee, I hate this law. I think it should be down to if there is daylight between the players but whilst IFAB make the law so stringent, it would be wrong for VAR to not give offside even if it's only a mm off and no real advantage is gained.
As a referee, I hate this law. I think it should be down to if there is daylight between the players but whilst IFAB make the law so stringent, it would be wrong for VAR to not give offside even if it's only a mm off and no real advantage is gained.
The Spurs line looks thicker because the two lines are overlapping. When that happens it shows the red on top as they're looking to see if there's any blue on the onside side.. If there is it's offside, if there isn't it's onside.
It should be used for clear errors. The decision for the Spurs goal was correct, but it should never have gone to VAR as it was so marginal. Also they are not using it enough to upgrade yellows to red. They have done that a number of times abroad over the weekend.
Picture is from VAR
Lets not forget the priceless situation with Newcastle vs Watford, where they didn't have the footage that actually showed the handball
Every moron with a beer in his hand watching the broadcasted match could see it, but not the referee reviewing it...Personally, I have absolutely no idea whatsoever how, after having the chance to review how VAR has been implemented in other competitions and the benefits and downsides, Mike Riley and his band of morons have managed to introduce something as useless as this. The clear and obvious error rule means that identical situations will/can still be treated differently depending on who the referee is. Like the penalty situations we've seen recently, Martial vs Crystal Palace, if the referee awards it then VAR won't overrule it, doesn't award it and VAR won't overrule that decision either. Sanchez vs Newcastle. VVD vs Newcastle. Not to mention the amount of clear and obvious errors they've managed to miss out on.
Offsides won't be up to the referee to make a call on, unless they decide to flag for offside before the goal is scored...And we're stuck with VAR trying to decide if the player is onside or offside by inches, spending ages in the process.
In it's current form, it's utter frustrating
It should be used to verify the big decisions the referee makes, if they disagree with the decision the referee ,no matter what the situation is, should be asked to review the situation on video
I don't think it is. Unless the ball is swerving along the path of the goal line & it might cross that line or it might not. And at a specific point in time like when the last bloke kicked it or something.
I'm being facetious, but offside is a hell of a lot harder to track & VAR-ing it contains the 'which frame' do you use for positioning the players.
The goal doesn't tend to move much.
I was just responding to a poster who brought those sports up. The goal isn't to make football a spectacle in the way cricket and tennis are but to make them as fair as those sports. Both were filled with endless controversy before a degree of technology was appropriately used.
Last edited:
But why should we apply the standard that something should be blatant and obvious, rather than take up the standard that it should in fact be correct?
Was watching BT version of Soccer Saturday and the pundits on there asked ex-referee Peter Walton if there is a margin for error and he said yes, but did not know how much it was. I would have thought that goal would have come inside it. The first goal disallowed there was no doubt it was offside.
Because you're getting bogged down in the tedious detail of millimetres I suppose. It isn't quite like tennis (where that is the whole game) or cricket (it helps the tv spectacle a lot there).
What you say is entirely valid though, obviously.
And what about if there is a mm of daylight or not? It wouldn't change a thing other than make it even harder for linesman to spot. It is one of the dumbest things people consistently bang on about. There is a reason it has never and never will be a rule, because it is a stupid idea.
If a defender & an attacker are stood together but the attacker has stuck his knee out. I'm not really thinking that this was ever regarded as offside are we?
I mean, it's pretty much the rule being applied in a completely different way.
Although, if you're gonna do it - you have to find a way & do it the same every time, I suppose.
It's a bit of a surprise, so many are as close as they are.
I mean, it's pretty much the rule being applied in a completely different way.
Although, if you're gonna do it - you have to find a way & do it the same every time, I suppose.
It's a bit of a surprise, so many are as close as they are.
I said this, the linesman would have no chance looking across a line of players who are all moving around. And he's looking for the occurrence of 'daylight' at a specific time,
.It was always regarded as offside, it is just literally impossible to spot close offside calls with the naked eye and refs are taught to make educated guesses. It hasn't changed the rule, it has changed to using technology instead of trying to just guess.
They spent 5 minutes deliberating over the above image, but about 2 seconds deliberating over the image of the passer releasing the ball.
I like VAR. But in an instance as close as this, you need to be CERTAIN of when the pass was played just as much as when the receiver made his run.
Watching the match live, I saw no evidence that the VAR team had taken this still image at the correct moment in time. If they'd been even a split second off, the run might have been started a split second earlier, the red line might have a couple of inches further back, and the goal would have been onside.
Exactly, seeing a body further than a body is possible to see. Seeing daylight would be almost impossible, not to mention if the linesman is even slightly at the wrong angle how on Earth can he accurately judge "daylight." It would lead to complete guessing and the same people complaining who will complain about anything. It doesn't solve anything and would just make it an even bigger shit show.I said this, the linesman would have no chance looking across a line of players who are all moving around. And he's looking for the occurrence of 'daylight' at a specific time,
- As far as I understand it VAR does use high frame-rate cameras. The Mail (and Jonathan Wilson) have spread a lot of misinformation that it uses 50fps. However it would help if the PL had an explainer page detailing the tech used.
- As such the margin of error is pretty small. A couple of CMs at most. Some might argue that if the decision is within this margin of error the on-field decision should be maintained
- BUT... why? The on-field decision will 100% have a higher margin of error / be more of a guess than the technology
- We should just go with the lower margin of error of the technology and be done with
- At least the margin of error is fair and equal for all and not dependent on an official/the weather/their view/attention etc
Yep, I agree.
I'd make the red and blue lines, let's say, about 3 inches wide if they existed in real life. The VAR refs would continue to try to be as perfectly accurate as they are now. But if their images show the two lines either touching or overlapping, that would be within the margin of error and the run can be deemed onside.
VAR has it's place in football. But if you accept that there's human error in all areas of subjectivity, it makes things smoother and less contentious. Having a pre-defined margin at least accounts for that.
This would indeed be the correct way of doing it, not this "daylight" nonsense. Very easy to do too, if that's what people want.
It is annoying as well when the referee have made an obvious error and VAR does not get involved at all. If they cannot correct really obvious errors they need to bring in independent operators.
they play it frame by frame and go from the first frame where the ball has left the passers foot.
I don’t know how I know that. I’ve read it or heard it somewhere though
Fixed.
Because if we wanted it to be perfect we would have the most tedious game in the world. We'd check every throw in, every corner, every foul etc.
We have already taken away the game in my opinion because some great moments like the "Hand of God" will never happen again and for me that's a shame.
I can get behind VAR but only if it's quick and doesn't get in the way. At the moment, it's slow, confusing and adds nothing positive.
In my opinion each captain should get 3 challenges per game where VAR gets consulted, if no decision after say 20 seconds then the initial decision stands. AKA - it would stop the clear and obvious mistakes.
Agree with this. IFAB should change it to daylight, would be loads more goals and improve the sport.
Personally think VAR in the premier league is a joke. They cherry pick decisions to review, referees don't use monitors to review, they pull up these ridiculous marginal offsides etc. Referees were already terrible and it hasn't helped much if at all.
VAR isn't perfect in other leagues but about 10x better than premier league version.
But why deem it onside rather than offside? And why is this any different to the current situation? What about decisions that are 1mm from having the lines overlap? You’ve just moved the location of the yes/no
No. Think about it.