What's your proof that decisions 'balance out'?
It's also just struck me as a convenient cop-out from luddites.
VAR - Not the hero we want, the one we need
- Thread starter Pavl3n
- Start date
It's also just struck me as a convenient cop-out from luddites.
This VAR review is sponsored by Budweister! VAR's'uuuuuup!
I hadn't watched yesterday's game, but reading through the reports and looking at the pictures it seems like yet another monumental feckup by the English FA regarding VAR.
Looking at this video from FIFA:
Offside decisions don't seem to hinge on one particular camera angle and I don't recall a decision taking this long or being this controversion in Bundesliga. Even last season, when VARs didn't have the calibrated lines and had to judge themselves decisions didn't take five minutes iirc.
Yikes... not nearly as terrifying as the 39th game idea mind
Interesting. It does seem to be incredibly badly applied by the FA.
Out of interest, how do linesmen approach their job with VAR implemented in Germany? Do they tend not to flag any tight offside calls? One of the (many) issues last night was the linesman raising his flag, which could be argued was a distraction for Kepa.
If they are sure it's offside they raise their flag and the opposition gets their free kick without VAR intervention being possible. If they guess it's offside but aren't sure then they let play continue and raise their flag/interrupt play after the immediate situation has played out.
Well that makes sense. Crazy that they evidently haven’t got the same brief from the FA.
It’s not Luddite to question if technology is appropriate everywhere. That’s just the kind of lazy thinking that leads to sci-fi dystopias.
In regards to ‘balance out’ I agree it’s not a guarantee. It’s just the law of large numbers. The same principle that says if you toss a coin more and more times the number of heads and tails will balance out.
Also an aside point: luddites are used as perogative but luddites had a legitimate point that was proven correct over time. The jobs that they had made their livelihoods doing did go away. They didn’t respond appropriately to the coming change but the same is not true for football. Slowing down the game to ensure ever minute rules are enforced at the cost of the past paced nature of the game isn’t inevitable. And if the concerns are paid attention to I’m sure VAR could be implemented in ways that will try to still keep the flow of the game. But if no one raises a fuss about it then it won’t be paid attention to.
Last edited:
It's absolutely crazy how the FA keeps fecking up VAR time and time again to massive extends.
You would think they could just pick the league which has the best VAR implementation in their eyes and just take/buy their implementation and expertise.
Even at the world cup, where referees from all over the world had to use VAR for the first time ever it went a lot more smoothly.
Nah I don't think you are... I mean considering they can have a sensor in a football (that tracks the exact size of the ball) that travels at high speeds and can tell exactly when it crosses a goal line...
I mean it would probably cost a lot of money... but the FA aren't exactly short on cash.
Except that not all games are equal. Getting a wrongful penalty in a random PL match (which you might win regardless) might balance out being denied a goal in a cup final or a quasi-playoff for a CL spot statistically, but not in terms of finances or silverware.
That’s true expect VAR doesn’t guarantee an error free game either. So the whole point is kind of moot. If however the VAR was subject to public scrutiny after the game and the VAR ref was grilled in a post game press conference then I could see it.
My issue is that the main referee is on Tv and everyone knows what his location wrt to the event was so he can be scrutinised whereas the TV ref is a faceless entity and there is a lack of transparency in the whole process.
Add to that the whole slowing down the game and general confusion it causes for the live audiences. I think in general it puts the demand of a TV viewing audience over the live match going audience.
Why is it moot? VAR very significantly reduces the number of refereeing mistakes. "It's not perfect so it's worthless" is a bad attempt at logic imho.
VAR roles are filled with regular refs whose names are on the match sheet, so they aren't faceless entities. Though I agree that they should work on communication. But that's more of a tweak than a fundamental issue.
Because it also slows down the game. If VAR was literally a 1 sec thing then I would have no problems with it. But the whole pausing the game to review/confirm slows does the game too much for my liking. We make fun of NFL etc for having too many commercials but it’s not hard to imagine a few years down the line something similar happening to football as well and most VAR decisions take 30+ seconds and the TV telecast going to commercials while the review happens.
You’re talking as if there are no trade offs to the better decisions. My view is that the trade offs aren’t worth it. I’m more than comfortable with a few human errors in a fast paced game than slowing down the game to improve the decisions.
They’re basically throwing away the big advantage that comes with waiting before implementing a new technology. Learning from other people’s problems. The only thing they’ve done well is create a whole new bunch of problems!
What do you guys think of a cricket/tennis style system where each team gets 3 reviews per game and the VAR doesn’t interfere apart from that? It might stop it from causing stoppages through the game and would also give teams a recourse in case of agregious errors like an incorrect offside or penalty.
Also do we know if such a system was ever in consideration and if not why?
Also do we know if such a system was ever in consideration and if not why?
Really against it, I don't think teams should be involved in officiating the game. And what if more incidents happen than they were allowed to question?
Of course it changes the stance because there is no reason to give advantages if you have the technology to give you the correct answer. The limitations of the current technology is a different argument. But if it is able to provide the refs with the correct answer than there is no advantage to the attacking side because the only reason that exists is in cases where refs don't know the answer.
Offside is offside. You can't just allow goals because they are only an incy wincy bit offside. They are offside. Lets just get rid of goalline technology because it is only milimetres so who the feck cares.
Goal line technology is absolute, VAR is just human interpretation of an image so there is no correct.
Your argument seems to come down to a simple belief that technology equals certainty. That isn't the case and shouldn't be hard to understand but perhaps you're right we shouldn't use any technology until we develop one tells us to a 99.9999% certainty whether someone was offside or not.
We've got VAR in the Dutch Eredivisie and just like a the World Cup, VAR is named and shown in the broadcasting of the match. So there aren't faceless entities. Our Dutch version of the FA even shows almost after every weekend a video where we can see what the VAR has to see during a controversial moment. All communication between the Ref and Video ref regarding this controversial moment are shown. Still there are some very doubtful decisions made by VAR, but I think everyone who follows the Dutch Eredivisie will agree that VAR made the league much more fair. It will cost some time for the refs to get used to this new rules, but I think it's good for the sport.
Thanks, yes there are lots of issues that people either seem to not want to acknowledge, are too stubborn to take on other peoples opinions or think “it will finally come good with time”.
I would like a fairer game, I would like VAR too, but not as it is with these dodgy pen and offside calls. It’s too subjective most of the time.
Elbows, stamps, clear ball to hand handballs, all this stuff that can be picked up by someone off the field and relayed to the ref to sort in the next break of play I can agree with.
Stopping the play for someone in a room to watch an iffy decision in slow mo 5 times or different stills to try and get a decision, I can’t agree with.
Not sure if you’re calling me Poch here or just laughing at what he’s said?
Sure, Poch.
If it’s what he’s said, then it’s just his opinion on it. He wants to use technology but not how it’s currently being used. I think that’s fair.
He’s clearly not that happy with it if he’s still having a moan about it after winning a match thanks to it.
Except that isn't what I said nor is it related to what the op said that I replied to.
That only applies when there is an equal chance of either outcome. In football there are too many variables, how a team plays and how good they are influences the way the decisions go so it doesn't balance out. Certain teams, mostly those who have more of the ball or attack more, get more decisions going their way.
The camera angle that VAR used for the Spurs Chelsea game was simply not good enough for the process and they've marked the line with the feet it seems.
Even from the VAR screen though, which is too far up the pitch I can see Kane is leaning forward and his shoulder/torso and head is beyond the defenders line if you study Kane's body angle. That's looking at it for a longer time mind.
What's annoying is a while back the front of Mata's kneecap was adjudged to be offside while here assuming the shot is what VAR used it's feet along the ground and a much more significant part of the players body that can play the ball was offside, whether the frames are off by one or not between the VAR and Chelsea provided screen.
Also high res cameras at 120fps are available.
Thing is I prefer the clear and obvious errors, not scrutinizing every inch, centimetre or millimetre. Mata's bodyline is onside, he is effectively onside or level with the play in the spirit of the game staying level.
Where you stop measuring is a problem, how you decide at what moment was the ball kicked or played forward, you can slow it down enough to show when your foot touches the ball, or when the ball is deformed around the foot to when it's leaving and left the foot.
Even from the VAR screen though, which is too far up the pitch I can see Kane is leaning forward and his shoulder/torso and head is beyond the defenders line if you study Kane's body angle. That's looking at it for a longer time mind.
What's annoying is a while back the front of Mata's kneecap was adjudged to be offside while here assuming the shot is what VAR used it's feet along the ground and a much more significant part of the players body that can play the ball was offside, whether the frames are off by one or not between the VAR and Chelsea provided screen.
Also high res cameras at 120fps are available.
Thing is I prefer the clear and obvious errors, not scrutinizing every inch, centimetre or millimetre. Mata's bodyline is onside, he is effectively onside or level with the play in the spirit of the game staying level.
Where you stop measuring is a problem, how you decide at what moment was the ball kicked or played forward, you can slow it down enough to show when your foot touches the ball, or when the ball is deformed around the foot to when it's leaving and left the foot.
Just put a tracker on the emblem of each player & completely automate the process. No need for human interpretation to get in the way, and the results would be immediate. Hell, you could even get rid of linesman entirely (at least for offside calls - still be used for fouls/throws).
Seems a good idea but don’t think that would work either.
What if the opposition play the ball forward (backwards)? Ref would still get his offside bleep in his ear, stop play only to realise later it wasn’t actually offside.
It’s a total minefield
At Spurs manager of course.
And that didn't sound like an opinion, just a garbage claim for which he offered nothing to back up.
Fair enough
That's not how that rule of thumb works tbf. It just means that however often something should occur in theory, given enough chances it'll turn up that often in practice. Doesnt matter how many possible outcomes there are.
To my mind the lack of this type of communication is the single biggest problem with VAR as used by other leagues and tournaments. If something was released post-match taking us through the logic of various VAR decisions then a lot of arguments would be cleared up.
Take the Kane goal that was disallowed in one of the early WC games. A perfectly correct decision that a huge amount of the viewing public thought was an error simply because nobody explained it to them. If you want people to buy into VAR then there has to be an education process involved.
If this is the only angle that Oliver saw, then it looked slightly offside to me. Given that nowadays decisions are given if finger, kneecaps, hair were offside or not.
It doesn't seem to stop cricket fans celebrating when a decision gets reviewed. Maybe they should do like in cricket and have the result come up on the big screen..
Oliver didn't see anything, he was too busy fending off players like a scared little kid in the middle of the pitch. VAR told him what to do.If this is the only angle that Oliver saw, then it looked slightly offside to me. Given that nowadays decisions are given if finger, kneecaps, hair were offside or not.
I was at the game last night and it is not true that the linesman raised his flag before Kane got fouled.
I noticed it because it looked weird (and I always look at the linesman to see if it’s offside)
The linesman stopped at the line of the offside and did not follow the play (ie did not sprint down the line to follow the play/ball), but he also did not raise his flag until after Kane was fouled/ play was stopped.
I think this was to let the play go on because he knew it was a tight call, and at the same time to signal to the referee - afterwards - that he thought Kane was offside.
Either way I don’t get why people are even talking about this:
1) It did not make a difference since there was no chance Kane would have been caught before the incident.
2) Even if he had raised the flag it is unprofessional by the defender to stop before the whistle - especially knowing VAR is used. So even if it had happened there are no excuses.
One last point. I think that if an offside is very tight / inconclusive (even with VAR) you should always give the advantage to the attacker (and not just follow what the linesman called as is the case with other calls)
But I agree they should get better equipment.
Is this not an issue in Spain, Germany etc? How do they handle offside-VAR’ing?
I noticed it because it looked weird (and I always look at the linesman to see if it’s offside)
The linesman stopped at the line of the offside and did not follow the play (ie did not sprint down the line to follow the play/ball), but he also did not raise his flag until after Kane was fouled/ play was stopped.
I think this was to let the play go on because he knew it was a tight call, and at the same time to signal to the referee - afterwards - that he thought Kane was offside.
Either way I don’t get why people are even talking about this:
1) It did not make a difference since there was no chance Kane would have been caught before the incident.
2) Even if he had raised the flag it is unprofessional by the defender to stop before the whistle - especially knowing VAR is used. So even if it had happened there are no excuses.
One last point. I think that if an offside is very tight / inconclusive (even with VAR) you should always give the advantage to the attacker (and not just follow what the linesman called as is the case with other calls)
But I agree they should get better equipment.
Is this not an issue in Spain, Germany etc? How do they handle offside-VAR’ing?
Last edited:
I disagree - you are talking about milimetres precision. This kind of precision can be achieved by goal line technology, but unfortunately not by VAR.
As a referee myself, I'm 100% pro VAR. I don't care that much about one of the biggest complains - the delays, however there is one big problem - the video technology has technical limitations. TV in the UK is broadcast at 50 frames per second, but each frame consists of only half an image, so there are 25 images per second.
So at 25 images per second there is 0.04 seconds between each image, so there is a gap of 0.04 seconds between each image and we have no information on what is happening during that time. This seems like a ridiculously small amount of time, but in football it's actually quite substantial. Players often sprint with 30+ km/h, which means that in 0.04 seconds they would travel 33.3 cm, even at moderate running speed of 20 km/h (marathon running speed) players would travel 22.2 cm. As you see milimetres precision is not possible when your resolution is thousand times lower. It's even worse for the ball - it can be kicked with speeds in excess of 100 km/h, so in 0.04 cm the ball would travel 110 cm.
I'm not sure what is the recording fps that is used for VAR, maybe it's higher - if someone knows, please let me know. I did my calculations for the standard 50 fps, but even if VAR uses higher fps, I don't think we have the technology for something that would give us milimetres precision.
Last edited:
One camera angle shows Kane onside and another shows him onside. During the match, I thought that the VAR didn't take Kane leaning forward into account sufficiently. Maybe VAR decisions should be similar to what happens in cricket - when a call is too tight for the technology to judge, the on field decision should stand.
For the record, this is an insight into how the offside lines were calculated in the World Cup - https://www.fifa.com/worldcup/news/var-the-virtual-offside-line-2951752
I am not certain if the same technology is being used in England - quite possibly it isn't.
I am not certain if the same technology is being used in England - quite possibly it isn't.
By the way to those of you convinced Kane dived last night. Please look at this.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Mate my whole family (except my father) is Cricket crazy, and I can tell you their emotion are not different then mine, its just we that can't find emotion in other sport.
How using VAR will kill emotion in sport?
13 seconds in, ruled out goal for Athletic Bilbao. Does anyone actually agree with this use of VAR?