So everyone is looking at that freeze frame to determine he was offside by mere inches. But if you watch it live the Real Madrid player was rapidly moving towards goal and the Ajax player moving away. Is it guaranteed that freeze frame was the exact moment he headed the ball. This is why I do not understand how you can use VAR for extremely tight offsides calls. I wager the next frame he was onsides.
VAR to be used in CL knockout stage
- Thread starter peridigm
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran hold a long overdue conversation about United's awful league form with 1 win in 7. They discuss a disappointing draw at Bournemouth, a not so disappointing draw against Liverpool and a crushing defeat at Chelsea - Is time nearly over for Erik Ten Hag?
Then in a special second half of the pod, Nik welcomes Natalie ( https://twitter.com/natalie_17) to discuss the fortunes of Manchester United Women as they booked a place in the FA Cup Final after a historic first ever win vs. Chelsea.
It wasn’t a valid goal, get over it.
Just because you don’t like the rules doesn’t make it wrong. Right decision was made...
He was clearly offside. Are you suggesting that they made it appear more offside than it was?
still believe it should only be for clear and obvious errors, I've not seen this but if there is doubt then the referee's decision should stand if it's marginal.
Absolute nonsense to use VAR for stuff like this. He was a ball hair offside.
I hate it when its used for these grey hanf balls and offside for interfering witj goalkeeper. This may kill football for me.. Thhis isnt american sports where scoring is abundant.. If you are going to gift a penalty or cancel a goal is must be something blatant. Ive seen goals canceled for fouls on defenders 15 seconds before.. Whats the end game of this
Was VAR involved in Pogba's sending off? Initially for me it didn't seemed like the ref wanted to book him the 2nd time...
Why didn't the ref let the game go on for Verratti's dive in the first half and check later? Verratti got himself in a difficult situation and just threw himself on the ground inside the penalty area as he lost control of the ball and the ref more than willingly awarded him the free kick.
Why didn't the ref let the game go on for Verratti's dive in the first half and check later? Verratti got himself in a difficult situation and just threw himself on the ground inside the penalty area as he lost control of the ball and the ref more than willingly awarded him the free kick.
So he was offside then. It doesn't matter by how much, offside is offside. If we say that a millimetre or two is ok, then does that mean it's the same for the ball crossing the line. The rules say that the whole of the ball has to cross the whole of the line but as long as it's almost over, that's ok then?
It's a heartbreaking decision, and without VAR it would've been a goal. According to the rule book, it's offside though. Shite as that may be. Doubly so because those Real cnuts seem to have a near bottomless well of luck in the CL.
When an offside call is that close, like you say a mm is offside is offside. No it’s not. We haven’t got the technology for that yet so we can’t acuratley judge a mm. the frame rates are not quick enough and the camera angles are not accurate enough.
So no, a mm offside is not definitely offside.
Close calls should be left alone.
Is this what VAR is about? Finding every tiny detail leading up to a goal...how far back in play should VAR go?
This should have been goal IMO.
This should have been goal IMO.
Funniest part about reading the reactions on here is that plenty of people simply seem to refuse to want to realise that the referee did not actually have to disallow that goal. The VAR merely pointed out that technically it was probably offside and so according to the protocol the referee should take a look for himself and make his own decision about it.
It's a problem.
VAR's supossed to overturn clear mistakes and this is something that just doesn't get called in real time. But on the flipside offside isn't really a judgment call - you're either offside or you aren't. So if the technology exists to overturn clear (but not obvious) mistakes, should it be used?
What you see in a league like de Eredivise where VAR is being used for a while now, is that referees are slowly but steadily getting comfortable with it and develop the confidence to simply let the most marginal calls be and let a football match be a football match. Like last week at the PSV game there was an incident with shirt pulling at corners, which is another typical problem in football where you're never going to get a satisfying outcome.
In this case a PSV player's shirt was clearly pulled, but at the same time the player fell down immediately, even before the short pulling actually restrained him/held him back from moving towards the ball. What the referee can do in such a case is directly scream into the microphone that he saw the incident. The VAR's then going to say 'yeah but it's a clear case of grabbing the shirt', after which the referee goes and have a look on the screen. Then, if he has some balls, he'll simply say it wasn't enough for a penalty for me, no foul and play on.
In general I really don't see how the VAR has been ruining the Eredivisie. If anything, it's the best of both worlds. I mean, how many Champions League knock-out stage matches alone have been filled with the most ridiculous and obvious unfair decisions? The occasional marginal neurotic punctual call by a referee seems like a fair price to pay if it pretty much completely helps preventing the most grave and obvious injustices.
Most satisfying thing for me is that it shows how out of the loop a senile corrupt fecker like Sepp Blatter was by being against the use of technology in modern football. His, or FIFA's main argument usually was something about how the discussions and wrong decisions were part of the charm of the game, and the discussions were what makes football so great. Now what I've seen with the implementation of the VAR, there's still easily as much discussion if not more, because plenty of people automatically assume the VAR will somehow be a magical instrument solving everything and then get even more upset than with just regular refereering when they dislike a decision. At the same time obviously the VAR can help prevent about 99% of the most blatant wrong calls, so that's what I mean with the best of both worlds.
"Just offside" is still offside. Why on earth wouldn't that count? You don't randomly start deciding the offside rule doesn't apply from decision to decision.
No I am suggesting that frame rates probably 30 fps are such that close offsides calls are subjective. Let's say the real Madrid player was moving backwards at 15 mph and the Ajax player forward at 5mph. This would mean the offsides line is moving at 20 mph. 20 mph is 29.3 feet per second or about 1 foot per frame. What I am suggesting is that the moment the ball is struck does not fall cleanly on a frame so the freeze frame does not portray offsides definitively when players are moving quickly. This does not take into account camera angle and lens distortion as well. What I am saying is close offsides calls are not really clear and obvious errors.He was clearly offside. Are you suggesting that they made it appear more offside than it was?
To me the offsides test used should be they look at the frame chosen along with the frame before and after and all three must be the same to overrule the call on the field.
VAR so far has become worryingly inconsistent.
Sissoko should have seen a 2nd yellow early in the first half for the foul on Sancho. The ref didn't award anything and played on. That should have been pulled back.
Kimpembe should have had a 2nd yellow for multiple fouls - none given.
IMO Courtois got very lucky, he was never going to get to the ball whether the player was slightly in his way or not. If he'd have stayed on his line and didn't move closer to the player, would the goal have been disallowed? I don't think so. While I don't blame the ref for disallowing it, I don't agree with the decision. He wasn't impeded by the player intentionally, Courtios initiated the contact.
Sissoko should have seen a 2nd yellow early in the first half for the foul on Sancho. The ref didn't award anything and played on. That should have been pulled back.
Kimpembe should have had a 2nd yellow for multiple fouls - none given.
IMO Courtois got very lucky, he was never going to get to the ball whether the player was slightly in his way or not. If he'd have stayed on his line and didn't move closer to the player, would the goal have been disallowed? I don't think so. While I don't blame the ref for disallowing it, I don't agree with the decision. He wasn't impeded by the player intentionally, Courtios initiated the contact.
VAR literally can't be applied to those incidents though, so I don't see how it's inconsistent?
VAR literally isnt for yellow card decisions and the 'Sissoko foul' was by foyth if were thinking of the same one. They both went out to press Sancho but Foyth tripped him.
So it's a half hearted waste of time. I understand they can't go reviewing every decision but those were game changing moments.
No I was talking about the part where Sancho was running at Alderweireld I think it is, and Sissoko clips his heel as he's running.
One is a logical rule and one is a crap, massively outdated rule so it’s not really a valid analogy.
Strict enforcement of the offside rule just leads to less goals and therefore less entertainment. If VAR leads to all marginal offsides being given then you’ve basically just made the game worse.
Hopefully after people get fed up with this nonsense, the law will changed to daylight or at least if any part of the attacking player is level then it’s onside.
I see what you’re saying and agree, I’d argue though it could be inconsistent in a way that if a team scored following said foul it would be looked at then called a foul and then a 2nd yellow and game changing. Obviously if there’s no goal there’s no way to go back and look at the incident. That’s a grey area.
I’ve read on here that fouls before goals are not being looked at in the champions league but goals scored are looked at, that’s a bit confusing to me too.
Exactly this re offside. The tech is not there to judge it accurately enough yet so it’s going to be inconsistent as hell!
Good argument big guy...where's the "thumbs up" emoji
Offside is not subjective it’s either on or off. It’s the reason why VAR does not ask the referee to look at offside calls because he doesn’t need to.
You’ve rejected all valid arguments (the facts) already, there was nothing more that I could say really
Did you even read the post?
Stating that someone can be offside in one frame and off in another frame due to the speed of play and frame rate and skewed camera angles?
You are right that it’s not subjective if you could literally freeze time and analyse it. Using replays is not conclusive imo at the moment though.
I was referring the the “offside is subjective” part. I forgot to highlight it my bad.
Stage 1: Yay! It will make the game better and fairer. Its hightime we had it in football.
Stage 2: Well there are minor issues, it will get ironed out over time.
Stage 3: Yellow cards and minor off sides are not important decisions, so VAR cannot intervene
Stage 4: You cannot blame technology if the ref is shit.
Stage 2: Well there are minor issues, it will get ironed out over time.
Stage 3: Yellow cards and minor off sides are not important decisions, so VAR cannot intervene
Stage 4: You cannot blame technology if the ref is shit.
I can understand the reason for not allowing second yellow cards to be reviewed.
Their argument is that if you did that you would have to review every yellow card that was shown or any instance where a yellow card possibly ought to have been shown, because, for instance, you could have a player incorrectly shown a first yellow card who later receives a correct second yellow card or a player who ought to receive a clear first yellow card but doesn't and is later correctly cautioned.
I think there also tend to be more grey areas in terms of the showing of yellow cards compared to red cards - you often get more lenient referees with a very low yellow card average (I remember Premier League referees having an average of about 1 a game in some seasons) and stricter referees with a somewhat higher yellow card average (around 4 a game) but I'd say it's quite rare that yellow card decisions are categorically wrong. They are often just a case of a referee being slightly harsh in showing one or slightly generous in not showing one.
Off course offsides is on or off, but the question isn't if it is on or off, but if the still frame is a completely accurate model for determining offsides. What I'm saying is the methodology used isn't accurate enough to determine extremely tight offsides calls.
It could also apply to penalties and some red cards as well depending on the referee, yet VAR can intervene on that?.
What they have done with VAR is just pick and choose what they "feel" are game changing moments and decided to just review them. But due to the nature of the game, every decision, including foul, throw-in, corner is game changing. Yet, they wouldn't dare do reviews for them because, it will ultimately expose VAR's weakness which is it will slow down the game.
I just want it to be less a referee based thing & a decision that clubs have to make by only having 3 per match per team.
Yesterday it didn't look like a single Madrid player complained about the ajax goal. If it was their decision then that would be interesting to watch; a decision made by the captain.
Just the whole referee seeing nothing then seeing something which is very marginal is just a bit stupid.
Let the game flow & give a team 3 chances to use VAR. Will lead to some tactical battles that some may hate but I think some might love.
Yesterday it didn't look like a single Madrid player complained about the ajax goal. If it was their decision then that would be interesting to watch; a decision made by the captain.
Just the whole referee seeing nothing then seeing something which is very marginal is just a bit stupid.
Let the game flow & give a team 3 chances to use VAR. Will lead to some tactical battles that some may hate but I think some might love.
It’s accurate enough.
Why would the teams be put in charge of officiating the game? Why on Earth should the officiating of the game be a tactical battle?
And who gives a feck what players complain about, that is one of the dumbest arguments ever. They aren't paid to know the rules and officiate the games. The refs are.
It's bollocks, only to be used when ref blows whistle. Only when player is on ball for offside flag goes up?. It's rubbish, it needs to be TMO. Television match official that can guide ref etc through game in what he's missing. Still open to refs interpretation of what he sees or does not choose to see. Not working at all only incedents in penalty area there really looking at.
Of course there are grey areas for penalties and red cards but, in theory, VAR should not be used for such marginal decisions. Additionally, there tend to be more yellow cards than red cards/penalties in a match.
When a red card is missed, it is often because it is either an off-the-ball incident which the referee hasn't seen (a player head-butting or punching another player for instance) or it is a case of the referee misjudging the severity of the incident (such as De Jong's tackle in the 2010 World Cup final) - I think there is generally (though obviously not always) more clarity on whether a red card should have been shown than there is with yellow cards, which are often produced for more trivial/minor offences and more at the referee's discretion as to whether he thinks they are required. A lot of people felt that the yellow card count in the PSG game on Tuesday was excessive for instance but I'm not sure you could argue that any were categorically wrong.
I don't think it is practical for every single decision to be reviewed in a match because it would interrupt the flow too much. If we accept this rationale then the options are either not having VAR at all or trying to find a balance whereby you only apply it in certain situations - I think they have theoretically done a reasonable job of deciding what is or what is not reviewable.
Sadly not, no. Only direct red card instances. I don't get why, 2nd yellow is as bad as a direct red card when the two yellow cards are so very clear.
No I didn't. I gave an argument. You followed with "you're wroong, get over it"...Like I said, great argument. Troll someone elseYou’ve rejected all valid arguments (the facts) already, there was nothing more that I could say really
You’re the one disregarding actual rules obvious facts. You’re the troll here pal.
Look at the way the incident has been reported in the media, all reporting the decision as technically correct under the current rules.
people think they were 3 correct decisions last night?
I felt they were all correct to a point but don't think Ottamendi's was a clear and obvious error, and handballs with VAR are 'supposed' to only be viewed in real time as slow mo will always make it look like a handball.
I like VAR but there is still too much to iron out for me.
I felt they were all correct to a point but don't think Ottamendi's was a clear and obvious error, and handballs with VAR are 'supposed' to only be viewed in real time as slow mo will always make it look like a handball.
I like VAR but there is still too much to iron out for me.