Jump to content

VAR


Millbrook Saint

Recommended Posts

I'm just here for Whitey Grandad :rolleyes:

 

Guess that's the sort of thing we'll get from VAR. I can see why people will be against this decision but the rule is either you're onside or you're off, there's no grey area. I'd be interested to see what the margin of error is though and how they decide where to draw the lines, particularly with moving cameras. I'm sure it's been thoroughly tested but I have to admit, I'd be annoyed if that were the difference between us getting 3 points or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well, it wasnt. It was offside

 

Exactly right!

As marginal as it was, under current FA rules that was offside. It’s not VAR’s fault that the rule is stupid and any body part can be offside even by an inch (they should make it only offside if daylight between players IMHO). VAR just analyses and decides based on the rules.

Anything that makes the game more fair, works for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree it was correctly ruled offside....but...stockley park brief is to get involved when the referee or assistant referee has made a clear error. Neither of the city goals were clear errors and shouldnt of been checked in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree it was correctly ruled offside....but...stockley park brief is to get involved when the referee or assistant referee has made a clear error. Neither of the city goals were clear errors and shouldnt of been checked in my opinion.

 

not quite, not for goals as far as I am aware

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree it was correctly ruled offside....but...stockley park brief is to get involved when the referee or assistant referee has made a clear error. Neither of the city goals were clear errors and shouldnt of been checked in my opinion.

 

According to Big Al, every goal will be checked:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly right!

As marginal as it was, under current FA rules that was offside. It’s not VAR’s fault that the rule is stupid and any body part can be offside even by an inch (they should make it only offside if daylight between players IMHO). VAR just analyses and decides based on the rules.

Anything that makes the game more fair, works for me.

Or have it the same as athletics, where the head or torso counts as crossing the line, not limbs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like VAR. It's got its teething problems but overall it’s clear cut on important decisions. Never thought I’d be a fan initially but I think it will be good. Doesn’t detract from the game if they make quick decisions so just need to avoid the previous occasions when they’ve taken minutes to arrive at a decision. VAR officials have been instructed to take a very passive approach to fouls and only intervene if a clear and obvious mistake is made. Offside is as accurate as GLT and a good thing imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The amount of whining that’s happening over rules being correctly applied just shows how accustomed most have become to the rules of football simply not being applied. Declan Rice encroaching is against the rules, the penalty should be retaken, the fact it doesn’t normally happen is testament to the **** standard of refereeing in this country. Offside is so clear cut its painful to see so much debate.. IF ANY PART OF YOUR BODY THAT YOU CAN PLAY THE BALL WITH IS BEYOND THE LAST DEFENDER THEN YOU ARE OFFSIDE. The rule may be excessive, it may be stupid, but it’s the ****ing rule. In time, VAR may cause the tidying up of some of the laws of the game, but until now it’s just ensuring the current ones are correctly applied.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The amount of whining that’s happening over rules being correctly applied just shows how accustomed most have become to the rules of football simply not being applied. Declan Rice encroaching is against the rules, the penalty should be retaken, the fact it doesn’t normally happen is testament to the **** standard of refereeing in this country. Offside is so clear cut its painful to see so much debate.. IF ANY PART OF YOUR BODY THAT YOU CAN PLAY THE BALL WITH IS BEYOND THE LAST DEFENDER THEN YOU ARE OFFSIDE. The rule may be excessive, it may be stupid, but it’s the ****ing rule. In time, VAR may cause the tidying up of some of the laws of the game, but until now it’s just ensuring the current ones are correctly applied.

 

The Laws were written to be interpreted by a bloke with a whistle and two with flags, they were never intended to be forensically examined to the nearest millimetre. Offside was only introduced to prevent goal-hanging and to try to apply it to anything more accurate that afoot or two is ridiculous, especially in a fast moving game. They should just leave it in the hands of the independent assistant and say that if he looks offside, he’s offside. We never used to have this problem until they started filming and recording games.

 

If we are going to micro-analyse every game then we need a wide scale revision of the Laws. The problem for me is that there should be the same Laws and application of them throughout all layers of the game, from local park kicks abouts to World Cup Finals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Laws were written to be interpreted by a bloke with a whistle and two with flags, they were never intended to be forensically examined to the nearest millimetre. Offside was only introduced to prevent goal-hanging and to try to apply it to anything more accurate that afoot or two is ridiculous, especially in a fast moving game. They should just leave it in the hands of the independent assistant and say that if he looks offside, he’s offside. We never used to have this problem until they started filming and recording games.

 

If we are going to micro-analyse every game then we need a wide scale revision of the Laws. The problem for me is that there should be the same Laws and application of them throughout all layers of the game, from local park kicks abouts to World Cup Finals.

The laws were originally written over a hundred years ago. And they’ve changed immeasurably since. The idea that the laws are sacrosanct is very strange. So many changes have been made that have made the game better: the use of red and yellow cards, the use of substitutes, the back pass law, GLT, countless other minor changes. the game evolves, so do the rules.

 

As for the ideas that local parks should have the same regulations as the top level, nice idea but utterly impractical and it happens in most other sports and has done for years. Cricket, tennis and rugby are the other big games played in this country and they all have technology applied at the highest level, they’ve all benefitted from it, and the grass roots doesn’t suffer one iota.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Laws were written to be interpreted by a bloke with a whistle and two with flags, they were never intended to be forensically examined to the nearest millimetre. Offside was only introduced to prevent goal-hanging and to try to apply it to anything more accurate that afoot or two is ridiculous, especially in a fast moving game. They should just leave it in the hands of the independent assistant and say that if he looks offside, he’s offside. We never used to have this problem until they started filming and recording games.

 

If we are going to micro-analyse every game then we need a wide scale revision of the Laws. The problem for me is that there should be the same Laws and application of them throughout all layers of the game, from local park kicks abouts to World Cup Finals.

 

Almost word for word what I posted a while back on offside, totally agree with you. The current interpretation of offside is a nonsense, it was never intended to be used this way, and the boys and girls at IFAB need to go back and review the law and its interpretation. VAR should never be involved with offside.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You’re both echoing what i’m saying - ‘it may be stupid, but it’s the rule’. VAR is highlighting some rules may need changing, but VAR is not the issue, it is merely implementing what is supposed to be by the referees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You’re both echoing what i’m saying - ‘it may be stupid, but it’s the rule’. VAR is highlighting some rules may need changing, but VAR is not the issue, it is merely implementing what is supposed to be by the referees.

But VAR is for super-pedants. It’s the sort of system that’s designed to be used by traffic wardens. Your argument is that anybody doing 71 mph on a motorway should be fined.

 

It takes all the joy out of life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having played, managed, and was a class 3 ref, I'd like to add, that I found a lot of blokes who play the game, do not know the laws, a bit like a lot of golfers. So they interpret to suit their own agenda. This is one of the reasons you get players gobbing of at refs, they truly don't think they were in breach of a law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But VAR is for super-pedants. It’s the sort of system that’s designed to be used by traffic wardens. Your argument is that anybody doing 71 mph on a motorway should be fined.

 

It takes all the joy out of life.

 

Partly. I agree and staggered to think someone thought it was wonderful to disallow a goal by a margin no one has ever noticed in any game ever previously and no human could ever be expected to pick up (Sterling’s armpit).

Should be extended to slow mo when players are speaking to ref to note any stray saliva so we can give some more reds for spitting.

 

That said VAR has its place for clear and obvious fck ups. And winding up dinosaur ‘proper football men’ pundits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But VAR is for super-pedants. It’s the sort of system that’s designed to be used by traffic wardens. Your argument is that anybody doing 71 mph on a motorway should be fined.

It takes all the joy out of life.

I do not believe we are far away from that being a reality. Along with average speed cameras being all over the place/trimble devices being installed in all new cars

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But VAR is for super-pedants. It’s the sort of system that’s designed to be used by traffic wardens. Your argument is that anybody doing 71 mph on a motorway should be fined.

 

It takes all the joy out of life.

 

But, and i’ll say again, as it stands, that is how the ‘law’ is written in football. Would you be happy with an official looking at the video replay and saying ‘yeah I mean his foot is ahead of the last defender, but it’s only a little bit, let it go’? What if the next referee thinks a whole leg is ‘only a little bit’, and the next one thinks half the body is ‘only a little bit’. VAR is supposed to limit the inaccuracy and inconsistency of refereeing, offside is one current law where that can actually be done, given that it is so binary. If the law as it currently is written is not fit for purpose then it shouldn’t be down to the VAR system to start deciding that on an incident by incident process, it’s merely enforcing the laws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The laws were originally written over a hundred years ago. And they’ve changed immeasurably since. The idea that the laws are sacrosanct is very strange. So many changes have been made that have made the game better: the use of red and yellow cards, the use of substitutes, the back pass law, GLT, countless other minor changes. the game evolves, so do the rules.

 

As for the ideas that local parks should have the same regulations as the top level, nice idea but utterly impractical and it happens in most other sports and has done for years. Cricket, tennis and rugby are the other big games played in this country and they all have technology applied at the highest level, they’ve all benefitted from it, and the grass roots doesn’t suffer one iota.

 

But, and i’ll say again, as it stands, that is how the ‘law’ is written in football. Would you be happy with an official looking at the video replay and saying ‘yeah I mean his foot is ahead of the last defender, but it’s only a little bit, let it go’? What if the next referee thinks a whole leg is ‘only a little bit’, and the next one thinks half the body is ‘only a little bit’. VAR is supposed to limit the inaccuracy and inconsistency of refereeing, offside is one current law where that can actually be done, given that it is so binary. If the law as it currently is written is not fit for purpose then it shouldn’t be down to the VAR system to start deciding that on an incident by incident process, it’s merely enforcing the laws.

 

Well said both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not at all. Referring to them as 'rules' proves my point, as a fan, how can you debate on the issue, if you have no understanding of it.

 

I’m fully aware of the terminology, rules and laws in a sporting sense to me essentially are the same thing so I don’t tend to focus on remembering they’re labelled ‘laws’ and that people love to remind others of that when they have nothing valuable to contribute to the discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But, and i’ll say again, as it stands, that is how the ‘law’ is written in football. Would you be happy with an official looking at the video replay and saying ‘yeah I mean his foot is ahead of the last defender, but it’s only a little bit, let it go’? What if the next referee thinks a whole leg is ‘only a little bit’, and the next one thinks half the body is ‘only a little bit’. VAR is supposed to limit the inaccuracy and inconsistency of refereeing, offside is one current law where that can actually be done, given that it is so binary. If the law as it currently is written is not fit for purpose then it shouldn’t be down to the VAR system to start deciding that on an incident by incident process, it’s merely enforcing the laws.

But the present ‘view’ from the TV cameras is off-axis in at least two dimensions. You would need an array of cameras on both sides of the pitch, preferably down near player level. Even then you end up with different interpretations of where the arm begins and where you draw the cut-off line through the armpit. It’s a sledgehammer to crush a grape.

 

The Law is not written to be implemented by some imprecise, remote technology. OK for instances of clear offside such as Gabbi at Wembley but trying to adjudicate over a couple of centimetres is ridiculous and unnecessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having played, managed, and was a class 3 ref, I'd like to add, that I found a lot of blokes who play the game, do not know the laws, a bit like a lot of golfers. So they interpret to suit their own agenda. This is one of the reasons you get players gobbing of at refs, they truly don't think they were in breach of a law.

 

 

:) We referees have to stick together ;)

 

It’s amazing how many professional players don’t actually know the Laws of the Game.

 

We were told on our referee courses that there was a specific reason the they were called Laws and not rules. Rules have a tendency to be bent or broken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the present ‘view’ from the TV cameras is off-axis in at least two dimensions. You would need an array of cameras on both sides of the pitch, preferably down near player level.

You’re basically describing what they currently use, multiple cameras from various angles plus a 3D digital mapping application. The lines shown on TV screens are only for visual reference for the audience.

 

Im not sure I can get on board with the whole “it’s too accurate” argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m fully aware of the terminology, rules and laws in a sporting sense to me essentially are the same thing so I don’t tend to focus on remembering they’re labelled ‘laws’ and that people love to remind others of that when they have nothing valuable to contribute to the discussion.

 

What a cop out, there is a huge difference between a rule, and a law. Anyway I'm not a pendant, just someone who loves football, and uses the right term, as one should.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

£5 treble on arsenal, Leicester and Utd.

Arsenal 1-0 up and saw Wolves went one up and reported on vidiprinter so cash out (£1 loss so should’ve known something not right) and then findVAR ruled out the Wolves goal.

 

Don’t fcking show it on the vidiprinter then until it is confirmed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You’re basically describing what they currently use, multiple cameras from various angles plus a 3D digital mapping application. The lines shown on TV screens are only for visual reference for the audience.

 

Im not sure I can get on board with the whole “it’s too accurate” argument.

 

Then why can’t we see a shot from a view which is at right angles to the players? The red and blue lines that they showed for Sterling’s armpit didn’t look right to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then why can’t we see a shot from a view which is at right angles to the players? The red and blue lines that they showed for Sterling’s armpit didn’t look right to me.

 

They've been getting ready for this for two seasons in the PL and it's been used in leagues around Europe, plus the World Cup and the women's World Cup. You really think they're just picking a random angle and drawing lines in with a marker pen and a ruler?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For offside judgements, who is making the call of when the ball is actually passed.

 

I bet you can go back a few frames for that Sterling 'goal' and he will be onside, and the passer will still be in contact with the ball.

 

I bet you're wrong. In any event, it has to be more accurate than a linesman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For offside judgements, who is making the call of when the ball is actually passed.

 

Each game VAR studio has a Premier League referee and a VAR systems specialist. So they're the ones who are making the call (well the ref is but he'll ask the systems guy to get the video to the point he deems is correct). They did quite a good feature on Sky of how it all works pre game on Friday night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anything that brings an end to wrestling at corners has to be progress.

We may even get a slightly more honest sport now that Big Brother is watching everything, it looks like we are getting a more accurate one already, so I'd take the odd 'harsh' borderline decision if it wipes out the dozens of mistakes we normally have to endure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})