VAR VAR

[Ainsley Harriott]

Someone send Shearer round to this guys house:

As mentioned in that thread, Owen wouldn't have scored half his goals if these decisions are given offside. He's a cock anyway.

 

[Mad Mick]

Michael Owen clearly doesn't understand how the technology works. It's not black and white it's several shades of grey.
The problem is the frame rate of the cameras that are used for VAR is too low. Apparently its 50 frames per second. So it takes an image every 0.2 seconds. VAR must choose a frame where the ball is actually kicked, so If one frame shows he's nearly kicking it, they must go to the next frame. The margin of error could be as much as 38cm when you also take into account the speed that players are travelling. So while it might be more accurate than the referee it's nowhere near accurate.

 

[WalkelyFan]

I am generally in favour of VAR. one suggestion, I believe from Graham Souness to amend the off side problem (and would have given us a goal yesterday) - if any part of the player is behind the line then the player is deemed to be onside.

 

[Ainsley Harriott]

Michael Owen clearly doesn't understand how the technology works. It's not black and white it's several shades of grey.
The problem is the frame rate of the cameras that are used for VAR is too low. Apparently its 50 frames per second. So it takes an image every 0.2 seconds. VAR must choose a frame where the ball is actually kicked, so If one frame shows he's nearly kicking it, they must go to the next frame. The margin of error could be as much as 38cm when you also take into account the speed that players are travelling. So while it might be more accurate than the referee it's nowhere near accurate.

This explains what you're saying.

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

I'm a bit disappointed posters aren't thinking outside the box. Use VAR more, trust the technology, there's no need for an on field Referee, no one to get in Fleck's way, that Aguero goal doesn't happen.

The ref is not required now, ignore his whistle, play on and score then send it to VAR.

Chances of the ref getting it right - nil.
Chances of VAR overturning his wrong decision - nil.

We're fucked.

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

I am generally in favour of VAR.

Horseshit for breakfast?

 

[Charlieblade]

Please make it stop!.
The technology is not fit for purpose.
Any decision that goes to Stockly Park for affirmation, is subject to the whims of individuals, who are using bogus technology as a crutch, to undermine the on field decision of another individual, operating in real time, at normal speed.

In both cases, the decision is made subjectively, by individuals who are human, and therefore subject to error and inconsistency.
A flawed individual makes the decision in real time, or a flawed individual makes the decision based on wonky technology.

Please make it stop!

 

[William]

View attachment 67529

This is why they have “Umpires Call” in cricket. They need something similar in football clearly. It’s not a case of been black and white at all. There’s a grey area and it’s that what’s ruining the game.

 

[Yewsman]

View attachment 67531

This explains what you're saying.

I have not seen this before but it perfectly explains why the present application of VAR to offsides is wrong. It clearly states that there is at least a 13 cms margin for error and possibly more. So given that Sterling was only 2.4 cms off side VAR is not accurate enough to say scientifically he was offside so there is doubt and any doubt goes in favour of the attacker. If the PL can tweek VAR to take account of the margin of error (which would need to be assessed scientifically and would presumably be somewhere between 13 and say 50 cms) then a lot of the goals that have been ruled out would be allowed. I could live with that.

 

[Yellarbellyblade]

I have consistently said the offside RULE needs tweaking because armpits and toenail lines are ridiculous but yes I really welcome VAR. I think a few months will see it well bedded- in . In the past I have watched so much football where the referee decided the points with his errors.

Unfortunately our referees are well capable of errors even on 5 screens. They will improve or will be demoted, they are in the spotlight like never before and with nowhere to hide.

Next season it will all be fine. I square the technology supposed weaknesses with the belief it is the same for all teams and the knowledge it will inevitably be improved.

I respect your views and to a degree agree regarding the offside law. The problem I have is that VAR is trying to make perfect decisions with imperfect technology. It is simply not good enough to be 100% sure that these extremely tight offside calls are correct.
I go back to my original point that in the day the theory was always that the benefit of any doubt wen with the attacking side. If they have to spend two minutes or more drawing lines etc. then surely by definition there is a doubt and the decision should be play on.

Football is an entertainment industry and I cannot understand why you would use a system in such a way that it actively reduces the number of goals which are the whole point of the game. Over the weekend there were something like eight goals ruled out for such tight decisions, what benefit to the game and fans is that? How would you feel if one of these decisions relegated us?

 

[Yellarbellyblade]

Fact is that Mousset was offside when all is said and done. No bad luck in that. The Man City players were appealing instantly and straight after the 'goal'. The linesman has been told to keep his flag down in close situations, if they really have to do that then they really should add an instruction for him to put his flag up and call for a check when the ball enters the net.

The VAR official could not overturn their first goal because there was no rule broken. The onfield referee should have stopped the game ( whistled) before Aguero shot. After he scored there was no way back, no rule to stop the goal.

Great shame a poor ex-referee like Reilly has been running this project. However referees do not make the rules of the game, as far as I know.

We were not 'diddled' yesterday, but very unlucky.

I think you’ll find the City players were appealing for a foul on Aguero not offside

 

[ScottishBlade93]

If every football fan was serious about wanting rid of it, the next time your team scores a goal just turn your back on the match and don’t celebrate. It will never ever happen but that would be the best way to show the authorities that football fans across the country are sick and tired of this shambles every weekend. Let’s be honest, it’s not a one off is it? Every single game has a controversial decision. There were less controversy when VAR wasn’t in place!!! Get it fixed or get it in the bin. Simple.

 

[Woodwardfan]

I respect your views and to a degree agree regarding the offside law. The problem I have is that VAR is trying to make perfect decisions with imperfect technology. It is simply not good enough to be 100% sure that these extremely tight offside calls are correct.
I go back to my original point that in the day the theory was always that the benefit of any doubt wen with the attacking side. If they have to spend two minutes or more drawing lines etc. then surely by definition there is a doubt and the decision should be play on.

Football is an entertainment industry and I cannot understand why you would use a system in such a way that it actively reduces the number of goals which are the whole point of the game. Over the weekend there were something like eight goals ruled out for such tight decisions, what benefit to the game and fans is that? How would you feel if one of these decisions relegated us?

I accept say 95% technology accuracy as that's far better than linesmen without tech support.

The tech will improve very quickly. My new car model was improved before I'd had it a year. It's not rocket science this camera lark.

 

[Yellarbellyblade]

I accept say 95% technology accuracy as that's far better than linesmen without tech support.

The tech will improve very quickly. My new car model was improved before I'd had it a year. It's not rocket science this camera lark.

Wasn’t there research that showed linesmen (and women) were something like 98% accurate? VAR has to be 100% in that case and the technology doesn’t allow that. Technology should be an aid not the be all and end all. In cricket and rugby the on field officials either have the final say or on borderline decisions it sticks with what they said at the time. That seems far more sensible to me.

You say it’s not rocket science but are you seriously trying to argue that the system is 100% accurate?

 

[Woodwardfan]

Wasn’t there research that showed linesmen (and women) were something like 98% accurate? VAR has to be 100% in that case and the technology doesn’t allow that. Technology should be an aid not the be all and end all. In cricket and rugby the on field officials either have the final say or on borderline decisions it sticks with what they said at the time. That seems far more sensible to me.

You say it’s not rocket science but are you seriously trying to argue that the system is 100% accurate?

Not a clue what the accuracy is but I posted I'd accept 95% if it's the best available.

Linesmen did not flag for toe-nails. There have been 27 such decisions this season. They would have missed all those.

Before you say it, I agree, the rule needs changing, not a lot but enough to restore confidence in the system. I was saying that after incident 1 in August.

 

[Yellarbellyblade]

Linesmen did not flag for toe-nails. There have been 27 such decisions this season. They would have missed all those.

Before you say it, I agree, the rule needs changing, not a lot but enough to restore confidence in the system. I was saying that after incident 1 in August.

You are assuming of course that the toenails were actually offside which is the point I’m making, the technology as it exists is not accurate enough to judge that.

 

[Badger Blade]

Pre-VAR, there were a few utterly disgraceful decisions that stick out like sore thumbs that VAR would have sorted immediately. For example Graham Poll's 3 yellow cards, Thierry Henry's handball against Ireland, mistaken identity of Kieran Gibbs I think getting sent off wrongly and I'm sure various instances of violent conduct either missed or given incorrectly when someone's thrown themselves needlessly to the ground. However, the rest of it just needs to be left alone to continue how it was before we had all this rubbish about armpits, toenails etc.

Benefit of the doubt to go to the attacking team and unless something blindingly obvious gets missed, just get on with it

Before we know it, Zlatan Ibrahimovic will be having to get a nose job to make sure he stays onside.

Other stuff like "ghost goals" (Stuart Attwell at Watford?) has since been cured by goal line technology which is a welcome addition and sorts things almost instantly.

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

I accept say 95% technology accuracy as that's far better than linesmen without tech support.

The tech will improve very quickly. My new car model was improved before I'd had it a year. It's not rocket science this camera lark.

It's horseshit.

 

[Pittsburg Blade]

Michael Owen clearly doesn't understand how the technology works. It's not black and white it's several shades of grey.
The problem is the frame rate of the cameras that are used for VAR is too low. Apparently its 50 frames per second. So it takes an image every 0.2 seconds. VAR must choose a frame where the ball is actually kicked, so If one frame shows he's nearly kicking it, they must go to the next frame. The margin of error could be as much as 38cm when you also take into account the speed that players are travelling. So while it might be more accurate than the referee it's nowhere near accurate.

50 frames per second is 0.02 Mick.
Your theory might need some recalibration.

 

[Woodwardfan]

It's horseshit.

Rhubarb. I put it on my rhubarb.

 

[Mad Mick]

Just testing

 

[raul]

Rhubarb. I put it on my rhubarb.

You must eat a lot of it.

 

[Woodwardfan]

You must eat a lot of it.

Custard. Smoothies. Crumble. With or without apple. Healthy(ish).

 

[Bladesman]

 

[DronnieBlade]

Had high hopes for VAR.

Not any more !!

UTB

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

Rhubarb. I put it on my rhubarb.

And then put it on here as VAR love-in cream.

Which means its from horseshit.

 

[metalblade]

Over the weekend Liverpool, Tottenham and Man City have benefited from goals being ruled out by VAR, just saying.

 

[Muttley]

I love a good conspiracy theory.
These VAR images. They could easily and quickly be " photoshopped" to make a player just offside. Strange how all the big teams have benefited once again.

 

[SB_90]

its getting tougher to keep trying to not repeat yourself & go around in circles. because we are coming into a yr since 1st offside controversy in derby v Southampton in fa cup 3rd round replay, I will say I think Var is working on the most part the Manchester derby is a good example but the problem is that offside is overshadowing everything we no longer talk about football we talk about VAR. I believe if they take offside out of the VAR jurisdiction then I would you remove 95% maybe even 100% of the problem that fans have with the new system.

football would go back to normal. because outside of offsides I can think of a problem with it

 

[Brian Deane]

Would it make any difference if a manager / coach ordered his team off the pitch and forfeited the match to get something done ? UTB