Poll reference VAR

[spongebobblade]

'Clear and obvious' does not apply to offside decisions. Its 100% fact based to the extent that technology provides ' the facts'that is.

Sorry mate but no way can anyone say that Lundstram was 100% offside, even with the technology we used yesterday. The ‘fact’ that we scored during the second phase when Wilder has been quoted as having a meeting discussing this only on Thursday pours even more doubt on the way things are interpreted

 

[Woodwardfan]

Offsides should be applied in the spirit of the game. The rule was invented to stop players bog lining.

And anyways surely offsides as a minimum should be measured from the players head, as that's what the player uses to judge where he is. He can hardly look down the line to see if he's offside with his big toe can he.

Agree reviews will be undertaken but we are in the early days of a major change.

 

[Hague Blade]

I take your point but there have been numerous times when a clear reversal of the match referees decision should have been overturned yet wasn’t. Further down the line they have admitted this. They left themselves wide open for criticism for not allegedly seeing what the rest of us can and then in the last few weeks we’ve had a fair few decisions overturned after an internal review.
They have to be clearer and more simplistic with the rules so we can all understand them better including the officials both on the pitch and at Stockley Park.
Yesterday was laughable though. When Baldocks goal went for revue you almost felt that Jon Moss was actually desperately looking for a reason to chalk it off. It’s getting bloody ridiculous and killing the game we all love. 1st phase, 2nd phase, different handballs for whether your the defender or attacker, we are getting wrapped up in complex issues brought about by meddling with rules and the ability to overanalyse. We need to take a step back, simplify and clarify for VAR to work how we all wanted and expected it to

Agree with this. There was absolutely no reason to review the goal - it was a mishit cross that snuck in at the far post. But off to VAR we go - it felt very much as though they were looking for a reason to disallow another one.

 

[Pierre's PC]

Bottom line is that the technology isn't good enough at present to make marginal calls on events like offside. It shouldn't be used as if it is.

There's no way you can tell if Lunny is offside based on the image being used. Picture compression averages pixels in blocks to create almost an exaggerated AA affect.

If you're arguing that it's a definite offside, could you explain how you come to the conclusion, I'm genuinely interested.

 

[Woodwardfan]

Surely the really simple way to avoid it is by not reviewing it in the first place. The reason for no review is that Dier headed the cross out of the area, end of phase start of new phase.

If that had happened, not one single person in the world would be querying Lunny's foot position and asking why VAR wasn't used.

Big point is that. I dont know the rule on the beginning and end of phases.

After Baldock's pass there are touches by 4 United players and one Spurs. Lundstram, Dierr, Norwood?, Stevens, McGoldrick.

Mike Reilly should have to clarify the rule. and define it.

He should also have to explain that cast iron Leicester penalty that wasn't given.

 

[Woodwardfan]

Bottom line is that the technology isn't good enough at present to make marginal calls on events like offside. It shouldn't be used as if it is.

There's no way you can tell if Lunny is offside based on the image being used. Picture compression averages pixels in blocks to create almost an exaggerated AA affect.

If you're arguing that it's a definite offside, could you explain how you come to the conclusion, I'm genuinely interested.

if you mean me then the simple answer is rhat the technology in use is the same for everybody.

 

[cooperblade]

I voted no simply because it does have the potential to be used for the greater good. (believe it or not) just needs refining which may take a couple of seasons.

For offsides these days and advancement of technology, my preference would be for offsides to be based on only the foot of defender vs attacker ( none of this elbow, armpit, ponytail bullshit)

If all boots had a gps chip in them and with how specific and advanced gps is these days you would know without a shadow of a doubt whose foot was closest to the goal line. This would negate having a camera angle which isn't parallel with where the players are and trying to guess whose in front of who by drawing random lines. Only way I can ever see it being absolutely black and white.

They're already trialling this in the Premier League, there was an article on The Athletic. Apparently every team's number 7 was wearing special boots yesterday that had been extended at the front to fit the chip in.

 

[IOM Blade]

So is the size of Lundstrams foot. It’s not a CLEAR AND OBVIOUS offside (IMO not even offside) The goal should stand. Simple

Exactly. Going on that shitty resolution, Lunstram's foot is the same length as his lower leg!

 

[spongebobblade]

'Clear and obvious' does not apply to offside decisions. Its 100% fact based to the extent that technology provides ' the facts'that is.

'Clear and obvious' does not apply to offside decisions. Its 100% fact based to the extent that technology provides ' the facts'that is.

Not according to CW

 

[Pierre's PC]

if you mean me then the simple answer is rhat the technology in use is the same for everybody.

I didn't but that's ok.

The technology isn't the same for everyone. Frame rate of the capture, distance, how compression works, camera quality, weather (rain and snow), advertising board images and lighting conditions, all affect the quality of the capture. Too many variables to even suggest that its the same for everyone.

 

[northsomersetblade]

I think they should keep it, review the games the next day and then decide how many goals should have been scored. The decision can then be emailed to the fans and the results and tables posted on facebook and the club website. Much more logical.

 

[Woodwardfan]

View attachment 64243
Not according to CW

New one that is. Misquote perhaps.

 

[Woodwardfan]

Exactly. Going on that shitty resolution, Lunstram's foot is the same length as his lower leg!

Thats tbe same angle that makes, Dier's shoulder look behind his knee.

 

[spongebobblade]

New one that is. Misquote perhaps.

Or quite possibly what Wilder was told on Thursday?

 

[Addison]

I reckon Moss will have taken all that time to make his decision because he knew the decision was controversial but couldnt find any way to avoid it
In such a case the rules/ guidance/practice needs review.

Moss is an appalling referee with a history of getting it wrong. He would have been looking to find a reason to disallow the goal rather than a clear and obvious error. It wasn't as if the Spurs players made a big fuss about the goal. Moss looked as far back into the play as possible to find a reason to say no goal. All he should have reviewed was the pass that was made to Mcg and whether he was offside. The reset or second phase had started when Dier headed the ball away.

Moss is a disciple of Riley in that they arrogantly believe they know best. Riley has completely re written the intention behind VAR and FIFA should investigate why he has been allowed to do this. VAR is there to assist the referee not be the referee.

 

[CarlMcBlade]

The third party involvement should be scrapped. The pitch side monitors should be the ONLY video assistance available when the ref needs it.

 

[mablethorpe utd]

I voted no simply because it does have the potential to be used for the greater good. (believe it or not) just needs refining which may take a couple of seasons.

For offsides these days and advancement of technology, my preference would be for offsides to be based on only the foot of defender vs attacker ( none of this elbow, armpit, ponytail bullshit)

If all boots had a gps chip in them and with how specific and advanced gps is these days you would know without a shadow of a doubt whose foot was closest to the goal line. This would negate having a camera angle which isn't parallel with where the players are and trying to guess whose in afront of who by drawing random lines. Only way I can ever see it being absolutely black and white.

Jumpers for goalposts. Chips in boots, whats it coming to?

 

[bypassblade]

When they are giving a goal offside by virtue of a guys toe being in front of a players knee then it is going too far yesterday was pathetic, bet if Spurs had scored it would have stood.

 

[LoughboroBlade]

Add an option to keep it but with changes to adjust and further test and improve. That would be my choice.

Same. The general principle of video assistance to right clear wrongs is very different to how it’s been implemented, and different to how we were told it would be. People wanted technology brought in for that, but certainly didn’t want a small minority of that pro-VAR group to push through a harsh use of it for marginal decisions that nobody had complained about previously, despite this being described as what people had been calling for.

VAR is in that respect a bit like Vote Leave...

runs off to General Chat

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

Add an option to keep it but with changes to adjust and further test and improve. That would be my choice.

And that will be exactly what happens. Just like goal line technology it will speed up and be almost instant within a year or two. Offside for goals probably won’t even be a decision made by a man watching a screen which would be a huge step forward. Just a message to the linesman’s watch to confirm him lifting his flag.

Just think it's typical of the arrogance of the premier league and our officials in particular to take something that is working fine and refuse to use it the same way as everyone else but instead turn into the opposite of what it's there for

Using the screens was hardly working fine, everyone was rightly having a right old moan about it because of the time it took. I thought the high bar was a good thing, it was just too high and they were terrified of overruling the on field ref even if he was clearly wrong because it wasn’t a clear and obvious error in their mind.
With regards to his toe, either we have offside as a law or we don’t. Maybe it needs to be if any part of the body you can legally score with is level with the defender then you’re on, but it’s a clear matter of fact if someone is offside or not. For the goal yesterday the biggest argument for it to be given was the change in phases. But as the law stands the offside decisions by VAR have been right.

 

[Mumbo]

Some things in football are objective, such as the ball crossing the goal line. We now have a way to decide definitively if this has happens. All good.

Some things are more subjective - fouls, dives etc

Some things are a mix of both. Handball requires a decision as to how natural the arm position was when the ball struck it, and whether it counts if the ball hit the upper arm or not. Offside is also a mix. A players position on the pitch is objective, but interfering with play makes it more up to the referee to decide.

For all these decisions, we've historically simply given power over to the referee & linesmen and just said 'For better or for worse, you decide, and we'll stick with your decision'. The downsides of this are manifold. Different referees will come to different opinions, and will occasionally miss the blindingly obvious, such as actual goals going in the back of the net.

There's a lot of calls on here to scrap VAR. The question I have for those people is:
If VAR is removed, will you be ok with simply accepting the referee's decision when he inevitably gets it wrong, and just accepting that mistakes from players, managers and the ref all play a part of the game?

I ask this because although I think this it's a reasonable position, I remember so many complaints from fans every week about refereeing decisions. Sometimes I question if fans know what they really want.

Fans have blamed refs for a hundred years and more I just thought it was part of the game.
It can even get the crowd motivated when the ref is a bit of a cock.They used to make and break games and were relevant
instantaneous and essential.With VAR they are bitches to some nob playing computer games.
Scrap VAR now,lets get back to football instead of this soulless crap.

 

[Yellarbellyblade]

I think they should keep it, review the games the next day and then decide how many goals should have been scored. The decision can then be emailed to the fans and the results and tables posted on facebook and the club website. Much more logical.

I laughed then got to thinking ............

 

['Doc' Pace my hero]

The Premier league need to be very,very careful.If they don't act quickly to modify VAR and allow it to be used only to assist in correcting clear and obvious errors,then they run the danger of killing the goose that laid the golden egg.The on field referee with the aid of the pitchside monitor should be the only one to make the decisions,we must stop 'slide rule' remote refereeing decisions immediately,fans deserve better than this.

 

[McGrath]

Agree reviews will be undertaken but we are in the early days of a major change.

They need a fundamental reset and start again. Right now they are using VAR to try and make the perfect decision. What they should be doing is using it get rid of controversial decisions, outright howlers, cynical fouling and diving.

 

[Blend-it-like-Harris]

Get rid. I’ve seen more decisions wrong than right, since it was introduced.

Absolutely spot on comment - the number of wrong decisions (including decisions that should have been made but were ignored) has increased and the game is poorer for it. VAR is like fucking Brexit. It wasn't a top priority for the fans (as with Brexit the EU didn't even figure in the top 10 issues for voters) but now it's turning into a disaster that's wrecking the game we love. The technology is reasonable, but the powers that make the decisions on our behalf are just as incompetent as the twats in Government. A curse on all their Houses. Somehow they'll engineer another back-door method to get us relegated rather than West-Fucking-Ham. Rant over.....

 

[mablethorpe utd]

Absolutely spot on comment - the number of wrong decisions (including decisions that should have been made but were ignored) has increased and the game is poorer for it. VAR is like fucking Brexit. It wasn't a top priority for the fans (as with Brexit the EU didn't even figure in the top 10 issues for voters) but now it's turning into a disaster that's wrecking the game we love. The technology is reasonable, but the powers that make the decisions on our behalf are just as incompetent as the twats in Government. A curse on all their Houses. Somehow they'll engineer another back-door method to get us relegated rather than West-Fucking-Ham. Rant over.....

It will be OK in South America, by the time the commentator has finished shouting goal they might have made their mind up.

 

[blade67]

'Clear and obvious' does not apply to offside decisions. Its 100% fact based to the extent that technology provides ' the facts'that is.

I think that is how they are thinking at the moment but as soon as you measure anything, there is an inaccuracy in it and I think they are deluding themselves about how accurate the system is

 

[Cruyff Turn]

I think they should keep it, review the games the next day and then decide how many goals should have been scored. The decision can then be emailed to the fans and the results and tables posted on facebook and the club website. Much more logical.

This is clearly the way forward. In fact, given the PL's whore-like devotion to the media, perhaps they could have a reality TV style show at 7pm every Monday, a bit like Strictly. Claudia Winkleperson could introduce clips of the weekend's worst VAR decisions, with a panel of experts (plus Mark Lawrenson) selecting the worst two. These two could then go to a public vote. By 10pm, the people would have spoken. The worst VAR of the week would be publically shamed and the decision reversed.

Thus, if it was the disallowed Blades goal which won the viewer's poll, the Blades would be awarded 2 extra points and Spurs deducted one. If the Leicester penalty shout won, then Leicester would be awarded an extra goal from the resulting penalty, for a 3-0 win.

Then as a finale to the show, the Stockley Park ref who called the overturned decision would be forced to eat live grubs under the baying supervision of Ant and Dec

My working title for this TV ratings winner is "I'm a shit VAR decision, get me out of here" or possibly "The FA's got no talent."

Sounds like a winner to me.

 

[PokerBlade]

Some things in football are objective, such as the ball crossing the goal line. We now have a way to decide definitively if this has happens. All good.

Some things are more subjective - fouls, dives etc

Some things are a mix of both. Handball requires a decision as to how natural the arm position was when the ball struck it, and whether it counts if the ball hit the upper arm or not. Offside is also a mix. A players position on the pitch is objective, but interfering with play makes it more up to the referee to decide.

For all these decisions, we've historically simply given power over to the referee & linesmen and just said 'For better or for worse, you decide, and we'll stick with your decision'. The downsides of this are manifold. Different referees will come to different opinions, and will occasionally miss the blindingly obvious, such as actual goals going in the back of the net.

There's a lot of calls on here to scrap VAR. The question I have for those people is:
If VAR is removed, will you be ok with simply accepting the referee's decision when he inevitably gets it wrong, and just accepting that mistakes from players, managers and the ref all play a part of the game?

I ask this because although I think this it's a reasonable position, I remember so many complaints from fans every week about refereeing decisions. Sometimes I question if fans know what they really want.

My answer to your question is sort of. I'm more than happy to accept that referees will always make mistakes. I'll even go as far as to say that I'm willing to sacrifice a degree of accuracy in order to maintain the speed of the game and the speed of decisions made.

The caveat I'd add is that I've been arguing for years that we could raise the standards of refereeing by a mile if we started enforcing respect rules. Some staggeringly high % of refs quit the game in the first couple of years. Why? Because of the abuse they take from parents and players at youth level. The ones that survive that? They usually quit because of the abuse they take from some thugs that are still half-cut from Saturday night in the Sunday leagues. The refs at the top of the game aren't necessarily the best, they're the ones mad enough to stick it out.

We could also add a fast track system so that ex-players can become referees. There must be so many pros that finish the game, would like to stay involved, and know the game better than anyone else. The current system doesn't allow them to reach the professional level.

There's any number of ways to improve refereeing, improve the standards of the game, without adding huge delays to deal with the really difficult cases. If we've learned anything so far from the VAR experiment it surely has to be that a lot of the close calls in football are so hard to judge that it's almost pointless to worry about them.

 

[Ainsley Harriott]

VAR itself isn't a problem. It's the useless twats behind it. 4 minutes to see what they could after 30 seconds. They've not actually implemented the rules of the game properly regards 'phases of play'. Dier clears it - attack dead. We continue and Didzy isnt offside.