VAR thread

[Mark79]

VAR 'should not be too forensic' - football law-makers set to issue guidance

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/50944416

Suggestion here seems to be that these armpit offsides shouldn't be being given, and they are going to reissue guidance on them.

Whether this is or isn't what was initially intended it is how the system has been used all season and it seems wrong to change midway through the season. Also it's interesting that this has come out after 4 or 5 of these incidents occurred in a single round of games, they seem to be fairly reactive to criticism of VAR.

So there we go. No need for massive law changes. Simply following the IFAB guidance on VAR and offsides would be a big step in the right direction.

Don't be too forensic and apply 'clear and obvious' to reviews. The compete opposite of what we saw at the weekend.

[Irishnev]

Cue lengthy and technical definitions of "daylight".

Anyway, FIFA don't set the rules. It has nothing to do with them.

Yep - didn’t have the time to put my thoughts with the article, arguably it will reduce the number of tight calls but they will still exist

[baitman]

This stupidity of when the ref blows the whistle also needs looking at...

If he'd have blown before manes goal had crossed the line, blowing for the "handball" off lallama's shoulder, then apparently it wouldnt have been a goal even if VAR had said it wasnt handball.

****ing madness really.

[Charly]

Define 'too forensic'? Isnt that the point of VAR?

Its either on, or it isnt.

[dom9]

Define 'too forensic'? Isnt that the point of VAR?

Its either on, or it isnt.

Well, no. And no.

Read this thread to see why.

[Mark79]

Define 'too forensic'? Isnt that the point of VAR?

Its either on, or it isnt.

Did you read the article?

"In theory, 1mm offside is offside, but if a decision is taken that a player is not offside and the VAR is trying to identify through looking at five, six, seven, 10, 12 cameras whether or not it was offside, then the original decision should stand."

[Norbs]

Then it's all a bit pointless and silly then.

Imagine if Hawkeye in tennis said 'ah, he tried and it was so close to the line that it may as well stand' and just ignore the technology. Worra load of **** that would be

[Norbs]

Well, no. And no.

Read this thread to see why.

Actually, it's yes and yes until you apply the 'it couldn't be seen without 12 camera angles' logic.

It really is either onside or offside to a point

[dom9]

Then it's all a bit pointless and silly then.

Imagine if Hawkeye in tennis said 'ah, he tried and it was so close to the line that it may as well stand' and just ignore the technology. Worra load of **** that would be

If the technology isn't up to that job, then yes, exactly that.

But it is up to that more simple job (deciding if a ball is on or over a line), so it's not really a comparative analogy.

The more accurate comparison would be comparing the tennis one to the goal line technology. And nobody has a problem with either of those.

[dom9]

Actually, it's yes and yes until you apply the 'it couldn't be seen without 12 camera angles' logic.

It really is either onside or offside to a point

The point being missed again Norbs.

In the real world, it is either on side or off side. Correct.

The technology isn't giving us that information though. It's an approximation.

And if it's an approximation, then you can't start making decisions based within the margins of error inheritent in the system.

[Red_Polo]

Then it's all a bit pointless and silly then.

Imagine if Hawkeye in tennis said 'ah, he tried and it was so close to the line that it may as well stand' and just ignore the technology. Worra load of **** that would be

It's more like saying the radar camera thinks you were doing 71mph however since we attribute a greater margin of error to the technology we will not prosecute you.

However, let's be real. People are not REALLY annoyed that close offsides get given as offside. They are just annoyed it takes so long, is shrouded in secrecy until the decision is delivered, and affects the way the officials behave during play. Those are the issues that need to be resolved, everything else is noise.

[dom9]

It's more like saying the radar camera thinks you were doing 71mph however since we attribute a greater margin of error to the technology we will not prosecute you.

However, let's be real. People are not REALLY annoyed that close offsides get given as offside. They are just annoyed it takes so long, is shrouded in secrecy until the decision is delivered, and affects the way the officials behave during play. Those are the issues that need to be resolved, everything else is noise.

Pretty sure generally get a 10% or margin with speed cameras.

You won't get done at 32 mph in a 30mph zone. But you will at 33. For example.

But anyway, people are also pissed off at armpits and other previously unheard of footballing parts of the body now being called offside too.

[Mark79]

Then it's all a bit pointless and silly then.

Imagine if Hawkeye in tennis said 'ah, he tried and it was so close to the line that it may as well stand' and just ignore the technology. Worra load of **** that would be

Actually, it's yes and yes until you apply the 'it couldn't be seen without 12 camera angles' logic.

It really is either onside or offside to a point

The Hawkeye tennis thing is more comparable to goal line technology than the offside rule.

Offside isn’t really about being either side of a line. It’s about the attacker not having the advantage of hanging around behind the opposing defence.

Having an armpit or big toe 1mm ahead is still offside in a pedantic kind of way, but it’s not actually giving the attacker any sort of advantage. So given the purpose of the rule, why does this need to be so severely enforced?

Level has always been considered to be ‘on’ and now suddenly it isn’t.

[Red_Polo]

Pretty sure generally get a 10% or margin with speed cameras.

You won't get done at 32 mph in a 30mph zone. But you will at 33. For example.

But anyway, people are also pissed off at armpits and other previously unheard of footballing parts of the body now being called offside too.

Yeah exactly. I remember hearing 10% too.

[Mark79]

It's more like saying the radar camera thinks you were doing 71mph however since we attribute a greater margin of error to the technology we will not prosecute you.

However, let's be real. People are not REALLY annoyed that close offsides get given as offside. They are just annoyed it takes so long, is shrouded in secrecy until the decision is delivered, and affects the way the officials behave during play. Those are the issues that need to be resolved, everything else is noise.

Disagree there. Fans, players, coaches, pundits are all definitely annoyed that what would have been previously considered as level is now being given as offside.

We thought VAR was going to help correct clear mistakes. None of those 5 goals scored at the weekend would be have been considered as mistakes last season (had they stood) as they were all essentially level. Not one of them was a clear offside.

Had Pukki scored the same goal last season and it it was disallowed by the on field officials, everyone would’ve been saying that’s exactly that type of thing VAR will fix.