The World Cup 2022 Thread

[Harv]

Decisions don’t get much finer, but it didn’t go out. Would be even more clear if the camera was directly above the goal line.
https://twitter.com/jamiebvb30/statu...22739722936320

They didn't show that view in our coverage. Our view was side on and it clearly looked out. But still how do you overrule the on-field call there? There is absolutely no way you can know for sure to overrule.

[Kenneth]

Are you criticising VAR for you being wrong?

[Fosterbloke]

Decisions don’t get much finer, but it didn’t go out. Would be even more clear if the camera was directly above the goal line.
https://twitter.com/jamiebvb30/statu...22739722936320

The complete opposite to throw ins when the ball is about an inch over the line yet still gets given.

[Harv]

Are you criticising VAR for you being wrong?

How am I wrong? Theres no way you can be absolutely sure that ball hasn't crossed the line. VAR is just looking at the same images we saw (well I haven't seen any pics of this fancy technology they're supposed to be using and the commentators said it wasn't used for these decisions) and they're not supposed to be overruling decisions like that unless is "clear and obvious" aren't they?

Plus this is giving me flashbacks to Korea 2002 when that absolute cunt of a ref dicked us multiple times so Korea would stay in the tournament

[Cerbie]

How am I wrong? Theres no way you can be absolutely sure that ball hasn't crossed the line. VAR is just looking at the same images we saw (well I haven't seen any pics of this fancy technology they're supposed to be using and the commentators said it wasn't used for these decisions) and they're not supposed to be overruling decisions like that unless is "clear and obvious" aren't they?

Plus this is giving me flashbacks to Korea 2002 when that absolute cunt of a ref dicked us multiple times so Korea would stay in the tournament

Whether the ball is out or not is binary, like the goal line technology the used to make this decision or the offside system. The clear and obvious assessment is for things like penalties and red cards where the ref makes a subjective call on what he has seen or not seen.

It took them way too long to come up with a single photo from the goal-line camera though, so people will naturally be suspicious of the call.

[Kenneth]

Doesn't matter for Spain in the end, but the Germans will be seething at that second Jap goal. Was clearly out. No replays after the initial slow mo. Just like 2002 cheating to keep an asian side in it.

[ame]https://twitter.com/jamiebvb30/status/1598422739722936320[/ame]

How am I wrong?:

As Cerbie said, it was either out of play or wasn’t. It wasn’t, and VAR Stepped in and and made the correct call. Maybe it’s a sign of the times where we need to see evidence there and then or things get conspiratorial. But in reality, whether we were shown an appropriate angle or not doesn’t change anything; the goal was good, the goal was given and anything else would have been an injustice.

[Harv]

Whether the ball is out or not is binary, like the goal line technology the used to make this decision or the offside system. The clear and obvious assessment is for things like penalties and red cards where the ref makes a subjective call on what he has seen or not seen.

It took them way too long to come up with a single photo from the goal-line camera though, so people will naturally be suspicious of the call.

Eh?? Did they use goal line technology? Because i didn't see it. All they showed was a still image, that is very much not conclusive. Each angle makes it look completely different.

Im almost 100% sure the commentator here said they don't use that tech with non goal decisions (like throw in, goal kicks etc)

[Harv]

https://twitter.com/jamiebvb30/statu...22739722936320






As Cerbie said, it was either out of play or wasn’t. It wasn’t, and VAR Stepped in and and made the correct call. Maybe it’s a sign of the times where we need to see evidence there and then or things get conspiratorial. But in reality, whether we were shown an appropriate angle or not doesn’t change anything; the goal was good, the goal was given and anything else would have been an injustice.

Keep posting the same image, its not going to change my mind. Should i post the one from side on and we can keep showing an image that makes it look different?

If someone had a gun to your head and said was this ball in or out, would you say "yes its in"? Thats how confident you should be overruling it. Its not a matter of the tech said it was out either, because If they used the same hawkeye tech they do for goaline decisions with the watch then fine. or the new offside thing - but as far as im aware they don't use it. So they're guessing based off a still image and trying to find the precise moment the ball leave the foot. Good luck with that.

[Kenneth]

It looked on the line from the side too, as I said initially. They have angles you don’t, and seemingly better special awareness, and they made the correct call. Your gun to the head standard has been pulled from your arse, and a conspiracy added on top; all because you won’t admit you got a call wrong. Weird hill to die on.

[SB]

I thought the rule was that the ball had to be touching the line to be called in? IF that was right that would make that out based on the last photo shown here. As in when players take corners the linesman seems to get them to place the ball on the line, with it making contact with the line- not just above the line as shown in the photo, but I’m not sure anymore.

[Kenneth]

No, that’s not the rule for corners either. As long as some of the ball is at least overhanging the line, it’s considered ‘in’ the quadrant.

[Cerbie]

No, that’s not the rule for corners either. As long as some of the ball is at least overhanging the line, it’s considered ‘in’ the quadrant.

The ball in this tournament also has a 500Hz sensor in it for the new offside system, so they know the exact frame it was kicked.

I believe the image circulating is from the goal-line system. Could be wrong there tho.

[ame]https://twitter.com/nonotavocado/status/1598464146735263744[/ame]

[Rigadon]

If we scored a goal like that (i.e. similar 'over' the line), we'd be gutted if it was ruled out e.g. against Chelsea (ghost goal)

[Bender]

No clear visible gap between ball and line to show any green of the grass which would indicate the entire ball being out of play...

[Pablo]

The ball in this tournament also has a 500Hz sensor in it for the new offside system, so they know the exact frame it was kicked.

I believe the image circulating is from the goal-line system. Could be wrong there tho.

https://twitter.com/nonotavocado/sta...64146735263744

Shouldn't it be the last still frame when the ball is about to leave his foot? If there was even a few ms after that frame where he was still in contact with the ball before it left his foot then it might have been out?

I totally agree a call has to be made and I'm fine with the technology, but these fine margins can have dramatic consequences as we saw last night.