VAR thread - Page 25

S-RED · 10-04-21, 11:58 PM

is it just the prem league fucking it up or are other leagues suffering the finite tinkering/guesswork?

Kenneth · 11-04-21, 09:31 AM

The Dutch do their own thing, and it seems better to me..

https://www.sportbible.com/football/...01129.amp.html

SB · 11-04-21, 09:39 AM

Once upon a time it was just the 3 officials on the pitch that could be corrupted but now there’s more. And they can bend imaginary lines to trick us into believing they are right. It’s a disgrace

Fredo · 11-04-21, 09:40 AM

Yep, good shout this. As I’ve said before, VAR in itself is not an issue but the implementation of it. The PL’s implementation is piss poor.

Buzzo · 11-04-21, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kenneth

The Dutch do their own thing, and it seems better to me..

https://www.sportbible.com/football/...01129.amp.html

Absolute no brainier. Much better use of the tech.

Kenneth · 11-04-21, 11:20 AM

Yep, but probably isn’t compliant with UEFA rules, but the Dutch don’t give a chuff I guess.

Buzzo · 11-04-21, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kenneth

Yep, but probably isn’t compliant with UEFA rules, but the Dutch don’t give a chuff I guess.

Yep, the interest here is in making the game fairer and better. As soon as the stupid lines come out with armpit locators the goal should instantly be given, and the way to prove it is as above.

I was thinking yesterday that if they ever get to the stage of showing these decisions on screens in stadia there will be riots over decisions like that.

And they do need to, as it keeps the process honest.

Again, works in Rugby where the process is totally transparent and the refs mic’d which doesn’t stop them from making tough decisions. The culture is used to it.

Pepe79 · 12-04-21, 03:22 PM

Seems like such an obvious an immediate improvement.
All those hairline 'offsides' would count, more consistency, easier for fans to understand the decision. Far less time fucking around with VAR and maybe even a little more confidence to be able to celebrate goals.

No brainer.

Buzzo · 12-04-21, 05:28 PM

Could they also not make the lines drawn to where the foot lands not the shoulder? It’s called football, not armpit ball or Lean ball. The lines are drawn on the ground so just make them measure where the foot lands or is? All this shoulder:armpit nonsense is just... nonsense. The Jota one for me is miles onside. I’m not having the vertical line to armpit thing at all.

Pepe79 · 12-04-21, 05:49 PM

Yes, that too. You're unlikely to be gaining an advantage by leaning forward (head) or being sidewards on to goal (shoulder, armpit, t-shirt line, etc), at the point the ball is played.

Kenneth · 12-04-21, 06:22 PM

I guess it’s conceivable that someone could be almost an entire body length in front of a defender if going for a diving header.

fidget · 12-04-21, 06:27 PM

Doubt anyone will begrudge them that advantage if they're prepared to throw themselves for a diving header before a cross is even made.

Exiled_red · 12-04-21, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fidget

Doubt anyone will begrudge them that advantage if they're prepared to throw themselves for a diving header before a cross is even made.

Buzzo · 12-04-21, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fidget

Doubt anyone will begrudge them that advantage if they're prepared to throw themselves for a diving header before a cross is even made.

I want to see this goal. Some sort of delayed scorpion kick?

BobTheCharmer · 12-04-21, 08:55 PM

Goal ruled out in West brom game and var didn't have cameras in right place to rule in or out. Fucking joke.

Why can't everyone not watch football until it's kicked out. Easy.

Exiled_red · 12-04-21, 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobTheCharmer

Goal ruled out in West brom game and var didn't have cameras in right place to rule in or out. Fucking joke.

Why can't everyone not watch football until it's kicked out. Easy.

We've had fuck all else we could do for months

Saveloy · 12-04-21, 10:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Exiled_red

We've had fuck all else we could do for months

BobTheCharmer · 12-04-21, 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Exiled_red

We've had fuck all else we could do for months

it's made me watch less than at any other time in my life. Once you accept it's all bollocks it's easier.

baitman · 12-04-21, 11:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobTheCharmer

it's made me watch less than at any other time in my life. Once you accept it's all bollocks it's easier.

If fans were never going to return to watching football then id lose all interest in it.
Football is nothing without fans.

Scratch · 13-04-21, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobTheCharmer

Goal ruled out in West brom game and var didn't have cameras in right place to rule in or out. Fucking joke.

Why can't everyone not watch football until it's kicked out. Easy.

Just watched that on Sky, and as they can't say for sure from the picture available (for all they know, the WBA player could have his arse sticking out and they only use that one camera for decisions) they have stuck with the onfield decision. In my mind, this is fine, a decision was made, and because there is no 'definitive' proof otherwise, they have stuck with it. That is how it should be done.

The freeze framing when a ball leaves the foot stuff, and the lines being so close it comes down to millimeters, well that is where they should either follow the example above by sticking with the onfield call, or have a carte-blanche 'attacker gets the benefit' in all cases.

I think next year may see a mash up or the Dutch league (fixed line widths) and sticking with the onfield call. Will be so much cleaner and efficient.

Kenneth · 13-04-21, 12:19 PM

Quote:

for all they know, the WBA player could have his arse sticking out and they only use that one camera for decisions

But from each of the dozen other cameras it’s clear that his arse wasn’t sticking out, it could be seen with the eye without the need for lines. If the VAR cannot see what millions of people can on TV, then it’s not fit for purpose. There was a clear on-field error and VAR didn’t fix it, it’s sole purpose is to do so. Should be another nail in the coffin for this system.

Kenneth · 13-04-21, 12:37 PM

This is a fair point..

__________________
Kick VAR out of football.

Scratch · 13-04-21, 12:39 PM

They use one camera in a fixed position for VAR offside calls, so they can calibrate the lines. So that is the only camera that can be used for evidence in these situations. I'm fine with that, it should be the best way of analysing these things quickly (it isn't yet, but that is cos we use it so incompetently). And from what they had available, they go with the onfield call, otherwise we get into a situation further down the line where they have to trawl thru 15 cameras' footage to find a good angle....so no, stick with the one fixed camera angle, consistent at every ground.

Scratch · 13-04-21, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kenneth

This is a fair point..

https://twitter.com/lpoolck/status/1381701269836947460

And yes, again in this situation, VAR should have said we don't have enough evidence, go with the onfield decision. Why they didn't and took a guess, only the VAR man knows....my guess is cos it's Liverpool.

Kenneth · 13-04-21, 01:20 PM

The Liverpool one needed lines to determine, the issue with the West Brom one was that a simple TV replay would have been enough, and we know they have access to those angles because they use them for other kinds of incidents.

S-RED · 13-04-21, 01:23 PM

andy madley - another shite ref

https://www.google.com/search?q=andy...AtaMxDB_J3iYFM

Scratch · 13-04-21, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kenneth

The Liverpool one needed lines to determine, the issue with the West Brom one was that a simple TV replay would have been enough, and we know they have access to those angles because they use them for other kinds of incidents.

I'd rather for offside we stuck to the one camera angle, for fairness at all grounds. If that one camera angle is inconclusive, the onfield decision is the one to go with. Quick and simple.

Kenneth · 13-04-21, 04:01 PM

Ok. I'd rather they correct obvious errors when they have the means to.