VAR offsides. How tight is this?

For such a close decision, how accurate is the technology to show the exact point that the ball was struck.

Using the likes of Sky+, I have often been suspicious of tv editors. One frame forward or backwards can still look like it's the point when the ball was struck, but make a difference in how an offside decision looks.

Edit. Just noticed that @jaws73 has made the same point above.
 
I think this could be solved if they go back to the “old” offside rule where there needs to be a gap between attacker and defender
 
Honestly just hate the whole thing.

It is devised entirely to make the game more entertaining for tv fans, stops the game for minutes for those that are actually at the game.

Takes away the joy of celebrating goals when you just wait for the inevitable VAR check because somebody looked funny at a full back 2 minutes before the goal. Never mind judging levels of contact, etc, which doesn’t work in super slo-mo.
 
Got to be onside if attacker given the benefit.

I hate VAR, could be used for good in black and white situations but is turning into a mechanism for disallowing goals based on micro-decisions.

We’d suffer badly if ever implemented here, think trial by Sportscene but at the game itself.



mentally challengeds ever get their grubby paws on VAR it will be an absolute clusterfuck
 
The issue here is the technology is not accurate enough to make decisions that are a matter of millimetres.

By their own admission, the VAR cameras pick up to a maximum of 120 frames per second, it's an enormous margin of error.

===============

An attacking player running at a pace of 6 meters-per-second would require a 6000 frames-per-second camera to capture every 1mm of movement.

Currently VAR cameras are UP TO 120 frames-per-second. (4 times higher than regular broadcast cameras). You also have to question if the resolution is anywhere near high enough to accurately be able to tell when the ball is played.

In one second Raheem Sterling covers 6 meters (6000mm), camera takes 120 frames. SO… 6000mm / 120FPS = 50mm resolution between frames. So moving frame to frame you would only be able to see in 50mm increments. Margin of error potentially 50x too high with the current technology.
 
But people have been shouting for it for years and if it’s going to be used then accuracy is what is needed.
Harsh I know but that’s the deal.

I have more of an issue with the rules than the technology
 
Offside is a factual decision, nothing to do with being a clear and obvious error.

It's not really, who can guarantee that snapshot was taken the exact moment the ball was released? A split second either way and the picture, hence the decision, changes.

Edit: I'm late to the thread, and frankly can't be bothered reading through it, so this point has probably been raised.
 
For such a close decision, how accurate is the technology to show the exact point that the ball was struck.

Using the likes of Sky+, I have often been suspicious of tv editors. One frame forward or backwards can still look like it's the point when the ball was struck, but make a difference in how an offside decision looks.

Edit. Just noticed that @jaws73 has made the same point above.

Live sport is now broadcast at 50 frames per second. So pretty damn accurate as they have 50 pictures taken every second to find the exact point the ball was struck
 
It’s crap when it’s used for such a close call as that. I thought it was only to be used when it was clear ref got it wrong .

Everybody readsas far as the ‘clear and obvious error’ bit - but forgets to read the second bit:

What incidents does the VAR check?

VAR will be used only for “clear and obvious errors” or “serious missed incidents” in four match-changing situations: goals; penalty decisions; direct red-card incidents; and mistaken identity
 
Live sport is now broadcast at 50 frames per second. So pretty damn accurate as they have 50 pictures taken every second to find the exact point the ball was struck


They would need between 1200 and 6000 frames per second to be 100% accurate in regards to VAR and offside
 
Live sport is now broadcast at 50 frames per second. So pretty damn accurate as they have 50 pictures taken every second to find the exact point the ball was struck

But they don't have enough cameras to cover the angle necessary to show exactly when the ball was struck.
 
VAR seemed to work well for the most part in the World Cup.

I don't remember goals like this being disallowed for a player possibly being a couple of millimetres offside in the build up.

No chance that's definitely off.
 
Just watched MOTD. The way it's being used is ruining football. It needs to be changed to one challenge per team per half.
 
Var is ruining the game down south.
I’m sitting watching motd this morning, thinking, nah, not for me.
Attacker should be given benefit of the doubt. They said they don’t 100% know conclusively exactly when the ball leaves the foot.
Talking about mm’s offside is plain ridiculous.

The game is a about scoring goals at the end of the day.


I’d rather have goal line tech only. vAr is a joke
 
As soon as VAR came in there were offside decisions chalkjng goals off because a strikers toe was ahead of a defenders shoulder. An absolute nonsense. Like the handball rule this bit about any part of the body the player can score with is wrong. Thats not how footballers play the game.
 
A referee should be the one officiating a football match.

If there a contentious moment in a game in which hes not sure about then he could request video assistance.
 
That is down to where the operator places the cursor. Never offside. Worst VAR decision yet
Places the cursor. Frrezes the frame. Had the ball left the players foot? Was it leaving..?surely the 3D tech is of a level where a Computer can make these calls in a microsecond rather than humans.
 
There’s no way they can say with certainty the accuracy of that call. Far too close to use VAR as a definitive decision.

I’m now very much in the get VAR to %^*& camp. It’s creating more problems than it solves.
 
Offside is a matter of fact.
Has the ball left the players foot?
Can you tell me that as fact?
Humas can't make that decision from yesterday. So many factors at play with regards to all 3 players involved, plus the ball, the person freezing the frame. The guy drawing the lines. The interpretation of why the line of the attacker is where it is. You could argue that his shoulder starts further in.
Crazy decision.
 
Var is ruining the game down south.
I’m sitting watching motd this morning, thinking, nah, not for me.
Attacker should be given benefit of the doubt. They said they don’t 100% know conclusively exactly when the ball leaves the foot.
Talking about mm’s offside is plain ridiculous.

The game is a about scoring goals at the end of the day.


I’d rather have goal line tech only. vAr is a joke

Thanks for that, Charlie.
 

I’ve real all the arguments about frames per millisecond, cock being offside, offside is factual decision, when was precise moment ball left foot, etc etc.

However, that goal above has to to be given. It’s a well timed run from the attacker. Maybe we need to start using some kind of grey zone on the width of the measure bars to allow a couple of inches leeway. But these microscopic decisions are a nonsense.
 
Its ok Jamie Carragher has said the technology is fine in the Chelseas v Liverpool game, Thank god that's been cleared up
 
What they need to do is implement the challenge system like they have in tennis. If a team feels there has been a wrongdoing, the captain asks the ref to go check it out on the screen. Each team gets 3 challenges oer match. 1 more if it goes to extra time.

Leave the rest to human judgement.

These kind of decisions they are making now like in the Chelsea game are an absolute joke. Nobody was claiming for offside. Its ruining the emotion of the game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TN8
Even if your caught speeding you are allowed plus or minus 5% on your speed.
The exact point of pass and where his shoulder is at that point is not an exact science, even using algorithms.
 
That is NOT offside! When the VAR officials need a slide rule and three minutes to examine the picture it not a'clear and obvious error'. So the goal should have stood. I have just seen a Chelsea goal being ruled offside by VAR when the Chelsea player's left foot was just behind the offside line' drawn across the pitch. The commentators and TV panel all agree it was offside but they are focusing only on feet. Had they looked at the picture closely it is clear that the last Liverpool defender's arm is outstretched behind him and his hand is actually playing the Chelsea forward onside. Whereas the offside law decrees that offside does not applywhere the attacker's hand or arm is 'offside' because a goal cannot be scored by an attacker's hand or arm, the whole of the defender's anatomy has to be taken into account.
 
That is NOT offside! When the VAR officials need a slide rule and three minutes to examine the picture it not a'clear and obvious error'. So the goal should have stood. I have just seen a Chelsea goal being ruled offside by VAR when the Chelsea player's left foot was just behind the offside line' drawn across the pitch. The commentators and TV panel all agree it was offside but they are focusing only on feet. Had they looked at the picture closely it is clear that the last Liverpool defender's arm is outstretched behind him and his hand is actually playing the Chelsea forward onside. Whereas the offside law decrees that offside does not applywhere the attacker's hand or arm is 'offside' because a goal cannot be scored by an attacker's hand or arm, the whole of the defender's anatomy has to be taken into account.

It’s not only for a ‘clear and obvious error’ though, no matter how many times folk trot this out. There is a second part that everyone ignores. You can argue the incidents both yesterday and today were NOT ‘serious missed incidents’ but let’s not just ignore that clause altogether. The extract below is from the EPLs own FAQ page.

FWIW I thought yesterday’s decision was correct but I thought today’s went too far back in the play to be reasonable.

What incidents does the VAR check?

VAR will be used only for “clear and obvious errors” or “serious missed incidents” in four match-changing situations: goals; penalty decisions; direct red-card incidents; and mistaken identity.
 
Still don't think the example of Son being offside is clear tbh.

I understand that with offside it's a binary issue - you're either on or off.

But when it's so tight (eg. Son) then surely the advantage has to go to the attacker?

How accurate is the technology? When you see them checking it on VAR it looks as though someone is sitting there manually adjusting the lines to see if they're on/off...so basically human error still comes into it? Not only that, but how can they say what the EXACT moment was when the ball left the players foot?
 
Still don't think the example of Son being offside is clear tbh.

I understand that with offside it's a binary issue - you're either on or off.

But when it's so tight (eg. Son) then surely the advantage has to go to the attacker?

How accurate is the technology? When you see them checking it on VAR it looks as though someone is sitting there manually adjusting the lines to see if they're on/off...so basically human error still comes into it? Not only that, but how can they say what the EXACT moment was when the ball left the players foot?
Especially when the man controlling the mouse could have clicked a mm the other way and he’d have been onside.
 
You don't need it really, you just go to the frame where the ball accelerates away from the foot or changes velocity.
With 50 frames a second, it would be totally impossible to tell from one frame to another if the velocity has changed.

We are talking VAR, not a science lab.
 
Got to be onside if attacker given the benefit.

I hate VAR, could be used for good in black and white situations but is turning into a mechanism for disallowing goals based on micro-decisions.

We’d suffer badly if ever implemented here, think trial by Sportscene but at the game itself.
Every time I see this, I just shake my head. You cannot say on one hand that VAR is too precise and then say it will be used to fûck us over. Which is it? It’s got to be one or the other.
 
Back
Top