Fans Against VAR - Join us

[Deutsch Wolf]

I can't agree on the 1cm thing, If there is noticeable daylight that's offside for me, if any part you can score with is onside you're level and it's brilliant attacking play.

Pulled from our live thread on Sunday...

Son here. Offside or not? There isn't "daylight" really and his heel is probably onside.

But pretty much everyone thought it looked offside in real time and had no problem with it being disallowed when we saw the replays.

(Genuinely after your opinion, not having a dig)

 

[Kenny]

Unless there's different rules in "the hundred" which I don't watch

@Paddingtonwolf one for you to answer...

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

In cricket there is "umpires call", even if it's clipping the off stump, the umpires call stands if he didn't give the batsmen out.
Unless there's different rules in "the hundred" which I don't watch or the rules changed very recently. It's actually refreshing because it means the umpires respect the fact that technology isn't infallable.

That's only because there's a predictive element to ball tracking, that doesn't apply in any footballing context regarding offside.

 

[The Bear]

Pulled from our live thread on Sunday...

Son here. Offside or not? There isn't "daylight" really and his heel is probably onside.

But pretty much everyone thought it looked offside in real time and had no problem with it being disallowed when we saw the replays.

(Genuinely after your opinion, not having a dig)

The angle is behind the line of play so too hard to tell from that.

 

[Kenny]

That's only because there's a predictive element to ball tracking, that doesn't apply in any footballing context regarding offside.

The closest you get in football will be the exact moment the ball is touched. So for me the ones where it is like Neto's or Jonny's there is scope for the decision to be wrong. Its not an exact science as it stands.

No idea if the automated offsides cover that better.

 

[fansagainstvar]

Pulled from our live thread on Sunday...

Son here. Offside or not? There isn't "daylight" really and his heel is probably onside.

But pretty much everyone thought it looked offside in real time and had no problem with it being disallowed when we saw the replays.

(Genuinely after your opinion, not having a dig)

No problem at all mate - can tell it's a genuine question.

For me, this goes back to the chat I had with the Bear. In the old days before VAR, if that's given or not given by the linesman either decision doesn't bother me. The camera is slightly behind Son so it looks more offside than it was if it's totally level.

It shouldn't be me who sets this law really, it should be a collaborative effort on what the majority of people think, but if you want just my opinion...

I'd let that goal stand. It looks bad in a freeze frame, but he's timed his run just about perfectly, he's maybe one second out. If you changed the rule to daylight, there would be lots more goals and it would be very exciting to watch, lots of jeapordy for defenders.

The rule would be daylight, but if the linesman flags, it's offside, if that makes sense.

I think it goes back to basically that I just don't want VAR. I want it the way it used to be.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

The closest you get in football will be the exact moment the ball is touched. So for me the ones where it is like Neto's or Jonny's there is scope for the decision to be wrong. Its not an exact science as it stands.

No idea if the automated offsides cover that better.

As used at the World Cup:

Al Rihla, adidas’ official match ball for Qatar 2022™, will provide a further vital element for the detection of tight offside incidents as an inertial measurement unit (IMU) sensor will be placed inside the ball. This sensor, positioned in the centre of the ball, sends ball data to the video operation room 500 times per second, allowing a very precise detection of the kick point.

So not J-Dog making his own mind up in his Chamber of Doom, factual evidence.

 

[Johnny75]

No idea if the automated offsides cover that better.

They do. The model itself is built on similar software to gaming software (Unreal and Unity engines for the nerds out there). It uses the same collision detection rules coupled with 3D modelling software (AutoCad etc) which enables the model to work properly.

Edit: Ninja'd by DW

 

[fansagainstvar]

As used at the World Cup:



So not J-Dog making his own mind up in his Chamber of Doom, factual evidence.

Premier League/PGMOL voting against using automated offsides only fuels fire for conspiracists to think they want to be able to fix games. I'm not saying that is what they want to do, but it leaves the theory wide open.

 

[Kenny]

So the sooner that is introduced the better. An easy fix for VAR (if you ignore the crazy tin foil hat wearers it seems)

 

[North Shropshire Lad]

If you look at cricket there was always an unwritten rule of thumb that if you got miles down the pitch then no umpire was ever going to give you out lbw. That's gone now, if Hawkeye says it's hitting the stumps then off you pop, no matter how far you've charged down.

The equivalent there of "you never used to be called offside if your shoulder alone was off". So what, you're offside, there's the evidence (as the automated systems can show in a reasonable length of time, not the wonky hand-drawn lines).

I deliberately didn't include cricket as an example because I realise that the game has changed with the DRS system. I do though think that the way it's been implemented is how VAR could or should have been used in football - to eradicate the howler in the main.
Certain 'greats' wouldn't have had anywhere near as good career stats if DRS was around in their days and WC Grace couldn't have just carried on and ignored the umpire either.

Your example does back up my 1cm statement though - if you're off you're off regardless of where the line is but this can only be solved with automated tech and not some often clearly 'misdrawn' lines place by human hand. With automated offsides we would come to accept them the same way ball tracking is accepted in cricket and line calls in tennis.

VAR 'can' do all these things but it would seem PGMOL can't/won't/don't.

 

[fansagainstvar]

I deliberately didn't include cricket as an example because I realise that the game has changed with the DRS system. I do though think that the way it's been implemented is how VAR could or should have been used in football - to eradicate the howler in the main.
Certain 'greats' wouldn't have had anywhere near as good career stats if DRS was around in their days and WC Grace couldn't have just carried on and ignored the umpire either.

Your example does back up my 1cm statement though - if you're off you're off regardless of where the line is but this can only be solved with automated tech and not some often clearly 'misdrawn' lines place by human hand. With automated offsides we would come to accept them the same way ball tracking is accepted in cricket and line calls in tennis.

VAR 'can' do all these things but it would seem PGMOL can't/won't/don't.

Regardless of VAR opinions, I guess most of us on here would be on board with totally scrapping PGMOL and having a complete overhaul of the way we think about refereeing, and referee training?

Edit: I've just taken a look at the PGMOL "X" page and their main concern seems to be with social justice issues. God help us. They need to be stopped. Heads should roll for the utter incompetence.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

Sticking it here because it's sort of related - Bentancur out for at least 10 weeks after a dreadful challenge by Cash (only got booked). When there's an injury clearly caused by a bad foul then I think there should be some additional sanction. This wasn't a borderline case, it was a shocker, bang to rights and the impact is right there for all to see. Perhaps say Cash can't play again until Bentancur can.

 

[Carsy]

Ever since VAR came in for offsides I've argued that there should be a margin of error on them, by way of a thicker line from the defender's body part. If the attackers line is inside or overlaps it then it's onside. Purely because of the potential distances covered by players within the frame rates available to them.

So I agree with you on that.

It would take trial and error to find the right distance/margin that everyone is comfortable with, but should be able to be simulated before it goes into practice. 10-15cm or so.

I understand the tolerance argument. But say you say it’s 15cm. It just opens up a can of worms as to why 15cm. If they’re offside by 14cm, then you’ll have people moaning it should be 10, and so on.

With things you can measure with a strong degree of accuracy, you’re better off with the ‘if it’s offside, it’s offside’ IMV, no matter how pedantic it may seem. And the fact it’s more or less black or white.

It’s the subjective fouls etc where the changes need to happen with how they’re managed/assessed

 

[The Bear]

I understand the tolerance argument. But say you say it’s 15cm. It just opens up a can of worms as to why 15cm. If they’re offside by 14cm, then you’ll have people moaning it should be 10, and so on.

With things you can measure with a strong degree of accuracy, you’re better off with the ‘if it’s offside, it’s offside’ IMV, no matter how pedantic it may seem. And the fact it’s more or less black or white.

It’s the subjective fouls etc where the changes need to happen with how they’re managed/assessed

Well no, once it gets to say, in my example 15cm, then you can see it's clearly offside so there'd be no argument that it was too tight to call.

 

[pavlosmacwolf]

Your attempt to make me look like the idiot here is hilarious.

I understand semi-automation perfectly. You cannot automate subjective decisions like free kicks and yellow cards.

You're being petulant because I keep being proven correct about VAR, game after game.

He doesn't have to.
You seem totally capable of making yourself look the idiot with no help from anyone.
You apoear to be getting more smug and self righteous every post.
A touch of the "once you thought you were wrong, but you were only mistaken" syndrome, methinks.

 

[Boozad]

They do. The model itself is built on similar software to gaming software (Unreal and Unity engines for the nerds out there). It uses the same collision detection rules coupled with 3D modelling software (AutoCad etc) which enables the model to work properly.

Edit: Ninja'd by DW

Good job they didn’t use Frostbite where you could shoot someone in the face from round a corner or fly a tank through the sea upside down.

 

[Aikiwolf]

Well no, once it gets to say, in my example 15cm, then you can see it's clearly offside so there'd be no argument that it was too tight to call.

What if someone is 15.2 cms off? Or 14.8 cms on?

I hate VAR, it is a blight on the game but the only way to fix offsides is to automate. Should have been done this season.

 

[fansagainstvar]

He doesn't have to.
You seem totally capable of making yourself look the idiot with no help from anyone.
You apoear to be getting more smug and self righteous every post.
A touch of the "once you thought you were wrong, but you were only mistaken" syndrome, methinks.

Totally unnecessary

 

[fansagainstvar]

He doesn't have to.
You seem totally capable of making yourself look the idiot with no help from anyone.
You apoear to be getting more smug and self righteous every post.
A touch of the "once you thought you were wrong, but you were only mistaken" syndrome, methinks.

Also if you are going to call me an idiot, I would at least learn how to spell.