Surely you are allowed to guess, No? then you had best stay as an engineer as you would be no good as a VAR chap.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
VAR thread 2022/23
- Thread starter Ric
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
I believe the tolerance is 5cm, with the benefit given to the attacker.What is the defined tolerance for offside now and how is it measured.
I am an engineer and on a drawing I would add a tolerance say for a linear dimension. So 300cm +\0-.5cm means that when the inspector measures the manufactured part it has to be 300cm long however the tolerance means it can be anywhere between 295.5cm to 300.5cm and not .01 of a cm more or less than the tolerance dimensions.
The reason I am boring the tits off my avid readers is to clarify that a tolerance has to have a number and it is either in tolerance or it is a fail.
When St Marcus was ”within tolerance” how was that measured?
What is the tolerance as to what is allowed?
Unless I see a measurement for what the tolerance is then I think we are being taken for cunts by PGMOL as it is open to being subject to the VAR opinion and nothing specific other than shirt colour or shade of red.
Hayley Croppers chopper
Well-Known Member
Then how is that measured?I believe the tolerance is 5cm, with the benefit given to the attacker.
Is it from the toenail, is it from only parts that can score, is it from the arm? Where is the 5cm rule written.
I would like to see the definition written down so it can be viewed objectively.
richardtheref
Well-Known Member
You get sent the FA interpretations which basically outline how FIFA expect you to ref any game. You certainly could get them on line in the past. The problem is your elite refs then get sent the PL interpretations which sometimes differ to the FIFA laws. Recent ones I can think of is the handball law and off side. Why do the PL think they are above the actual laws is a mystery?Oh right. Thanks for that. Do you have any idea why the secrecy? I would have thought it was in the referees' interests for Joe Public to be able to understand why they make their decisions.
which are pretty
And why the opposition to mic'ing up the refs?
I can't imagine any downside (other than with a tin hat on) and it may even show that referees know what they are doing. Imagine that :)
It's the same as it's been for ages - from the part of the player that you can score from, nearest the goal. So, yes a toenail, the upper arm (anywhere which wouldn't be handball), the nose, the knee.Then how is that measured?
Is it from the toenail, is it from only parts that can score, is it from the arm? Where is the 5cm rule written.
I would like to see the definition written down so it can be viewed objectively.
The two lines are drawn as normal, and if they're within 5 cms, then it's still onside. The TV then show just one thicker green line.
Hayley Croppers chopper
Well-Known Member
Thanks BluenovaIt's the same as it's been for ages - from the part of the player that you can score from, nearest the goal. So, yes a toenail, the upper arm (anywhere which wouldn't be handball), the nose, the knee.
The two lines are drawn as normal, and if they're within 5 cms, then it's still onside. The TV then show just one thicker green line.
Just to clarify - the two lines, for defender and attacker are 5cm wide, and it's onside if they touch - which means the attacker can be up to 5cm "off" in the VAR pictures and still be considered onside.Thanks Bluenova
Trevor Morley's Tache
Well-Known Member
If we consider that the top players are more than capable of sprinting at >20mph (8.94m/s), and the frame rate of VAR is 50fps then 1 single frame difference at 20mph is a huge margin of error (17.9cm), and that 5cm margin pales into insignificance.I believe the tolerance is 5cm, with the benefit given to the attacker.
Even running at 10mph (4.47m/s) the 50fps camera gives a single-frame margin of error of nearly 9cm, so for them to spout a 'tolerance' is laughable.
True - but it's a compromise. I believe the clubs had to agree on it, and they're not all going to be as clued up, or even may not want something that can look more controversial, even if it's correct (or depending on how they play, the cynic might suggest some don't want to give attackers more advantage).If we consider that the top players are more than capable of sprinting at >20mph (8.94m/s), and the frame rate of VAR is 50fps then 1 single frame difference at 20mph is a huge margin of error (17.9cm), and that 5cm margin pales into insignificance.
Even running at 10mph (4.47m/s) the 50fps camera gives a single-frame margin of error of nearly 9cm, so for them to spout a 'tolerance' is laughable.
Ultimately, it's always going to be more accurate than an assistant with a flag, and will improve as technology improves.
What if its Harry Maguire ? Is it measured in minutes ? Hours ? Days ?If we consider that the top players are more than capable of sprinting at >20mph (8.94m/s), and the frame rate of VAR is 50fps then 1 single frame difference at 20mph is a huge margin of error (17.9cm), and that 5cm margin pales into insignificance.
Even running at 10mph (4.47m/s) the 50fps camera gives a single-frame margin of error of nearly 9cm, so for them to spout a 'tolerance' is laughable.
If we consider that the top players are more than capable of sprinting at >20mph (8.94m/s), and the frame rate of VAR is 50fps then 1 single frame difference at 20mph is a huge margin of error (17.9cm), and that 5cm margin pales into insignificance.
Even running at 10mph (4.47m/s) the 50fps camera gives a single-frame margin of error of nearly 9cm, so for them to spout a 'tolerance' is laughable.
The problem is that offside decisions don't only happen at high speed, they also happen at virtual standstills.
And if you made the tolerance 10cm then in those situations you'd start to have offsides that look obvious to the human eye being given as onside. Which would cause a massive fuss.
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 15,038
Thanks for that. The "secrecy" is the crux of the matter I think. There is no reason not to be transparent, unless there is something to hide. Hence the continual conspiracy theories.You get sent the FA interpretations which basically outline how FIFA expect you to ref any game. You certainly could get them on line in the past. The problem is your elite refs then get sent the PL interpretations which sometimes differ to the FIFA laws. Recent ones I can think of is the handball law and off side. Why do the PL think they are above the actual laws is a mystery?
Trevor Morley's Tache
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure technology is going to improve.True - but it's a compromise. I believe the clubs had to agree on it, and they're not all going to be as clued up, or even may not want something that can look more controversial, even if it's correct (or depending on how they play, the cynic might suggest some don't want to give attackers more advantage).
Ultimately, it's always going to be more accurate than an assistant with a flag, and will improve as technology improves.
With higher frame rates you either need to increase the exposure proportionally, or increase the sensitivity of the camera's sensor.
Increasing the exposure, either by lowering the shutter speed, or widening the aperture comes with its own problems (motion blur/shallow depth of field). In increasing the sensitivity of the image sensor you introduce noise into the image and it becomes increasingly grainy.
Alternatively you could increase the brightness of the floodlights, but if you increase the frame rate to 100fps (a 9cm margin of error at 20mph) you would have to effectively double the brightness of the floodlights, and nobody wants to have their retinas burned out playing football.
Apart from the above arguments why does it take so long to come up with a decision when we are involved.The problem is that offside decisions don't only happen at high speed, they also happen at virtual standstills.
And if you made the tolerance 10cm then in those situations you'd start to have offsides that look obvious to the human eye being given as onside. Which would cause a massive fuss.
Trevor Morley's Tache
Well-Known Member
It would appear that some decisions are quicker than others. Not sure why; I can only guess.Apart from the above arguments why does it take so long to come up with a decision when we are involved.
Clearly you know a lot about this, but surely things like calculating positions by combining multiple cameras is one way? It also seems to be an obvious application for AI.I'm not sure technology is going to improve.
With higher frame rates you either need to increase the exposure proportionally, or increase the sensitivity of the camera's sensor.
Increasing the exposure, either by lowering the shutter speed, or widening the aperture comes with its own problems (motion blur/shallow depth of field). In increasing the sensitivity of the image sensor you introduce noise into the image and it becomes increasingly grainy.
Alternatively you could increase the brightness of the floodlights, but if you increase the frame rate to 100fps (a 9cm margin of error at 20mph) you would have to effectively double the brightness of the floodlights, and nobody wants to have their retinas burned out playing football.
EDIT: Just googled it, and the semi-automatic system for the world cup based on this kind of tech, so not limited to a single camera's fps.
Because you care about them, so you have different things going on in your head, which probably makes the wait feel longer.Apart from the above arguments why does it take so long to come up with a decision when we are involved.
MillionMilesAway
Well-Known Member
I thought this season we could hear the conversations between the ref and VAR like in cricket and rugby after the game had finished.
Or am I imagining that?
I'm afraid you are.
It was suggested as something which could happen, but there was no commitment to make it happen.
At best, I think it'll be waiting for Riley to go in the autumn, and then it'll be down to the new brooms.
Trevor Morley's Tache
Well-Known Member
What is the PL's definition of when a pass is made? Is it when the foot first 'appears' to contact the ball, or is it when the ball 'appears' to leave the foot?Clearly you know a lot about this, but surely things like calculating positions by combining multiple cameras is one way? It also seems to be an obvious application for AI.
Dig out some slow motion video of a football being kicked on YouTube and see if you can work out the exact moment a ball is kicked, or when the ball leaves the foot. When is the pass actually made? Then imagine it at 50/100fps. It becomes totally subjective and I guarantee more than a single frame margin of error.
Sure, it could be worked out by knowing the EXACT position/velocity/direction of the passers foot, and the EXACT position/velocity/direction of the ball, plus the EXACT position of the attacker at the moment the pass is made (PREDICTED from the previous 6 bits of information) but that would require a lot more than a handful of cameras that would have to be calibrated to a high tolerance and synchronised.
VAR for offside is at best is a ball park estimation (pun intended), and the margin of error leaves it wide open to abuse.
Last edited:
Apart from the above arguments why does it take so long to come up with a decision when we are involved.
I'd agree with @bluenova, you just think they take longer because when it's your team that's relying on a decision the wait is agonising.
Although I wouldn't be surprised if all decisions were studied and top 6 decisions took longer because the referees are more worried about getting them wrong in higher stakes games with bigger audiences.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.