VAR thread 2022/23

[BlueHammer85]

It wasn’t really though. It seems the time was taken deciding whether the defender deliberately played the ball, which he obviously didn’t, so why it took so long is a perfectly valid question.

Winning goal scored in the final seconds - they really needed to get the correct verdict or more hell would break loose

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

It wasn’t really though. It seems the time was taken deciding whether the defender deliberately played the ball, which he obviously didn’t, so why it took so long is a perfectly valid question.

Not only that, but they had to try and measure whether Kane's forehead (or knee) was ahead of the ball, which is impossible given the angle. The dotted line drawn up to his knee and the grey line through the ball and through his forehead were an absurdity.

 

[BerkshireBlue]

Winning goal scored in the final seconds - they really needed to get the correct verdict or more hell would break loose

I suspect it was this, as the offside was very much clear cut

 

[BerkshireBlue]

Not only that, but they had to try and measure whether Kane's forehead (or knee) was ahead of the ball, which is impossible given the angle.

the lines do that and do it very well

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

Winning goal scored in the final seconds - they really needed to get the correct verdict or more hell would break loose

They just need to end this VAR experiment. So we can celebrate goes once again and have normal football moments. Instead of this waiting and waiting for more controversy.

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

the lines do that and do it very well

No they don't. It's guesswork at best because the camera is not symmetrical to the offsides frame. It's at an angle so the lines drawn upward involve guesswork.

 

[HolisticJim]

No they don't. It's guesswork at best because the camera is not symmetrical to the offsides frame. It's at an angle so the lines drawn upward involve guesswork.

FPS also plays into it as well.

But then you have to say, if we are measuring pixel resolution and FPS is it really 'clear and obvious?'

No, of course not. VAR shouldn't even be looking at it then.

 

[joe123]

Is that known?

Probably not, but it's a reasonable assumption. If they were transparent about it and mic'd up the ref/VAR official as they do in rugby, it would take out a lot of the controversy imo. It won't stop people being angry, but if we were to hear a clear explanation as to why something has been ruled the way it has, at least there's a bit of clarity.

 

[dronefromsector7G]

It seems that you're starting to see the problem with VAR. Taking ages to make a decision : that's what VAR does. That's how VAR works, that's what VAR is. Yes, the longer the delay, the worse it is, because you are excruciatingly waiting for "permission" to celebrate or to breathe a sigh of relief. That waiting and waiting and waiting for a subjective decision doesn't work for the football fan. Sure, a 4 minute delay is more aggravating than a 3 minute delay which is more aggravating than a 2 minute delay. But by the time the decision is made, after any amount of time, the moment has gone. The moments that we live for as football fans is lost.

Now if we want to say "but it's more important to get the decisions right". There's no guarantee they're gonna get the decisions right by making us wait and wait and wait. But one thing we are guaranteed is the inability to be able celebrate in the moment organically. In many cases they take a perfectly good decision and turn it into the wrong decision, without any explanation whatsoever.

We can't let the fact that the decision went against a rival in Spurs stop us from being honest about the situation. The tribalism aspect to these decisions is what VAR feeds off of. Looking at the sequence, we know that was a perfectly good goal. The player who received the cross was clearly onside, the ball was kicked backwards, went off a defender forward. Now, Harry Kane was "about level" when the ball as it was kicked backwards. Part of his body was just in front of the defender, part of his body was in-line with the defender. There was no "daylight" now was there that we hear all the time about how offsides needs to be changed. Kane stayed "enough" onside for me, what what do I know? The ball was kicked back anyway. Imagine being offside by a backwards pass as you were pretty much level then deflected forward to you off the defender.

After something like this, I don't wanna hear anyone acting like offsides is black and white, that you're either on or you're off. No no no, offsides is often very subjective and subject to reinterpreted and changes "laws" many of which have been changed in order to accommodate VAR. Also you may have noticed in the slow mo replays that the defender even pushed Harry Kane. Kane didn't go down, and it probably wouldn't be enough to warrant a penalty in real-time, but if we're splitting hairs on endless super-slow mo replay, why couldn't that have been ruled a penalty on VAR. If you really want to split hairs here, if you wanna get technical, you could argue that Kane was actually pushed forward into an offsides position by the defender as he was fouled trying to stay onside. The point is, all this is wildly subjective.

That was not "clear and obvious" offside. You could watch that sequence and come up with a variety of subjective decisions, each of which someone would disagree with. But the fact is that the ball was hit backwards as Kane was "about level". And if you wanna say he was onside, he was being kept from being completely onside by being fouled forward by the defender. This VAR process is atrocious. That's a horrible goal-reversal. We may be happy about it as City fans but it's the wrong decision. It just is. We all know deep down that was a goal, and that beautiful moment for Spurs, as much as it pains us as City fans, absolutely should have stood. And it is highly farcical for that to be chalked off. It's an embarrassment for all footballers. VAR must be put out to pasture.

People have been saying that they can’t or won’t celebrate goals because VAR may chalk it off. It seemed to me last night plenty of Spurs fans and all their players were going mental at that goal. Today plenty of them will be saying ‘no more of that for me’ yet if they get a last minute goal in the next game they’ll celebrate. If the goal stands then that was the right thing to do, if it’s denied they will just look a bit of an idiot

 

[the-ecstacy-of-eight]

When the officials have not seen the offside how can they lead the discussions for an offside ?

Surely that’s why there is VAR to highlight to a ref that there’s been a offside in the goal

He can go and check the monitor and have discussions (killing more time) all for the outcome to be the same as the VAR teams outcome… offside

Cool swerve bro!

(If you go back and read the thread you'll maybe see that I was simply adding to the rugby-based info that Saddleworth2 was providing you with regarding discussions between on-field and video assisted refereeing and how that could very simply be integrated into football, but crack on with your "life was shit before VAR" diatribe - Oh, wait, it's now turned into a "VAR takes too long - but it's still better than all those weekly occurrences of goals being given when a player was clearly yards offside, and who else remembers every match, every week, being ruined by penalties being given for players throwing themselves to the floor after no contact" monologue)

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

Is that known?

It’s what the great and the good said on BT so it might be true……

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

Winning goal scored in the final seconds - they really needed to get the correct verdict or more hell would break loose

Having watched it myself, it should have taken a minute at most, not 6+, as he was less than a yard from Sanchez when he headed the ball.

 

[BlueHammer85]

Having watched it myself, it should have taken a minute at most, not 6+, as he was less than a yard from Sanchez when he headed the ball.

I’ve said from the start they simply have to speed up decisions - just giving a reason why this one may have taken some time

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

It’s what the great and the good said on BT so it might be true……

My guess, and it is a guess, is that they had to load a program to tell the system to use the ball as one of the offside lines and it took longer to do as the bloke doing it hasn’t used the system much.

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

People have been saying that they can’t or won’t celebrate goals because VAR may chalk it off. It seemed to me last night plenty of Spurs fans and all their players were going mental at that goal. Today plenty of them will be saying ‘no more of that for me’ yet if they get a last minute goal in the next game they’ll celebrate. If the goal stands then that was the right thing to do, if it’s denied they will just look a bit of an idiot

Spurs fans are very passionate and they got caught up in the moment subconsciously forgetting that VAR was there for that brief moment of euphoria as they went mental celebrating that goal, until the reality of VAR set in. In many other cases goals in general aren't being celebrated property due to fans becoming wise to being burned by VAR.

 

[dadnlad]

They just need to end this VAR experiment. So we can celebrate goes once again and have normal football moments. Instead of this waiting and waiting for more controversy.

no betting money to be made in that

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Probably not, but it's a reasonable assumption. If they were transparent about it and mic'd up the ref/VAR official as they do in rugby, it would take out a lot of the controversy imo. It won't stop people being angry, but if we were to hear a clear explanation as to why something has been ruled the way it has, at least there's a bit of clarity.

I’ve responded to TEOE‘s post suggesting what I thought has probably happened.

We all know the reason it was given offside, don’t we?

Kane’s knee and foot were slightly ahead of the ball when it was passed and that the defender didn’t make an intentional touch of the ball. What else needs clarification?

The issue was the length of time it took, which hopefully will reduce as the refs get better acquainted with the systems.

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

My guess, and it is a guess, is that they had to load a program to tell the system to use the ball as one of the offside lines and it took longer to do as the bloke doing it hasn’t used the system much.

But, under the current laws, Kane was clearly offside, once the side on view was shown. Even Wio managed to draw the line to show that. In fact, the new tech gives a simple yes or no to offside and the VAR has to decide the nuance of that. For example, had a spurs player been lying down next to the corner flag, the tech would have flagged him as offside. The VAR would then have ignored that as he clearly wouldn’t have been interfering with play. Kane would, therefore, have been called as offside straight away and the only job the VAR had was to confirm that, based on the other factors in play. The only other factor was whether the defender had deliberately played the ball, which he quite clearly hadn’t, decision should have been done and dusted in 1 minute.
Surely the longer it goes on the more irate the players and managers get because I know that is true of me as a fan.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

I’ve responded to TEOE‘s post suggesting what I thought has probably happened.

We all know the reason it was given offside, don’t we?

Kane’s knee and foot were slightly ahead of the ball when it was passed and that the defender didn’t make an intentional touch of the ball. What else needs clarification?

The issue was the length of time it took, which hopefully will reduce as the refs get better acquainted with the systems.

How long have they had to get this right?

It's literally their job. If they are competent to operate VAR in a timely and efficient manner in a game where winning and losing is potentially worth £Millions they shouldn't be anywhere near it.

 

[TheBeautifulGame]

Kane’s knee and foot were slightly ahead of the ball when it was passed and that the defender didn’t make an intentional touch of the ball. What else needs clarification

The defender didn't need to make an "intentional" touch of the ball in order for the phase to be reset before VAR was introduced. The law change that you are referencing was a VAR-induced change to the law. Lets not act like that's a legitimate or traditional part of the law. That's wording that was put into the law was done specifically for VAR.

The issue was the length of time it took, which hopefully will reduce as the refs get better acquainted with the systems.

How long will they need to get better acquainted? We heard these same arguments that we need to give them time to work out the kinks 3-4 years ago.