Var debate 2019/20

[Heisenberg's Blue Sky]

Regards the disallowed Jesus goal (and apologies if already mentioned) I actually think it was disallowed so the FA could say "look how good our VAR is"

Ha ha that thought crossed my mind too.

 

[SamBlue]

I was all for VAR and this weekend has just strengthened my feeling about it. Unless offside rule is changed there will always be decisions you get and those you do not when shoulder against shoulder is matched. It would be travesty that Wolves goal was allowed after their player dropped a perfect sitter with his arm (inadvertently or not) for a teammate to strike. Go VAR!!!!!

 

[meeesh]

Apologies if it's already been mentioned, but did anyone else think Mike Dean looked like he was not going to give the penalty and then appeared to change his mind and point to the spot? The cynic in me was thinking at the time that he suddenly realised VAR was in use, that VAR would say it was a definite pen, and he'd look a bit of a twat if he hadn't given it!

Just to add that I've never had any major issue with Dean when he's reffed us in the past but that little episode looked a bit dodgy to me.

I thought exactly the same,although as you say it was a stone wall pen,and doesn't need to make himself look a bigger twat than he already is

 

[TheRemainsOfTheDave]

Said it'd be shite. Been saying all along that the controversies and difference of opinion is what makes the game. Same with all these rule changes, I'm very worried the direction the game is going tbh.

 

[trevorriley]

badly organised shit

 

[hgblue]

Apologies if it's already been mentioned, but did anyone else think Mike Dean looked like he was not going to give the penalty and then appeared to change his mind and point to the spot? The cynic in me was thinking at the time that he suddenly realised VAR was in use, that VAR would say it was a definite pen, and he'd look a bit of a twat if he hadn't given it!

Just to add that I've never had any major issue with Dean when he's reffed us in the past but that little episode looked a bit dodgy to me.

It does make me chuckle reading this thread when we've had post match thread after post match thread for years with City fans bemoaning how biased referees are against us, something gets done to make officiating much less open to abuse and now we're moaning about that too. Like you say, Dean could easily have waved play on and claimed to have not seen the contact, not so easy for him to do that now is it? Then there's the dodgy offside decisions we've had given against us time after time, these will now be checked and any mistakes rectified so any linesman with an anti City bias is fucked. Not sure I ever subscribed to the conspiracy theories myself, but I reckon VAR is a major step forward for the game and I'm all for it.

 

[City Man]

If that's the case with regard to which frame is used, surely its open to abuse. Can see far more reviews going rags and dippers way than ours this season

I'm confused about which frame is used. In the case of a player who may or may not be marginally offside receiving a long pass and scoring does VAR have a panoramic view that will show both the player making the pass and the player receiving it? Wouldn't that have to be the case if there was an offside call based on the scorer's position at the moment the pass is made which is my understanding of the offside rule? Or are there two frames of the passer and receiver both taken at the exact split second that can be compared?

 

[Ric]

Apologies if it's already been mentioned, but did anyone else think Mike Dean looked like he was not going to give the penalty and then appeared to change his mind and point to the spot? The cynic in me was thinking at the time that he suddenly realised VAR was in use, that VAR would say it was a definite pen, and he'd look a bit of a twat if he hadn't given it!

Just to add that I've never had any major issue with Dean when he's reffed us in the past but that little episode looked a bit dodgy to me.

Yeah, I thought that at the time too. He had such a clear view of it that I couldn't understand why he seemed hesitant to give it.

 

[SWP's back]

You are correct if UHDTV is being used - it has 50 frames a second but it takes 4 times the bandwidth of HDTV. I had totally forgotten about that.
You are probably right that UHDTV is used but as the VAR technical specs have not been published so we dont know. It will take a hell of a good internet connection to pass 8 camera images to VAR TV central which I know is the long term goal to provide manipulable 3D images.
The main point is that Offside is still a subjective decision for armpit decisions as it is totally dependent on the frame that the VAR operator decides the ball has been touched by the passer. They got it wrong for Sterlings offside decision.

Edinburgh’s link suggests 120 FPS for VAR purposes.

 

[Dax777]

It does make me chuckle reading this thread when we've had post match thread after post match thread for years with City fans bemoaning how biased referees are against us, something gets done to make officiating much less open to abuse and now we're moaning about that too. Like you say, Dean could easily have waved play on and claimed to have not seen the contact, not so easy for him to do that now is it? Then there's the dodgy offside decisions we've had given against us time after time, these will now be checked and any mistakes rectified so any linesman with an anti City bias is fucked. Not sure I ever subscribed to the conspiracy theories myself, but I reckon VAR is a major step forward for the game and I'm all for it.

VAR is an affront to the free reign of Conspiracy Theorists here and everywhere. They shan't take this lightly :)