Var debate 2019/20

[Damocles]

It's really rather simple, the moment the ball is played is the moment the ball is touched, so the first frame where there's contact from the passer is when the line should be drawn.

There's no contact between the ball and the player on a physical level. That's the point. "Contact" is a totally arbitrary distinction used by us that doesn't exist in nature in the same fashion. You can't say "clear contact" on the ball side but "according to our pixel perfect measurement system" on the other. Either use total precision on both or accept you can't and look for clear air on both

 

[cleavers]

@cleavers I can't watch the BT coverage as my dodgy box's playback isn't working.

I watched this video that pingu posted:



If it doesn't play, go on youtube and it's the first video after searching: Video Assistant Referee (VAR): The Virtual Offside Line

It's very good for explaining what I mean about locating the correct pixel in 3D space etc (rather than the blue parallel lines that were used in the last year's world cup etc), but it would seem that at present, it is still a technician that is clicking the pixel to determine the first body part that can be offside (as opposed to AI as AI can't seemingly decide where the arms ends and shoulder begins as an example).

In terms of what I was talking re: the lines being drawn, watch on the video from 3:57 to 4:01 ish and that is exactly what I saw happening on screen during the Sterling review. I was then as shocked as anyone that the defender's arse was playing him onside but that's the reason that the system exists (i.e. to show where in space every body actually is rather than trying to determine it using one's eye and a camera angle not quite in line.)

Thanks, its an interesting video, and well worth watching to gain some understanding of it all, and it would appear to be very accurate.

We don't know if the same system is being used in the PL, what Walton described was a unique (to the PL) system, so maybe its been enhanced since the WC, that said the later video with Neville and Carragher doesn't suggest that, but I don't know how old that is, is it this season or last ? Again maybe its been enhanced for this season.

The other thing, no matter how accurate it is, the offside law needs a change because football is about scoring goals, not preventing them, and some advantage should therefore go to the attacking side.

 

[Rolee]

There's no contact between the ball and the player on a physical level. That's the point. "Contact" is a totally arbitrary distinction used by us that doesn't exist in nature in the same fashion. You can't say "clear contact" on the ball side but "according to our pixel perfect measurement system" on the other. Either use total precision on both or accept you can't and look for clear air on both

Has to be total precision on both, VAR is giving the law makers the opportunity to take all subjectivity away but it needs to be clearly defined and press releases from stills in the VAR room would help instead of us relying on broadcasters to put their own interpretation on it.

 

[Dribble]

not sure if posted but this is spot on.

It's been posted & has made me think about VAR differently. I'm all for it, but as you'll have seen, this brings the highly technical Video Frames Per Second into play.

@SWP's back posted a link to FIFA which claimed offside is decided at "The moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team mates". Apply this to the disallowed goal & Sterling is on.

Roll it on a frame or two & he's off. Sterling could me moving full pelt at 10m per second, so you can see where the problem arises depending on which frame the offside is being adjudicated on.

This needs sorting before a team gets relegated or knocked out of a major cup because of it.

 

[Neville Kneville]

But there will always be a case where it’s 7 or 13 inches so the same issue would apply. There will always be a fine margin outside whatever cut off there is.

No it wouldn't at all.

If you are more than a foot offside, you have been given leeway & overstepped it. You are DEFINITELY offside.

It will still mean the horrors of waiting, but at least the end result will be correct & not for a toe of because the striker has a large penis.

 

[onceabluealways]

Doesnt help the day before VAR ref said we wont be disallowing goals over CMs. If fans stop celebrating because of var it will kill the game

 

[Dribble]

ref watch Dermot we can check off side to finest lines but we cant check keepers feet at a penalty, it either does one or the other

Exactly!!

This unbelievable statement seemingly blows the whole black & white VAR argument apart....

 

[cleavers]

If it's inconclusive they should revert to the on field decision like in cricket.

I kind of agree, but this is why there is a pitch side monitor, so he can go look, I don't think the PL want to that very often, because it wastes a lot of time as we saw in the summer, and I suspect it will only be used for debatable disciplinary decisions.

 

[cleavers]

They use more than one camera.

On the PL video there were at least 23 camera's in use, not all will be on the action all the time obviously, but they will have a lot of angles, and therefore frames.

 

[Damocles]

Has to be total precision on both, VAR is giving the law makers the opportunity to take all subjectivity away but it needs to be clearly defined and press releases from stills in the VAR room would help instead of us relying on broadcasters to put their own interpretation on it.

I'm not sure if I'm blowing your mind here mate but total precision/objectivity on position cannot possibly exist. It's a fiction. You may as well invent a dragon monitoring machine. It cannot do the job you're asking of it.

So you do what ever other person who deals with precision does, and accept objective total precision can't exist and introduce tolerances. Those tolerances should be "clear air" rather than "millimetres" because the latter provides no clear advantage to the player, which is the point of the offside rule, and the former does.