Var debate 2019/20

[Rolee]

Yes, we'd define "clear air" to be something that's visually distinct in the same way we've always done. As I said common sense can be applied to the rules.

We can have VAR setup to catch referee and linesmen mistakes with the understanding if the "mistake" was past a reasonable tolerance of human vision such as the millimetres then we acknowledge that's just outside the realm of human beings and carry on.

VAR will make mistakes. Linesmen will make mistakes. VAR will make less but also has the other drawbacks people have been talking about regarding speed/fans etc. So really what the debate here is if you're willing to trade off the accuracy of VAR that doesn't provide the player an advantage to gain the flow of the game back, and if you are, why would you do that? If the player didn't gain an advantage then it doesn't matter where he is stood, essentially.

Cheers, and yes mind is blown a bit, must swot up on physics.

 

[Dribble]

something crossed my mind with both the sterling VAR's replays and its the speed of movement and the ruling with the video replay and them blue and red lines final

the technology can not be 100% right and needs a margin of doubt and just like a uk police speed cam they have a margin of doubt in the ruling
UK speed camera tolerances
Most police forces have a tolerance of 10% plus 2mph above the limit before aspeed camera 'flashes'. So on a 30mph road, a camera wouldn't normally activate unless a car drove past at 35mph or above. On a 70mph stretch of motorway, this threshold would go up to 79mph.15 May 2019

this is because of the technology can not be 100% right, and a court of law and a good lawyer will get it over turned on the technology not being 100%
so am saying let there be a (margin of doubt) and if the lines are over lapping each other then its still a goal ?? every body would be fine with it and that TAG of doubt would be fair and until knowing 100% then we all would be happy

I never understood what was wrong with the clear daylight between players. Apparently this was never a rule, but an understanding which made sense. Judging offsides in millimetres with 23 people on the pitch & some moving at nearly 10m per second, is always going to cause contention.

 

[stonerblue]

Yeah I think most of us thought that, we wouldn't have got that last year, and we certainly wouldn't have got the retake, until VAR nobody was getting those ever.

That rule has been in the game forever and i've seen penalties re-taken loads of times before var was invented.

 

[homerdog]

I wonder if they could introduce a Yellow strip, let's say 2 inches wide, and if the Red line falls within this strip then the player is deemed onside because it's too close to call?

This wouldn't work, because it still depends on the operator deciding when the ball was played.

 

[SWP's back]

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.

But a foot is 12 inches so if they’re 13 inches off then it’s still an inch over your arbitrary measure and the same argument would exist.

 

[cleavers]

Perfect solution. Suits all corners.

It would speed it up too, because a "check" would be quicker, because if its within the "tolerance" it will be obvious most of the time, so the "check" would be over before anyone knows, as were most this weekend in fact, it was just typical we'd be involved in the most, and probably the most controversial, even though none of them were in fact game changing, but eventually there will be a game changer. Last year in a Bundesliga game, there was a penalty claim at one end, but while the check took place the offending team went down the other end and scored, the game was then stopped for the check, and a penalty was given and the goal disallowed, so instead of 0-1 it became 1-0, imagine that in a derby.

 

[Dribble]

There are far more than 2 cameras, the Neville Carragher video shows them using camera 23, so plenty of angles/frames to view, there is a video analyst who picks the "best".

I'll refine what I said. They claim there are 3 cameras covering all points at all times. This is so if a player is obscured, they have two options to show a better angle.

We were shown one angle, I was querying why we weren't shown the other two? Hopefully this clarifies my post.

 

[cleavers]

That rule has been in the game forever and i've seen penalties re-taken loads of times before var was invented.

Yes the rule was there, but I can't remember the last time it was actually given against a defender, I can remember it against a forward who has scored a rebound, and in fact there was discussion at one point that if a penalty was missed, play would restart with a dead ball. Encroachment has got worse, on both sides, which is why they seem to be clamping down on it a good thing in my view.

 

[stonerblue]

more posts on this thread than on the motm thread tells you all you need to know about the absolute fuckwittery of var.

 

[SWP's back]

more posts on this thread than on the motm thread tells you all you need to know about the absolute fuckwittery of var.

I never post on that thread tbh. Just a load people saying “so and so was good”.