The level of precision isn't the problem.
Here they use the old, "which team does it affect again?" rule.
You quoted super bitch.
As we know other sports like say athletics, use slowmotion camaras to decide the winner even when competitors are going in the same direction.You have to, because they are making measurements to determine whether a player is offside.
All measurements are made up to a certain level of precision. What is the precision of VAR? This is a very legitimate question to ask. The rule is that you are offside or onside, and that you can not be level. OK, that's clear, but it only works if you can make that measurement very precisely.
They need to tell the football world what that precision is in order for us to accept it.
When you make a measurement is made, you report its maximum likelihood and a confidence interval within which you can say, with say 95% probability, that the true value lies within those boundaries. From what I understand those boundaries maybe +/- several cm, and not the mm which are really what you need to make VAR work within the existing rules.
This is just a general comment on what is required to assess VAR in relation to offside. There is still the secondary issue of whether football really wants to stop the flow of the game to do this.
The ideal solution is something that is
a) precise and,
b) fast
I believe VAR is neither.
The graph below is an image I took from the Internet to demonstrate a maximum likelihood estimation and a confidence interval which enables someone to say with a confidence level of X percent (typically 95%) that my estimate of the true value of Y is Z +/- a.
a is your uncertainty. What is VAR's uncertainty? I suspect it is unworkable.
Where is the independent study of VAR technology? They've been trialing this for years. but have they analysed it properly? Maybe it has been detailed but its significance has been lost on football people?
Source: https://datumorphism.com/wiki/statistical-estimation/confidence-interval/
It needs fucking off or I won’t be back either
I think the point is that because there is a margin of error between frames unless the frame used by the var people has its immediate before and after frames also shown it is open to suspicion as to which frame has been selected.
Taking account of the the margin of error because of camera frame times would still involve close decisions but would stop people being called offside when they are actually onside. You could only be offside by 21 cms not 19cms. It would improve the current situation which is just simply inacccurate based on the capabiity of the equipment. It's a move in the right direction surely.
2 frames - one before touching the ball and the next one (first one with contact). If you are offside on both - bingo, if you aren't offside on either then you can not call it. You could easily undertake complex algorithms on speed of journey and let a computer decide, but in order to make it simple - the two frames before and after are all that is needed. This will inevitably come in when the numpties who control this finally come up with the idea for next season
problem with frame before is if you are running onside rather than offside, you may be onside in frame before but not when the ball is 'touched'. Hence - to provide an element of benefit of doubt to attacker (as has always been the case historically) both the before and after should be used and there has to be an offside in each
Ok. So that's it we have the solution then. Is anybody listening ?
He got one tonight.