Var debate 2019/20

[Rammy Blue]

Bang on. The clip uploaded the other day which you also posted in which someone has put a grid on and taken it back parallel with the box clearly shows his knee to be offside.

Still if he is onside as per the VAR footage lets see it, im all eyes.........

All I want is to see it done properly with my own eyes, just like I watched it live for 4 minutes with the Sheff Utd / Spurs game.

I also would like to think City would be all over this privately, we know it wasn’t checked properly as it was impossible to do in the 20 secs it took to confirm.

 

[meltonblue]

I’ve posted this before, but surely the technology is there (or thereabouts) for offsides to be determined exclusively via that means and thus taking the human element completely out of the equation.

It may require some tinkering around the ages of what constitutes being offside, with particular reference to what part of the body to include and exclude and how the ball being played forward is clearly defined, and it may also mean chipping players’ boots, and installing many more cameras, but it’s surely got to be possible, given current technological levels and would be one less thing for match officials to need to consider.

Personally I would question whether it’s worth it though, particularly taking into account the detrimental impact to the match going fan. To me, if you can’t see a player is offside without the need to put the lines across, then I would go with the benefit of the attacker - I don’t see it as enough of an advantage to require it to be such an absolute.

I do think people have forgotten the underlying intent of the laws at times, which for offside is to stop the attacker getting an unfair advantage. If their knee or foot is just offside, I still think the main reason for teams scoring is still either good attacking play or poor defending, not that the minutest bit of their body might be offside.

 

[Rammy Blue]

I see your point, and I agree it's hard to tell. My feeling is that he's probably *just* onside still, but it's mighty close. Certainly too close to be decide in 30 seconds with no evidence provided whatsoever.

One thing is for sure. If it was Sergio, he'd have been given offside. On that I think we are all agreed.

Personally, I’m convinced it was offside. My first instincts as soon as I saw the initial replay after the goal was that it was off and I’ve seen nothing to make me think other than that since.

IF the real VAR showed Salah to be ONSIDE then I think it’s pretty safe to say we’d have seen it by now.....

 

[blueinsa]

All I want is to see it done properly with my own eyes, just like I watched it live for 4 minutes with the Sheff Utd / Spurs game.

I also would like to think City would be all over this privately, we know it wasn’t checked properly as it was impossible to do in the 20 secs it took to confirm.

This.

We can all be put back in our box today and all it will take is the VAR footage from the game.

Anyone at the PL or PiGMOB?

 

[alexmcity]

Yes. I am merely making the point that he was actually on side.

Here's the evidence. Note a few things:

1. The ball is leaving Robertsons foot (you can see the yellow blur). The microsecond before, when Robertson first touches the ball, Salah is further on side.
2. The red and blue lines top and bottom are to show that the white "offside" line is correctly drawn. The ratios of the red line to the blue line are the same, top and bottom.
3. Salah's furthest point forward is his knee and this is clear behind Stones' foot. (Click image for bigger picture)

Again, none of this excuses the lack of VAR scrutiny. They did not scrutinise it, in case it proved to be offside, IMO.

Thanks, I appreciate your effort. But the point of having and using advanced technology is that widely available tools to measure such things might be misleading in their results. Still not convinced. Maybe those at VAR had decided prior to the game to avoid lenghy discussions, etc., but given the magnitude of the game and that the call is not obviously correct they should have proved with VAR there was no offside. Shocking incompetence, if it is incompetence, that is.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Strange post.

In real time it looked offside to me on tv. I have yet to see forensic evidence he was onside. Where was the VAR analysis? Instead we have the same arbitrary interpretations that have been proven to be unreliable and inconsistent. All credibility was lost with the clear and obvious hand ball incidents prior to their first goal and the penalty area push on Sterling. Also the referees failure to deal with persistant fouling by Liverpool.

Officials are there to make decisions except the laws and their interpretation are being changed week to week and VAR is being used as a smokescreen when clearly not fit for purpose. You cannot flip between VAR and officials with decisions. Seems you are defending the indefensible.

I'm sorry mate but my white line IS parallel with the penalty box. I've measured it. It shows Salah's knee as being maybe 6 inches on side. Rammy makes a good point about the height of Salah's knee, compared to Stones' foot which is on the ground.

However, there is no line that can be correctly painted on this screen which shows Salahs knee to be beyond it. If it does, the line is drawn wrong, period.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Strange post.

Not really. Someone said I should have drawn the white line parallel to the penalty box on screen. I was merely demonstrating how daft that is.

The white line I have drawn IS parallel to the penalty box in real life. That is what matters. It is correct.

 

[Chippy_boy]

I printed a simailar photograph which was posted on Sunday and used a ruler to measure the width of the dark grass at salah's position and at stone's position. I then measured
the distance from the the "off-side" line to the front of the dark patch of grass, at salah's and stone's position and calcuated it as a percentage of the width of the dark grrass.
I got 29% at both salah's position and at stone's position. Effectively this is the same proof as using the blue and red bars at the top and bottom of the picture
It implies that the off-side line is drawn at the correct angle. Therefore it is probably not off-side unfortunately.

Agreed. Exactly what I am saying.

 

[Marvin]

The white "offside" line needs to be parallel with the goal line and the penalty area and the half way line. The way it is drawn, it is.

If you drew the white line so that it is parallel on screen with the penalty box, it would be all wrong.

Inconclusive. You can't determine from that image where Salah's knee is in relation to the reference line. I know it appears to be behind it, but it may actually be in advance of the line because of the effect of angle and perspective. See the photo below where Stones clears the ball when its above but not over the line. THe ball appears to be behind the line because we are viewing it from an angle, but when viewed in the plane of the crossbar and goalline it was not.

This is why I believe these VAR measurements are floored. There is no adjustment for this effect.

 

[alexmcity]

I doubt VAR is available to clubs to see for themselves certain situations. So, City could use some version of VAR to look at the situation with Sa;ah's goal but not the actual VAR technology used by the PL. We might require from them to show/prove that the decision was correct, but they might doctor the proof anyway, so it's kind of pointless. Shame, that goal and the use of VAR is suspect.