Var debate 2019/20

half & half derby scarf said:
Going back to the Rodrigo incident:

Neil Swarbrick - the ex referee and now chief of VAR said:

“The arm was around the top of the body, yet Rodri fell forward. He didn’t fall backwards like he was pulled, he fell forward, so he felt contact, can he win the header? No he can’t, so he’s gone down looking for a penalty."

He's basically accused Rodrigo of cheating. Shouldn't he be forced to resign? How can he fall backwards without defying the laws of gravity?

jzOaBIW.jpg
Click to expand...
stupid, even though his hand is over the shoulder there was never any momentum from the defender going backwards, his forearm is clearly pushing rodri forward as well as his left knee in back of rodri's leg.
 


You have to take into account the distortion introduced on a 2D image when the camera is not in line with play. I don't think anyone can just look at that and say whether it is onside or not.

You need some kind of algorithm to adjust for the angle of view. I am sure that this is possible to do, but there's no indication that they are doing this. You can't just guess.

It's ridiculous that we are now into October and the science of the offside measurement is still unknown.

And even if they can measure it with a very small uncertainty budget, it's still a problem unless it's real time.
 
MillionMilesAway said:
Oliver/Laporte - no, I don't think so.

Handball by an attacking player, offside and line calls are considered factual not subjective, and are all judged the same. They do no need to be 'clear and obvious'.
Click to expand...

I think handball is defined as subjective in the text you quoted from the PL. The words are For subjective decisions such as a foul or a handball, VAR can be used to overturn if a “clear and obvious error” has been identified.

It doesn't mention different types of handball.
 
Brightwell Bros. said:
It seems fairly obvious that if someone as strong as professional footballer is pulling you backwards, you're pushing forward to get away from then, and then they release their grip the motion will carry you forward and not backwards. What sort or nonsense is this?
Click to expand...

It's known as Salah's Second Law of Resistance. It's to do with the electrostatic force of repulsion that exists between shirts of different colours. Since both teams were wearing shades of blue, Swarbrick knows that the repulsive force from Lamela's shirt was not sufficient to knock over an adult male. If the light blue shirt had been red, then the force would have greater by two orders of magnitude and a penalty would have been the only possible outcome. Physical laws of Nature and what have you.
 
caseball said:
I think handball is defined as subjective in the text you quoted from the PL. The words are For subjective decisions such as a foul or a handball, VAR can be used to overturn if a “clear and obvious error” has been identified.

It doesn't mention different types of handball.
Click to expand...

I think this is overruled by the laws now, rather than the VAR protocol which is what I copied from. I had seen that bit, and agree that it does look strange - I assume it may be talking defensive handballs.

The laws now say that any goal where the ball strikes a hand of an attacking player will be disallowed. There is no need for opinion as to whether it would count as 'handball', just that it hit a hand is enough.
 
MillionMilesAway said:
The laws now say that any goal where the ball strikes a hand of an attacking player will be disallowed. There is no need for opinion as to whether it would count as 'handball', just that it hit a hand is enough.
Click to expand...

The law doesn't say this. IFAB has said that football does not want goals scored after the ball has touched the hands or arm of an attacking player. This is out of step with the law, and I expect them to change the law at its next iteration.
862c12b83727bf7f069aae9b6072adb9.jpg
 
Paladin said:
The law doesn't say this. IFAB has said that football does not want goals scored after the ball has touched the hands or arm of an attacking player. This is out of step with the law, and I expect them to change the law at its next iteration.
862c12b83727bf7f069aae9b6072adb9.jpg
Click to expand...

I was paraphrasing obviously, or I'd have quoted it. Hackett of IFAB disagrees with you, and his explanation is how the laws are being reffed.

The current explanatory notes on this include this, which is wider than the law wording, and what is being reffed:
• football expects a player to be penalised for handball if they gain possession/control of the ball from their hand/arm and gain a major advantage e.g. score or create a goal-scoring opportunity

I think the significant part is the interpretation of the 'gains possession' line. Any strike on an attacker's hand/arm counts; it also makes sense to me that it encompasses the ball falling to any player on the attacking team once it's hit them, and not just the player struck. It was how the Wolves disallowed goal was reffed, and for Laporte (arguably a wide interpretation of creating a GSO). The Newcastle goal that was allowed was declared an error by Riley.
 
Marvin said:


You have to take into account the distortion introduced on a 2D image when the camera is not in line with play. I don't think anyone can just look at that and say whether it is onside or not.

You need some kind of algorithm to adjust for the angle of view. I am sure that this is possible to do, but there's no indication that they are doing this. You can't just guess.

It's ridiculous that we are now into October and the science of the offside measurement is still unknown.

And even if they can measure it with a very small uncertainty budget, it's still a problem unless it's real time.
Click to expand...


This is it for me: excuse me being a wordy twat, but we are now talking about epistemology and ontology and statistical significance and camera frame rates for a law designed to stop people goal hanging.
 
Brightwell Bros. said:
This is it for me: excuse me being a wordy twat, but we are now talking about epistemology and ontology and statistical significance and camera frame rates for a law designed to stop people goal hanging.
Click to expand...
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/
gaussian-alpha.png
 
Last edited:
Marvin said:
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.

Source: https://datumorphism.com/wiki/statistical-estimation/confidence-interval/
gaussian-alpha.png
Click to expand...

So what your saying is it’s not worth shite.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top