VAR Discussion Thread - 2023/24 | PL clubs to vote on whether to scrap VAR (pg413)

[Stephen230]

Sorry but thats nonsense, it clearly goes through his foot, one can only assume because its been put in the wrong place by the VAR ref carelessly.

On the original image, there is a small dotted line, indicating that the foot wasn’t on the ground.

On that widely shared image appearing to show the line going through his foot, there doesn’t appear to be any dotted line. Making me question whether it is even the official image. Either way, zooming in that much on an image is always likely to cause distortion.

 

[kaz7]

You want me to comment on every controversial VAR decision ? or just the ones you pick and choose?

shall i tag you in games without VAR and ask for your explanation on wrong decisions?

Can i have your opinion on this one from last night

'He's offside!' | Controversy as Willy Gnonto gives Leeds lead again!

Wilfred Gnonto gives Leeds the lead going into the break but there is question marks over whether the goal shouldve stood due to offside.

www.skysports.com

Lol, desperate deflecting

 

[BlueHammer85]

Lol, desperate deflecting

I won't answer to your demands. it's pointless. You're to thick to reason with.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

It looks like it goes through his foot because it’s the broadcast line. The two lines didn’t overlap though so ultimately he was more offside than decisions they would have given a couple of seasons ago.

Can you not just accept that that decision was wrong and the Coventry goal should have stood. At the very least the ball hasn't left the Coventry players foot ans they have used the qrong frame, do you accept that? Do you accept that Webb and Co said they weren't going to use VAR to check mm offsides ? I am pretty sure they did.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

On the original image, there is a small dotted line, indicating that the foot wasn’t on the ground.

On that widely shared image appearing to show the line going through his foot, there doesn’t appear to be any dotted line. Making me question whether it is even the official image. Either way, zooming in that much on an image is always likely to cause distortion.

I don't see how zooming in makes the line go through his foot? It doesn't go through the Coventry players foot does it?

 

[halfcenturyup]

They no longer use the one pixel line for close offside calls, once they’ve put that in it’s then converted to the thicker line, which is what the broadcasters use. If the thicker lines used overlap for the defender and the attacker, they now give that as onside whereas previously they didn’t build any tolerance.

Thanks. Didn't know some of that.

So the one pixel line is the one used by VAR to place the offside position? Do we know how the lines used for the broadcast are laid over the one pixel line?

 

[Stephen230]

I don't see how zooming in makes the line go through his foot? It doesn't go through the Coventry players foot does it?

Has anyone even confirmed where that image originates from? It just seems to have popped up somewhere on the internet and then widely shared as fact.

 

[Andy TheCatalyst Morrison]

We were sold VAR as a tool to get rid of howlers - Maradona handball, Henry handball against Ireland, Milner 3 yards offside for a Liverpool goal, the non-penalty on Aguero in the 2-3 derby where we could have won the league etc etc

I don’t think anyone would have a problem with that. And they wouldn’t take long to rectify. If that was VAR then I’d be 100% behind it.

Whereas what we’re getting is every tiny detail microanalysed to the nth degree. Who wants to see goals chalked off when someone’s knee/toe/whatever is fractionally offside to the point that you can’t detect it with the naked eye? Not me, whether for or against City. Just use it to eliminate the howlers and get on with the fucking game.

 

[Stephen230]

We were sold VAR as a tool to get rid of howlers - Maradona handball, Henry handball against Ireland, Milner 3 yards offside for a Liverpool goal, the non-penalty on Aguero in the 2-3 derby where we could have won the league etc etc

I don’t think anyone would have a problem with that. And they wouldn’t take long to rectify. If that was VAR then I’d be 100% behind it.

Whereas what we’re getting is every tiny detail microanalysed to the nth degree. Who wants to see goals chalked off when someone’s knee/toe/whatever is fractionally offside to the point that you can’t detect it with the naked eye? Not me, whether for or against City. Just use it to eliminate the howlers and get on with the fucking game.

Define a “howler” though.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Has anyone even confirmed where that image originates from? It just seems to have popped up somewhere on the internet and then widely shared as fact.

This is a blown up image from Dale Johnson's review, so I guess it's an official image as he gets most of his excuses explanations from PGMOL.



Not sure why there should be a blue blodge by his foot, or why the red line looks wider than the blue line? Can't see any green between the lines either tbh.

May just be resolution issues.