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

[cheekybids]

the problem is, every single officiating mistake, every wrong decision can just be labelled as 'corruption' (in many forms)

Mike Dean admitting he should have sent ref over and deeply regrets he doesn't - is that really proof of 'corruption' ? it was a human error. Not saying it's acceptable either. but it's clear he didn't make that decision on the back of a dodgy envelope and higher instructions from the FA.

Unless we have an officiating system with or without VAR that can guarantee every single decision is 100% correct, that can satisfy both sets of players, managers and fans at all times - then everything is just labelled as 'corrupt'

Yes it’s corruption he didn’t make a mistake he made a calculated decision based on his relationship with the referee. What he’s saying is if it was a different referee he’d have made a different call.

We are not calling out mistakes where are calling out when the LOTG are ignored for the reasons I explained earlier.

You could look further into the relationship & maybe Dean felt he owed him one.

 

[BerkshireBlue]

Not really the place for an AI thread, but it's interesting. Care to provide a few reasons?

For starters it will be using a type of a convolution neural net to model the limbs and pick where there are for a specifc epoch. These convolution neural nets are basically nodes and synapse systems exactly how like how your brain works. You can't analyse the results like a normal non AI model the results are what the results are as it's AI and it decides on what it thinks the answer should be. It's the definition of AI. If it were me I'd be also adding an extra input layer of noise so the CNN can pick out the sound of the kick and the movement of the ball maybe keeping this as a secondary model. So anyone stating SOAT isn't AI just doesn't know what AI is in the first place. Now General AI is where things get scary but that's another story

 

[cheekybids]

Yeah I get the argument, I just wouldn’t go to the level of calling it corruption or abuse of discretion. I would if PGMOL were aware of it and didn’t do anything about Dean though.

I’m not averse to the argument of making the operatives of VAR more independent to the referees on the pitch though.

What if it’s endemic of the behaviour in PGMOL?

 

[skillman]

Bent as fuck, is Dean.

 

[Kmezn]

Unless we have an officiating system with or without VAR that can guarantee every single decision is 100% correct, that can satisfy both sets of players, managers and fans at all times - then everything is just labelled as 'corrupt'

See, this is where I disagree. And I don't mean in terms of'it evens out over the season' as that's just crap. It's a way of saying we made a mistake but don't worry we'll make more and maybe next time you'll benefit...

But the system doesn't have to be 100% correct. That's not possible in the real world...
IMO most people would be happy for just knowing why. The thought process used and as much consistency as possible. Non of the guessing what the ref is thinking....

It's not perfect but it doesn't have to be. And the more effort attempting to make it perfect by constantly changing the rules is just pissing into the wind.... Wasted effort if you will on something that is not attainable

 

[BerkshireBlue]

very quickly and a gross oversimplification off the top of my head:

an algorithm is a set of instructions done to achieve a task. think maths and scientific formulae.

multiple algorithms for arguments sake create a program in software allowing it topreform certian actions.

for machine learning and AI it depends where you want to draw the line.
e.g. a smart speaker (alexa, google home) isn't AI. it's taking an input usually voice 'play music' that then looks for key words play and music. if it doesn't understand my accent and only gets 'play' then it returns something like 'would you like to play a game' or similar.
if it understands 'music' it returns the function 'playing music on spotify'
where machine learning comes in it will take all of those voice clips by EVERYONE using it to say 'play music' comparing and contrasting accents and accuracy of responses as per an algorithmic feedback to define what a 'correct' response would be.

i can provide some info if you would like to know more =]


edit- excuse the long reply but it's a passion subject of mine and the term ai is normally used for simple things and people expect HAL9000 when they just get voice detection.

A smart speaker is also AI same reason as SOAT and it will be using a Natural Language Processing model which again is an AI based model. Not ML at all. Anyway back on subject Dean is dick

 

[Kmezn]

A smart speaker is also AI same reason as SOAT and it will be using a Natural Language Processing model which again is an AI based model. Not ML at all. Anyway back on subject Dean is dick

Appreciate your earlier explanation; much better put than mine. I've just had too many people expecting magical JARVIS from iron Man or hal9000 that I'm cynical of things being that complicated. Good shout on the natural language model I've seen similar software without that but not on the same scale as Google etc obviously. But yes back on topic. Dean is a dick you say....

 

[cheekybids]

 

[halfcenturyup]

For starters it will be using a type of a convolution neural net to model the limbs and pick where there are for a specifc epoch. These convolution neural nets are basically nodes and synapse systems exactly how like how your brain works. You can't analyse the results like a normal non AI model the results are what the results are as it's AI and it decides on what it thinks the answer should be. It's the definition of AI. If it were me I'd be also adding an extra input layer of noise so the CNN can pick out the sound of the kick and the movement of the ball maybe keeping this as a secondary model. So anyone stating SOAT isn't AI just doesn't know what AI is in the first place. Now General AI is where things get scary but that's another story

:) Anyone who doesn't know the WC balls have an inertia sensor to determine the exact moment the ball starts to move just doesn't know what SAOT is.

But, joking aside, appreciate your response even if I don't understand much of it. I'll read up and revert if I have questions if that's OK.

 

[BlueHammer85]

See, this is where I disagree. And I don't mean in terms of'it evens out over the season' as that's just crap. It's a way of saying we made a mistake but don't worry we'll make more and maybe next time you'll benefit...

But the system doesn't have to be 100% correct. That's not possible in the real world...
IMO most people would be happy for just knowing why. The thought process used and as much consistency as possible. Non of the guessing what the ref is thinking....

It's not perfect but it doesn't have to be. And the more effort attempting to make it perfect by constantly changing the rules is just pissing into the wind.... Wasted effort if you will on something that is not attainable

IMO most people would be happy for just knowing why

Lets take the Rashford offside/goal (disgraceful decision I repeat over and over)

we get to the hear the transcript -

Lino flags 'offside ref'
Ref 'hold up, I didn't see Rashford touch the ball are you sure there was enough interference'
Lino 'I'm not to sure, you maybe right
Ref 'yeh looked like he didn't interfere '

Goal stands.

I mean we can pretty much guess that was the conversation. would that have satisfied ?

- I would like also to have more transparency and what was said, but I'm still unsure it will satisfy and i think the transcripts can be read and manipulated to make it look really corrupt.