That's the inherent bias that's built into the system. If a referee goes over to the screen to look at something again it means he's effectively been told by a team of VAR officials that they all think he's got it wrong. It takes a brave referee to stick to his guns once that happens.Has there been an instance where it’s gone to the ref on the field and they haven’t changed their mind yet this summer?
It seems as soon as they go to watch their telly the ref is expected to reverse their decision. The pen in the England game the other day being a good example, I’m not having that there was a clear foul there.
Of course the only time I can remember when this happened was when Llorente scored v City!
sadly most refs will give in to those operating VAR, i seriously cant see how this would help city in any shape or form. football has died for me regarding VARThat's the inherent bias that's built into the system. If a referee goes over to the screen to look at something again it means he's effectively been told by a team of VAR officials that they all think he's got it wrong. It takes a brave referee to stick to his guns once that happens.
Howard Webb loves it tells you all you need to know
sadly most refs will give in to those operating VAR, i seriously cant see how this would help city in any shape or form. football has died for me regarding VAR
Instead of just repeating the same argument over and over again, what are your thoughts on the fact that VAR can't possibly be reliable for tight offside calls?Let’s go back to refs guessing and when they get it wrong we all call them corrupt and moan how they ruined the game !
Maybe he's just guessing.Instead of just repeating the same argument over and over again, what are your thoughts on the fact that VAR can't possibly be reliable for tight offside calls?
Several posters have put this to you but all you ever come back with is "Yeah let's go back to the match officials just guessing"
He's got one argument and it's getting beyond tiresome hearing it. Numerous people have raised genuine concerns on here that go far beyond "It's shit, I don't like it".Maybe he's just guessing.
He's got one argument and it's getting beyond tiresome hearing it. Numerous people have raised genuine concerns on here that go far beyond "It's shit, I don't like it".
His response is to either ignore them (presumably because he can see they've got a point that can't possibly be argued with) or to respond with the above sarcasm.
He's adding absolutely nothing to the discussion, unlike the people who are pointing out the inherent flaws of the system currently being used.
The point is, who decides those tight offside calls are correct. It's completely arbitrary, as the posts below explain.Because to me the ‘flaws’ are simply minimal and that has been proven
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/sport/amp/football/42781236
You can't possibly know 100% that the offside call was right. That's the point.
When the margins are that tight (i.e., no daylight between the players) then the benefit surely has to go with the attacker. And if that requires a law change, then hurry up and change it because we can't keep seeing goals ruled out due to an attacker being onside in one frame but a toe offside in the next.
I guarantee there'll be a frame that shows the ball at Jill Scott's foot while Ellen White is onside. So, in such scenarios, there's "conclusive" evidence that the goal should both stand AND be disallowed. It's so wide open to manipulation that I struggle to believe anyone (even the most ardent VAR supporters) can defend it in its current guise.
Certainly seems that way.
Referee: "So, Mr. VAR, you're telling me we've got one image that conclusively shows the player onside and another that conclusively shows him/her offside. Which one shall we go with today?"
Only football could maneuver itself into such a farcical situation.
Indeed when using 25 frames per second 2 players moving at a mere 3 metres per second in opposite directions results in a 6 metre differentiation per second or 24cm per frame, and they reckon they can without doubt call a decision to a cm is total on utter fabricated bollocks. Even if the defender is static its 12cm margin of error per frame, and 3 metres per second isn't even sprinting, that's doing 100m in 30= seconds, imagine sane for example running full tilt at 8+mps with a quick full back running forward to try to play offside at 7mps that iss 60cm differentiation per frame, but we still trust someone to draw a line and say definitively he was 3cms offside totally disregarding the margins of error the laws of physics have dictated since time began.
I have gone 100% full circle on VAR from total support of the concept to absolutely hating the way its been corrupted and fully expect it to be used purely as a tool to appease the broadcasters rather than fans or actually improve match integrity.
That could be a fair compromise. Although it would have to be a fairly big shadow area as Hello's post above explains. Something is needed because we can't keep seeing goals ruled out because of potential discrepancies in frame rates.- allow a ‘grey’ shadow area past the offside line - if a player is deemed offside but in the grey shadow and scores it should count.
and who's calibrating the offside lines on the VAR monitor? They only have to be half a degree out and offside person becomes onside or vice versa. Can City's groundstaff start mowing the pitch at a slight angle to make our forwards look onside?The point is, who decides those tight offside calls are correct. It's completely arbitrary, as the posts below explain.
The ref makes his decision or misses something, it’s checked by VAR, they can’t decide so send it back to the on field ref. First of all it can’t be clear and obvious if three people can’t decide and secondly if the ref has given (say) a penalty how many will think they were correct anyway and no matter how many times they see the replay they will stick with their original decision.It’s not the decision that’s bothering me. We all want the right decisions but not at the expense of the game being stopped for minutes at a time.
It’s the farcical way in which some decisions mean the ref has to run to the sideline to watch back a video the VAR panel have all already watched themselves. VAR should make the bloody decision.
If it takes as long as it’s taking with all this sideline stuff, yes, I’d rather just give the **** the penalty. He might miss it anyway. Ideally it’d be VAR that makes the decision and we wouldn’t have the circus of refs going to the sideline.
I've no problem with VAR correcting clear offside decisions. It's the one area of the game where I think it COULD be put to good use. But it can't possibly be relied on at the current frame rates for tight calls.It’s still better than the human eye which we know gets the margin of error wrong, way more than VAR - the technology for ‘frames per second’ will always improve and so will the accuracy, we get to see the decisions they are making , so if there’s is obvious corruption we can call it out - before VAR we just have to accept it. This is massive and certainly the way forward even if there’s a few millimetre decisions that don’t go your way.
I've no problem with VAR correcting clear offside decisions. It's the one area of the game where I think it COULD be put to good use. But it can't possibly be relied on at the current frame rates for tight calls.
The problem I have is that the authorities are pretending the current technology is conclusive. Until it is, there needs to be a margin for error built into it (which, to be fair, you've acknowledged in your previous post). A bit like what they do in cricket: if there's any potential for doubt they allow the goal to stand.
Totally agree but somehow I can't see refs issuing yellows and reds for simulation to the likes of Salah, hope I'm wrong though...Also obvious dives , so unfair on the ref to be conned by cheating players - now VAR will make them think twice and it will be sweet justice when the next Salah dive he gets punished for diving instead of being awarded a penalty.
Totally agree but somehow I can't see refs issuing yellows and reds for simulation to the likes of Salah, hope I'm wrong though...
Good point, I just wish it could go back to being a contact sport, it's getting to the stage where you literally cannot touch an opponent, even while tackling.... The game is being systematically dismantled to the point where it won't be worth watching in 20 years time ....Like most serial collapsers, Salah pretty much always has some form of contact from a defender putting his hands on him or kicking him, and guidelines have been that any form of contact means there shouldn't be a booking (I assume this is the idea that it's very difficult to be certain that the contact has not led to the fall).
The guidelines would need some changes for bookings to be more common. Having said that, there are some obvious ones where the ref doesn't book them anyway.