VAR (PL introduction 2019)

Dubai Blue said:
Yeah it's all there in hello's post. The technology currently can't possibly tell us if someone is offside within 24cm let alone 2cm.
Click to expand...

Ah, I assume you mean this one....

hello said:
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.
Click to expand...

Nice calc, haven't checked the maths but assuming they are correct, considering Sky & BT broadcast at 50 FPS & VAR are looking at the same feeds, the figures are out by at least a factor of 2. Slow motion camera's (of which Sky use several at games) are often 3-4 times that frame rate as well (150 FPS +). Agreed 2-3 cm would still be difficult to judge, but not impossible depending on the actual time the frame is taken and 10cm (4 Inches) should pose no particular problems. Don't recall seeing decisions of 2-3 cm though, the lines on the screen would overlap, not just be close...overlap.

In any case, considering the human eye sees at around 10-12 FPS (although it can detect movement at much higher rates - that's why strip lights appear to flicker, especially at the edges of our vision), even 25 FPS is much better than the human eye (i.e. the linesman) could see. By definition VAR cannot but help and improve offside decisions (penalty/red card decisions are a different argument).

Don't get me wrong, I don't think the current implementation of VAR is perfect by any means, but it will get better & faster.
 
Colthekid said:
Ah, I assume you mean this one....



Nice calc, haven't checked the maths but assuming they are correct, considering Sky & BT broadcast at 50 FPS & VAR are looking at the same feeds, the figures are out by at least a factor of 2. Slow motion camera's (of which Sky use several at games) are often 3-4 times that frame rate as well (150 FPS +). Agreed 2-3 cm would still be difficult to judge, but not impossible depending on the actual time the frame is taken and 10cm (4 Inches) should pose no particular problems. Don't recall seeing decisions of 2-3 cm though, the lines on the screen would overlap, not just be close...overlap.

In any case, considering the human eye sees at around 10-12 FPS (although it can detect movement at much higher rates - that's why strip lights appear to flicker, especially at the edges of our vision), even 25 FPS is much better than the human eye (i.e. the linesman) could see. By definition VAR cannot but help and improve offside decisions (penalty/red card decisions are a different argument).

Don't get me wrong, I don't think the current implementation of VAR is perfect by any means, but it will get better & faster.
Click to expand...


I can't find the fifa article detailing specs prior to the world cup maybe its been taken down, that wouldn't be like fifa would it, however they still have:

This new technology, based on broadcast and audio equipment, was customized over the last two years to the specific needs of football in order to best possibly meet the overriding philosophy of VAR “minimum interference, maximum benefit”. https://football-technology.fifa.com/en/blog/hidden-technologies-at-the-2018-fwc/

Even if they have now upgraded and decided to use 50 fps, the speed used in the above example were on players running at less than half maximum speed. If they have truly back tracked as you suggest and upgraded to 50 fps then a forward running at 8mps (100 metre in 12.5s pace) and a defending running forward at 6mps (100 metre 16.6 s pace) still creates a 28cm differentiation per frame and I stand by the drawing of a line is still a "hopefully impartial & educated" guess, but its billed as scientifically absolute which is the bullshit part that's open to media and political corruption to suit which ever agenda appeases the likes of SKY\BT the most. they cannot 100% say x was 7cm offside for example when theirs an up to 28cm margin of error.
If they are ignoring the clear and obvious aspect and defining they can say with 100% certainly off or onside then they need to tweak rules\implementation to cover margins of error or its just a sham that will be used to enhance the neutral tv viewers experience at the expense of fans and actual match integrity.
 
Colthekid said:
Ah, I assume you mean this one....



Nice calc, haven't checked the maths but assuming they are correct, considering Sky & BT broadcast at 50 FPS & VAR are looking at the same feeds, the figures are out by at least a factor of 2. Slow motion camera's (of which Sky use several at games) are often 3-4 times that frame rate as well (150 FPS +). Agreed 2-3 cm would still be difficult to judge, but not impossible depending on the actual time the frame is taken and 10cm (4 Inches) should pose no particular problems. Don't recall seeing decisions of 2-3 cm though, the lines on the screen would overlap, not just be close...overlap.

In any case, considering the human eye sees at around 10-12 FPS (although it can detect movement at much higher rates - that's why strip lights appear to flicker, especially at the edges of our vision), even 25 FPS is much better than the human eye (i.e. the linesman) could see. By definition VAR cannot but help and improve offside decisions (penalty/red card decisions are a different argument).

Don't get me wrong, I don't think the current implementation of VAR is perfect by any means, but it will get better & faster.
Click to expand...

Seems much more reasonable, than the 24cms which had been quoted elsewhere, which seemed ludicrous!!
 
Bottom line is a lot of people were bleating on about getting the "right" decisions - what they didn't add was " in their view - for their team". Simple fact is VAR was always going to disrupt the game - take time to resolve and have fans stood waiting in the dark. The Genie is out of the bottle and we will just have to live with it - I was never a supporter of its introduction but for other reasons than what we are being shown now which is simply that the "right" decision can go against your side - you still have talking points but of a different nature. I've seen offsides that were offside, hand balls that were hand balls and pens that were pens all given. The big farce - keepers moving off their line for a penalty was addressed straight away. We are on the way to becoming American Football where a 4 x 15 minute quarter game somehow takes 3 hours to complete.
 
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
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.