VAR thread 2022/23

[kaz7]

How Goal Line Technology works in football and why yes, that can go wrong too

Goal Line Technology made a mistake during the Fiorentina-Braga match in the Conference League. The technology that detects whether or not the ball has crossed the goal line had made a mistake by awarding a goal to Cabral: a decision which was then corrected by the VAR. But how does GLT actually...

news.italy24.press

From this account it appears to be the Match Director (Commander?) who asked for the ref to review it because VAR could not confirm the goal …. (Lights blue touch paper and retires to a safe distance.)

Our stephen doesnt believe in match commanders or whatever you call them

 

[Stephen230]

Our stephen doesnt believe in match commanders or whatever you call them

I didn’t say I didn’t believe in them. I said I’d never heard them referenced anywhere other than on here. In reply to that, somebody then linked an old article from The Sun which mentioned them.

 

[halfcenturyup]

I’ve not seen it but from what I read they seemed to be suggesting that the tech. guy in the VAR room knew there was a malfunction. So they effectively disregarded it and resorted to what they could see. I imagine in that situation the burden of proof resorts back to having to have clear evidence to give a goal rather than clear evidence that GLT was wrong.

I’m no tech. guy but I don’t imagine any system is foolproof. GLT seems to be as reliable as you can hope for though. This is only the third time I’ve heard about it malfunctioning across all the leagues. You could argue that for really close ones, know one is going to question it if it was wrong but if as it seems here, they can tell when it’s playing up, it seems to working to an acceptable level.

Not sure I followed any of that. The system has worked perfectly for years but in this one case, the VAR says it didn't? Anyway, a couple of points:

0.5 cm margin of error? Don't tell Liverpool :)

And

I'm not a fan of CGI representations of goal line incidents and offsides. Show the actual images that are used. CGI just confuses cute graphics with accuracy.

 

[Blue Mist]

I didn’t say I didn’t believe in them. I said I’d never heard them referenced anywhere other than on here. In reply to that, somebody then linked an old article from The Sun which mentioned them.

And it was debunked by Richard the Ref. I am a Var hater but fully accept there is no match commander.

(If it is proved there is, Richard is in bigggggg trouble :-) )

 

[halfcenturyup]

And it was debunked by Richard the Ref. I am a Var hater but fully accept there is no match commander.

Not in the VAR booth anyway. They just give instructions through off-site mics. Oops .....

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

Not in the VAR booth anyway. They just give instructions through off-site mics. Oops .....

We only have the PL/PiGMOL's word about matchday comm's, and that is worth the sum total of f*ck all.

 

[Stephen230]

Not sure I followed any of that. The system has worked perfectly for years but in this one case, the VAR says it didn't? Anyway, a couple of points:

0.5 cm margin of error? Don't tell Liverpool :)

And

I'm not a fan of CGI representations of goal line incidents and offsides. Show the actual images that are used. CGI just confuses cute graphics with accuracy.

I assume it’s like a cash machine you hear “counting” your money. Or a fruit machine with all sorts of meaningless graphics for the gambler to think is affecting his play. I’m guessing there are no actual graphics to support GLT. But people like to see things with their own eyes to convince them it’s genuine.

 

[Cassandra]

Not sure I followed any of that. The system has worked perfectly for years but in this one case, the VAR says it didn't? Anyway, a couple of points:

0.5 cm margin of error? Don't tell Liverpool :)

And

I'm not a fan of CGI representations of goal line incidents and offsides. Show the actual images that are used. CGI just confuses cute graphics with accuracy.

The images, and the underlying calculations are based on information from a number of cameras so no one camera shows the whole picture - hence cgi. Sony and City are in a partnership to produce more 3D images - which, managed properly, give more realistic view of players’ positions. It doesn’t cure the underlying difficulties of the way the laws are written, and interpreted by referees.

 

[Dodge]

Not in the VAR booth anyway. They just give instructions through off-site mics. Oops .....

@Dodge says *Hi*

 

[halfcenturyup]

The images, and the underlying calculations are based on information from a number of cameras so no one camera shows the whole picture - hence cgi. Sony and City are in a partnership to produce more 3D images - which, managed properly, give more realistic view of players’ positions. It doesn’t cure the underlying difficulties of the way the laws are written, and interpreted by referees.

That's fair enough. I don't really have a problem with GLT. It's either over the line a mm or it's not and a ball is a ball is a ball, and maybe CGI is the best way to represent that.

Offside on the other hand is a whole other ball game.

I am thinking the powers that be are a bit giddy with how GLT has been accepted and have tried to handle offside in the same way. Not sure you can tbh. Meaning I am pretty sure you can't.