VAR thread 2022/23

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
waspish said:
It’s because those two grounds don’t have 360 degree cameras!

Theses tight calls though never ever go in favour of the away team and always in favour of the home team!
Click to expand...
If the 360 degree camera thing is true, why don’t they and are they the only grounds without them?
 
GaudinoMotors said:
They are constantly blurring the rules so they can blurr the decisions. It's not rocket science, it's legitimised, organised outcome fixing I'm all for debates and arguments, but anyone thinking this is a good and positive introduction- is clearly an idiot.
Click to expand...
Dodgy bastards.
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
Offside is a factual decision.

How does your logic apply to Rashford’s goal? It was a marginal decision that went for the rags and simultaneously against the dippers.
Click to expand...
Marginal decisions are SUBJECTIVE, not factual.

There is currently no way to tell the exact frame the ball was passed, and the camera frame rate is so slow that there can be >20cm difference frame-to-fame. It's a GUESS.
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
Because they were both marginal decisions.

Thats literally all they have in common.
Click to expand...
But the marginal decisions always seem to favour the favourite 2.
Can you recall a marginal decision going against Liverpool? I cant
Conte said last night that England need to learn how to use Var ! How many years has it been in and we still, in his opinion, don't know how to use it.
 
Blue Mist said:
But the marginal decisions always seem to favour the favourite 2.
Can you recall a marginal decision going against Liverpool? I cant
Conte said last night that England need to learn how to use Var ! How many years has it been in and we still, in his opinion, don't know how to use it.
Click to expand...
Apart from the Rashford one, which was like Schrodinger’s decision. The scousers were on the “wrong” end of that one and the “right” end of the Isak one.
 
Multi billion pound industry using 50 quid cameras resulting in subjective decisions.

It's guess work when the pass was made, even more so when running at a paltry 50fps.
 
Suggestion - Surely it would be very easy for tech to solve this: We know where all of the players are due to the tags they wear in the shirts and we know where the ball is (fit a tiny rfID tag in the centre of each ball. Job done - offside alerts ref in less than a second.
It would also sort out any incorrect calls on the ball going out of play too.
 
cheekybids said:
I think the Rashford goal brought into light a new “it’s within tolerance” that many of us had never heard. This looked closer.

It’s gone from factual to err not quite factual & back to factual.
Click to expand...
This is exactly what I have been trying to say but some on here don't want to accept that offsides are not "factual" How can you explain that the rashford goal was given but the Isak one was disallowed. Of the 2 the Isak goal seems more legitimate. All this "tolerance" and thicker/thinner/red/blue/green lines (take your pick) suggest to me that they can get the outcome that suits VAR. The sooner this bunch are miked up or replaced by robots the better!
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
That isn’t true. They are factual based on the cameras they work with.
Click to expand...
I have already explained why the way offside is determined by VAR is not “factual”.

Two people, assessing the same incident, using the current system, with it’s many limitations, can arrive at two different determinations (offside/onside).

That, by it’s very nature, means it is a subjective decision, regardless of your stance on whether VAR is or is not used to manipulate match outcomes.

Again, the “fact” of whether the player was offside or onside exists. But that is unfortunately independent of the subjective determination made by VAR.

This is not a matter of opinion; it is—ironically—a fact, so I am not sure why people are still trying to claim that VAR offside determinations are factual.
 
SebastianBlue said:
I have already explained why the way offside is determined by VAR is not “factual”.

Two people, assessing the same incident, using the current system, with it’s many limitations, can arrive at two different determinations (offside/onside).

That, by it’s very nature, means it is a subjective decision.

Again, the “fact” of whether the player was offside or onside exists. But that is unfortunately independent of the subjective determination made by VAR.

This is not a matter of opinion; it is—ironically—a fact.
Click to expand...
Perfectly put!
 
Blue Mist said:
But the marginal decisions always seem to favour the favourite 2.
Can you recall a marginal decision going against Liverpool? I cant
Conte said last night that England need to learn how to use Var ! How many years has it been in and we still, in his opinion, don't know how to use it.
Click to expand...
Conte being a bit naive - We've learnt how to use it alright.
 
SebastianBlue said:
I have already explained why the way offside is determined by VAR is not “factual”.

Two people, assessing the same incident, using the current system, with it’s many limitations, can arrive at two different determinations (offside/onside).

That, by it’s very nature, means it is a subjective decision, regardless of your stance on whether VAR is or is not used to manipulate match outcomes.

Again, the “fact” of whether the player was offside or onside exists. But that is unfortunately independent of the subjective determination made by VAR.

This is not a matter of opinion; it is—ironically—a fact, so I am not sure why people are still trying to claim that VAR offside determinations are factual.
Click to expand...
Use a sledgehammer, it might penetrate better.
 
bluealf said:
Use a sledgehammer, it might penetrate better.
Click to expand...

FavoriteSkinnyAntipodesgreenparakeet-size_restricted.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top