VAR thread 2022/23

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Trevor Morley's Tache said:
How long have they had to get this right?

It's literally their job. If they are competent to operate VAR in a timely and efficient manner in a game where winning and losing is potentially worth £Millions they shouldn't be anywhere near it.
Click to expand...
Not very. The semi automated offside system has only been used in CL games since the start of this season.
 
The Light Was Yellow Sir said:
But, under the current laws, Kane was clearly offside, once the side on view was shown. Even Wio managed to draw the line to show that. In fact, the new tech gives a simple yes or no to offside and the VAR has to decide the nuance of that. For example, had a spurs player been lying down next to the corner flag, the tech would have flagged him as offside. The VAR would then have ignored that as he clearly wouldn’t have been interfering with play. Kane would, therefore, have been called as offside straight away and the only job the VAR had was to confirm that, based on the other factors in play. The only other factor was whether the defender had deliberately played the ball, which he quite clearly hadn’t, decision should have been done and dusted in 1 minute.
Surely the longer it goes on the more irate the players and managers get because I know that is true of me as a fan.
Click to expand...
He was not clearly offside. The lines are not reliable. Even if he was, you still have the other issues associated with the play. The fact that the defender clearly pushed Kane forward into an offsides position, and the fact that the deflected header appears to have hit the defender's hand.
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
The defender didn't need to make an "intentional" touch of the ball in order for the phase to be reset before VAR was introduced. The law change that you are referencing was a VAR-induced change to the law. Lets not act like that's a legitimate or traditional part of the law. That's wording that was put into the law was done specifically for VAR.

How long will they need to get better acquainted? We heard these same arguments that we need to give them time to work out the kinks 3-4 years ago.
Click to expand...
Whatever is said, your mind is closed. You’ve created an account on this forum and only post in here.

Wording needs clarification as using VAR means they can look forensically at every goal. Even then, different humans still interpret the laws slightly differently. Therefore IFAB are trying to negate that by making the laws clearer.
 
The Light Was Yellow Sir said:
But, under the current laws, Kane was clearly offside, once the side on view was shown. Even Wio managed to draw the line to show that. In fact, the new tech gives a simple yes or no to offside and the VAR has to decide the nuance of that. For example, had a spurs player been lying down next to the corner flag, the tech would have flagged him as offside. The VAR would then have ignored that as he clearly wouldn’t have been interfering with play. Kane would, therefore, have been called as offside straight away and the only job the VAR had was to confirm that, based on the other factors in play. The only other factor was whether the defender had deliberately played the ball, which he quite clearly hadn’t, decision should have been done and dusted in 1 minute.
Surely the longer it goes on the more irate the players and managers get because I know that is true of me as a fan.
Click to expand...
Ferdinand drew a line from a different camera angle, from the middle of the ball.

No one knows what took so long, so we are all speculating.
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
Whatever is said, your mind is closed. You’ve created an account on this forum and only post in here.
Click to expand...
I sure have, but my mind is not closed. I am trying to have a substantive discussion about VAR and why it needs to go. I respect your ability to disagree and argue for VAR. Whether you want VAR to stay or not, there are many areas that we can agree on.
Alan Harper's Tash said:
Wording needs clarification as using VAR means they can look forensically at every goal. Even then, different humans still interpret the laws slightly differently. Therefore IFAB are trying to negate that by making the laws clearer.
Click to expand...
The "clarification" you speak of is a reinterpretation of the laws, not a traditional application of the laws.
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
He was not clearly offside. The lines are not reliable. Even if he was, you still have the other issues associated with the play. The fact that the defender clearly pushed Kane forward into an offsides position, and the fact that the deflected header appears to have hit the defender's hand.
Click to expand...
But they don’t use lines in Europe anymore, they have an semi-automated system. The VAR looks for context and does NOT ’draw lines’.

https://www.uefa.com/insideuefa/new...-european-referees-primed-for-a-new-campaign/
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
I sure have, but my mind is not closed. I am trying to have a substantive discussion about VAR and why it needs to go. I respect your ability to disagree and argue for VAR. Whether you want VAR to stay or not, there are many areas that we can agree on.

The "clarification" you speak of is a reinterpretation of the laws, not a traditional application of the laws.
Click to expand...
Ok, good luck in your quest. I suspect it will be a long and wordy futile one though.
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
What is different or better about "semi-automated" offsides vs how it was done before?
Click to expand...
www.uefa.com

European referees primed for a new campaign

The introduction of Semi-Automated Offside Technology (SAOT) in the UEFA Champions League group stage, clarified offside guidelines and instructions to protect football’s image mark the start of the 2022/23 season for Europe’s top referees.
www.uefa.com
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
Ok, good luck in your quest. I suspect it will be a long and wordy futile one though.
Click to expand...
Well VAR continues to have a long and futile effect on goals being scored. So as it stands, VAR will continue to plague the sport and drive fans mad, making my stance that the system needs to go much easier to articulate than those like yourself trying to argue that VAR should stay. I'd rather be on the side of tradition and normal football than then of trying to argue in support of this sham and detriment to the sport.
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
Well VAR continues to have a long and futile effect on goals being scores. So as it stands, VAR will continue to plague the sport and drive fans mad, making my stance that the system needs to go much easier to articulate than those like yourself trying to argue that VAR should stay. I'd rather be on the side of tradition and normal football than then of trying to argue for VAR.
Click to expand...
It actually allowed more disallowed goals than disallowed awarded goals in the Premier League last season.

It isn’t going away, so for most, it will just be a case of either making peace with it, or constantly being worked up about it.
 
Every week there is a discussion about VAR. While it should not be. Last night again. And anyone saw the outcome on the pitch.
Now what about the fans unable to cheer after a goal. Or the unclear and inconsistent handball decisions. It there a toe or an elbow or a shoelace that makes an offside situation.
Therefore I stick to my point: cancel VAR.

But obviously it won’t go away. It will spoil the beautiful game. So I hope the ones who decide make it work. Like it works for rugby. Or hockey. As it is now it’s simply changing the discussion from referee to VAR.
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
www.uefa.com

European referees primed for a new campaign

The introduction of Semi-Automated Offside Technology (SAOT) in the UEFA Champions League group stage, clarified offside guidelines and instructions to protect football’s image mark the start of the 2022/23 season for Europe’s top referees.
www.uefa.com
Click to expand...
I was asking for you to explain the new process in your own words. It's the same process.

Semi-Automated Offside Technology - ‘Enhancing the flow of the game’​

Semi-Automated Offside Technology (SAOT), used officially for the first time at the recent UEFA Super Cup match between Real Madrid and Eintracht Frankfurt in Helsinki, enables video assistant referee (VAR) teams to determine offside situations quickly and more accurately – "enhancing the flow of the game and the consistency of the decisions," said Rosetti.

If the claim is that semi-automated offside technology enables them to make decisions quickly and more accurately, that just failed didn't it with the extended delay.

IFAB clarifies offside ‘deliberate play/deflection’ guidelines​

Following a number of high-profile situations and based on the expectation that a player who is clearly in an offside position should not become ‘onside’ on all occasions when an opponent moves and touches the ball, football’s lawmakers, the International Football Association Board (IFAB), after discussions with football stakeholders – including UEFA – have clarified the guidelines for distinguishing between ‘deliberate play’ and ‘deflection’.

New guidelines based on the expectation that a player who is clearly in an offside position should not become ‘onside’ on all occasions when an opponent moves and touches the ball?

Kane wasn't "clearly" in an offsides position. For a player to be "clearly" in an offsides position, it would be noticeable with the naked eye in real-time or wouldn't come down to lines needing to be drawn. So again we hear that offsides doesn't need to be clear or obvious, but then their language as it pertains to these guidelines is precisely that. They've created a new expectation that deflections no longer put a "clearly" offsides player onside unless it's deemed to be "deliberate". To reiterate, these clarifications are more than clarifications, they are reinforcements of reinterpretations that were put in for VAR which are in direct conflict with the traditional law as it was written and always applied prior to VAR's introduction.
 
Trevor Morley's Tache said:
2 real options:

1. Fix it.
2. F*ck it off.

Either one needs to happen soon because fans are sick of it in its current state.
Click to expand...
They've had over 4 years to fix it, yet still the same problems persist. It's been given long enough yet it continues to fail with the same problems from 3-4 years ago, It continues to be a blight on the sport and it needs to be removed from the sport. So we can get back to normal football once again. So matches and flow naturally once again. So fans can go back to celebrating goals without having their euphoria interrupted and made to look like fools for wrongly celebrating.
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
I was asking for you to explain the new process in your own words. It's the same process.

Semi-Automated Offside Technology - ‘Enhancing the flow of the game’​

Semi-Automated Offside Technology (SAOT), used officially for the first time at the recent UEFA Super Cup match between Real Madrid and Eintracht Frankfurt in Helsinki, enables video assistant referee (VAR) teams to determine offside situations quickly and more accurately – "enhancing the flow of the game and the consistency of the decisions," said Rosetti.

If the claim is that semi-automated offside technology enables them to make decisions quickly and more accurately, that just failed didn't it with the extended delay.

IFAB clarifies offside ‘deliberate play/deflection’ guidelines​

Following a number of high-profile situations and based on the expectation that a player who is clearly in an offside position should not become ‘onside’ on all occasions when an opponent moves and touches the ball, football’s lawmakers, the International Football Association Board (IFAB), after discussions with football stakeholders – including UEFA – have clarified the guidelines for distinguishing between ‘deliberate play’ and ‘deflection’.

New guidelines based on the expectation that a player who is clearly in an offside position should not become ‘onside’ on all occasions when an opponent moves and touches the ball?

Kane wasn't "clearly" in an offsides position. For a player to be "clearly" in an offsides position, it would be noticeable with the naked eye in real-time or wouldn't come down to lines needing to be drawn. So again we hear that offsides doesn't need to be clear or obvious, but then their language as it pertains to these guidelines is precisely that. They've created a new expectation that deflections no longer put a "clearly" offsides player onside unless it's deemed to be "deliberate". To reiterate, these clarifications are more than clarifications, they are reinforcements of reinterpretations that were put in for VAR which are in direct conflict with the traditional law as it was written and always applied prior to VAR's introduction.
Click to expand...
This isn’t meant as a dig at you, but I can’t be arsed. Good luck in your quest to save football.
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
I was asking for you to explain the new process in your own words. It's the same process.

Semi-Automated Offside Technology - ‘Enhancing the flow of the game’​

Semi-Automated Offside Technology (SAOT), used officially for the first time at the recent UEFA Super Cup match between Real Madrid and Eintracht Frankfurt in Helsinki, enables video assistant referee (VAR) teams to determine offside situations quickly and more accurately – "enhancing the flow of the game and the consistency of the decisions," said Rosetti.

If the claim is that semi-automated offside technology enables them to make decisions quickly and more accurately, that just failed didn't it with the extended delay.

IFAB clarifies offside ‘deliberate play/deflection’ guidelines​

Following a number of high-profile situations and based on the expectation that a player who is clearly in an offside position should not become ‘onside’ on all occasions when an opponent moves and touches the ball, football’s lawmakers, the International Football Association Board (IFAB), after discussions with football stakeholders – including UEFA – have clarified the guidelines for distinguishing between ‘deliberate play’ and ‘deflection’.

New guidelines based on the expectation that a player who is clearly in an offside position should not become ‘onside’ on all occasions when an opponent moves and touches the ball?

Kane wasn't "clearly" in an offsides position. For a player to be "clearly" in an offsides position, it would be noticeable with the naked eye in real-time or wouldn't come down to lines needing to be drawn. So again we hear that offsides doesn't need to be clear or obvious, but then their language as it pertains to these guidelines is precisely that. They've created a new expectation that deflections no longer put a "clearly" offsides player onside unless it's deemed to be "deliberate". To reiterate, these clarifications are more than clarifications, they are reinforcements of reinterpretations that were put in for VAR which are in direct conflict with the traditional law as it was written and always applied prior to VAR's introduction.
Click to expand...
While I can sympathise that there's an argument "clearly" is the wrong word to use, but it doesn't matter at all in this position. That clarification was to deal with situations like the Rodri/Mings incident against Villa.

The clarification is as follows:
-------
‘Deliberate play’ is when a player has control of the ball with the possibility of:

  • passing the ball to a team-mate; or
  • gaining possession of the ball; or
  • clearing the ball (e.g. by kicking or heading it).

If the pass, attempt to gain possession or clearance by the player in control of the ball is inaccurate or unsuccessful, this does not negate the fact that the player ‘deliberately played’ the ball.

The following criteria should be used, as appropriate, as indicators that a player was in control of the ball and, as a result, ‘deliberately played’ the ball:

  • The ball travelled from distance and the player had a clear view of it
  • The ball was not moving quickly
  • The direction of the ball was not unexpected
  • The player had time to coordinate their body movement, i.e. it was not a case of instinctive stretching or jumping, or a movement that achieved limited contact/control
  • A ball moving on the ground is easier to play than a ball in the air
-----------------------
With Kane, I assume the delay was not working out the offside, which would be pretty much instant (assuming the auto system was working), but whether the defender deliberately played the ball.

This is a subjective decision, and given the importance of the goal, I assume there was some debate or even disagreement. Given the above guidelines, I think it's correct that the ball wasn't deliberately played, and so the goal was rightly ruled out, even if it appears harsh. It's ultimately then a simple on/off decision, and they would have know it was off from the start.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top