The problem with that is a lot of decisions will still be incorrect and plenty of people, having seen tons of replays, will say it was clear and obvious to them immediately.
Other forum meltdown watch
- Thread starter Woland
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
I also doubt those with a financial stake in VAR ('coz you can bet that's what/who is really driving all this) would wear it. because people would then be asking "What does VAR actually add?", would be coming up with the right answer and would start agitating properly for its abolition.
What was Wenger's suggestion? I thought I heard he said that it should only be offside if the part of the body that scored the goal (head, left foot, right foot, armpit) is offside. If so, what about if the offside is against someone other than the ultimate goal scorer?
I firmly agree with both of those points, but I'm very happy about how upset they make everyone, especially as we're winning everything
I'm not sure how you use VAR for offside and not have it down to the millimetre?
As soon as you introduce cameras into the decision making process for offside, it will always come down to the last millimetre.
If you do as some people suggest and allow for a few cm tolerance then the decision just moves from "was he 1mm offside?" to "was he a few cm and 1 mm offside?"
If you say VAR should only be used to overturn a "clear and obvious" offside error, then the argument becomes one of what constitutes "clear and obvious" and all the subjectivity, that VAR was supposed to remove, returns.
I think the VAR guy should have to look at the screen through a cloudy old mirror in smoke filled room full of sloths on crystal meth. If he can't see a clear and obvious error within 1.5 seconds in that room then the game should just carry on. It's the only way.
Is it him or the sloths on meth?
The sloths. Obviously.
Yep. As most commentators are saying, and indeed Klopp too (who had no argument with Firmino's armpit being offside) if you are offside, even by a mm, then you are offside, no argument. I heard a better suggestion recently though, only taking feet into consideration so no armpits, heads bent forward or any other body part which can score goals. That would be clearer, quicker and in my mind at least, fairer.
Hopefully not being wooshed here but the whole VAR line thing is just a gimmick. To work out if someone is offside to the millimeter you'd need camera frame rates beyond anything we have currently; not just to draw those stupid lines but also to nail the exact frame in which the forward pass was made. Even then it is where to call the frame; first contact, full impact, ball acceleration.
Arsene Wenger's idea is just a rule/interpretation change, it doesn't resolve the issue around judging the rule/interpretation which is the half the current problem, nor does it solve the speed at which the judgement is made which is the other half
Apart from no TV system in the world can detect 'to the mm'. You can freeze any random frame in a video stream and make the assessment but you cant be sure that (a) that is the frame 100% linked to the forward pass being instigated and (b) the time between frames allows considerable movement of players in both directions.
Well there is a system but it's not in place for the PL - FFF mentioned this in an earlier debate. So yes quite right there is that too - however there has to be a cut-off somewhere and until technology catches up what we have is still miles better (excuse the pun) than what we had before ... relying on human officials, regardless of what some troglodytes feel about it.
They need to drop the clear and obvious nonsense and just go with right or wrong. But what’s the point if the dopes in the video room are getting decisions completely wrong.
i think everyone can stomach the way VAR is currently applied for offside but all the other issues on top are testing the patience of fans.
i think everyone can stomach the way VAR is currently applied for offside but all the other issues on top are testing the patience of fans.
I think I'd probably accept this flawed 'science' and 'fact' if there were some element of tolerance thrown in. What I really hate is that it is being presented as FACT and even the TV studio presenters seem to be unaware of how arbitrary it is. In other words use the tech we have to say it is 'clear and obvious' if it is within the tolerance of the tech to assess which at 120 fps is about 7 cm (3 inchs).
Offside should be determined in the VAR room. Fouls and other more subjective calls should be pitchside review.
Shouldn't require clear and obvious ERROR but there should be sufficiently clear evidence to overrule the onfield ruling, otherwise it stands.
There is controversy related to video review in other sports but nothing like the farce that is VAR in the Premier League.
Shouldn't require clear and obvious ERROR but there should be sufficiently clear evidence to overrule the onfield ruling, otherwise it stands.
There is controversy related to video review in other sports but nothing like the farce that is VAR in the Premier League.
The only problem with that is sometimes it’s only clear and obvious from one angle.
It's weird to me how all the pundits think the solution to VAR is to have the ref look at the monitor. What's the idea there? That's even slower than what we have now. The VAR ref are qualified refs too, so what does it matter which qualified ref looks at the screen?
Is the idea that the video refs are too scared to overrule another professional? Personally I've always felt there's a psychological issue with having refs check their own decisions at the side of the pitch. I'm not sure why, but just intuitively I feel that making the journey over to the monitor actually places huge pressure on the ref to reverse his decision. It's almost like just going there acknowledges some doubt, and then it's difficult to slow the momentum towards changing your mind. And, indeed, refs do always seem to reverse the decision once they've gone to check.
I don't think it's an obvious solution at all.
Is the idea that the video refs are too scared to overrule another professional? Personally I've always felt there's a psychological issue with having refs check their own decisions at the side of the pitch. I'm not sure why, but just intuitively I feel that making the journey over to the monitor actually places huge pressure on the ref to reverse his decision. It's almost like just going there acknowledges some doubt, and then it's difficult to slow the momentum towards changing your mind. And, indeed, refs do always seem to reverse the decision once they've gone to check.
I don't think it's an obvious solution at all.
You get rid of the lines, bring back the common sense idea of being level, and have a human being look at it for a maximum of 1 minute or even 30 seconds.
It's not really the issue though, more the fact that it's overruling the referee with the wrong decision, as is often the case. Even is the ref ultimately would have made the same decision, it's then passing the buck to a faceless decision maker so the fans right to be aggrieved with a decision is almost taken away. Its not like it's a single ref who becomes renowned for making the wrong decisions or favouring particular teams. So as tin hat as some of the conspiracy theorists are, something so faceless and behind the scenes is obviously going to always be open to scrutiny if the outcome is this frequently questionable.
It's not just interpretations that are wrong, blatantly obvious errors are happening on almost every match day. And our brilliant season is likely to be forever associated as "that season of VAR controversy".
This.
Var should prompt referee to review possible issues on pitchside monitor, review offsides and otherwise leave the referee to it
There isn't, but it was brought in to make more correct decisions and improve the game. I don't think it's done either of them to be honest. It definitely can be changed into something workable, but they need to get clearer on it. I'd suggest that they stop using it for offside altogether.
- Status
