Spurs and VAR

Mycroft Jones · Oct 3, 2023

Shanks said:
Non-biased aside, it was clearly onside.

I did say to my 3 Liverpool supporting mates at the time, that we got away with it , and that they get the rub of the green all the time, but hey ho.

needs sorting though, absolutely no idea how they do it, the World Cup version of VAR would be the one though, fully automated, take the human element away from those decisions entirely.

only reason why the FA couldn’t have bought it this summer is either cost or ego though.

The issue I have with this reasoned response is that I'm totally biased in this case due to my utter hatred of Liverpool FC. That hatred started in September 1978 and has only festered and grown in the years since.

thebenjamin · Oct 3, 2023

Shanks said:
Is that really the reason?

Yes I think so. The PL has a buffer so goals aren't disallowed for a fraction, which seems like a good thing to me. With the automated offsides there is no wiggle room.

JacoZA · Oct 3, 2023

Shanks said:
It would boggle more of Liverpool were one of the votes against it, which I suspect they were considering how much they have benefited from VAR

I tried to find a list of which clubs were against it, but I could only find out that 'the majority' were. So, who knows?

fridgemagnet · Oct 3, 2023

I can't think where else to ask this does VAR take camera paralaxing into account when making offside decisions?

Led's Zeppelin · Oct 3, 2023

fridgemagnet said:
I can't think where else to ask this does VAR take camera paralaxing into account when making offside decisions?

They make no reference to it on their website. But I should think they must- it’s not hard with digital cameras to simple set the nodal point of the lens above the axis of the mount.

More troublesome is defining the exact moment at which to register the “kick”.

It’s never going to be 100% accurate and I wonder why we need it to be.

The whole point of the law is to prevent unfair advantage.

All this scientific precision is making us forget why we have an offside law in the first place.

It's bollocks to think a machine can adjudicate on a matter of fairness, so we invent specious “scientific” measures which really have fuck all to do with the reality of the game of football, and what’s fair and what’s cheating.

vegassd · Oct 3, 2023

LeSoupeKitchen said:
This is actually a good example of why VAR is good, it was just a f*** up which won't happen again as there will be a procedural change

This is the saving grace of the whole situation... VAR can be improved upon in stages.

Had this offside decision been made in "the good old days" then Diaz would have been flagged offside when the ball is played through. Sky would have the replays on TV within seconds, and fans/pundits/journalists would be complaining about the "best league in the world living in the dark ages".

VAR will never be perfect but I think it will improve over time. The on-pitch referees are not going to improve over time.

fridgemagnet · Oct 3, 2023

Led's Zeppelin said:
They make no reference to it on their website. But I should think they must- it’s not hard with digital cameras to simple set the nodal point of the lens above the axis of the mount.

More troublesome is defining the exact moment at which to register the “kick”.

It’s never going to be 100% accurate and I wonder why we need it to be.

The whole point of the law is to prevent unfair advantage.

All this scientific precision is making us forget why we have an offside law in the first place.

It's bollocks to think a machine can adjudicate on a matter of fairness, so we invent specious “scientific” measures which really have fuck all to do with the reality of the game of football, and what’s fair and what’s cheating.

Thanks for that and I agree with you.

Hazelton · Oct 3, 2023

They need to scrap VAR and go back to basics with the rules. It's done no real good since it was introduced, still a case of you win some and lose some and still endless debate over a fair amount of the verdicts. The wait after a goal is scored kills the atmosphere and moment, the amount of gametime spent paused kills momentum, the added time increases risk of injury etc. All so another ref can use human judgement that will still be disagreed with or debated. Get rid, it doesn't benefit the game.

Either that or else I don't see why they can't just have a screen on the touchline that the ref can use if unsure. Just him, at his discretion, double checking his own decisions. This current format is far too complicated and has too many people involved.

fridgemagnet · Oct 3, 2023

I've said before and I still maintain it should just be like or similar to the review system in cricket; each side has say 3 reviews per match or half (max 1 minute per review so max 6 minutes per match or whatever)
If your defender is adamant the opponent dived for a pen or a tackle was clean they speak to their on field captain only he can approach the ref asks him for a video review, ref goes to a screen alone either decision stands or is amended; if the appeal is "frivolous" the team loses one of it's allotted remaining reviews, if the decision to overturn is successful they keep their number of appeals. If at any point they start surround officials they lose reviews

That way it's on the players to be sure before appealing. Harassment officials stops. Match officials are given "room" to make an error (we're all human at the end of the day) knowing there is a mechanism to correct it during a match, if it comes down to "clear and obvious" if you have to zoom in to the minutest pixel or it takes longer than 30-60 seconds it's not "clear and obvious"

Anyhooo...

mil1lion · Oct 3, 2023

Hazelton said:
They need to scrap VAR and go back to basics with the rules. It's done no real good since it was introduced, still a case of you win some and lose some and still endless debate over a fair amount of the verdicts. The wait after a goal is scored kills the atmosphere and moment, the amount of gametime spent paused kills momentum, the added time increases risk of injury etc. All so another ref can use human judgement that will still be disagreed with or debated. Get rid, it doesn't benefit the game.

Either that or else I don't see why they can't just have a screen on the touchline that the ref can use if unsure. Just him, at his discretion, double checking his own decisions. This current format is far too complicated and has too many people involved.

VAR should be used for clear errors only I think. There's definitely a case for it as some decisions have clearly been rectified by it. It's always been worse when you watch on TV a bad decision made and can see on the replay it was wrong. This is where VAR should intervene to correct clear errors. It doesn't need to micro manage the game. Until the tech catches up enough to do it seamlessly in game.

aliyid · Oct 3, 2023

thebenjamin said:
Yes I think so. The PL has a buffer so goals aren't disallowed for a fraction, which seems like a good thing to me. With the automated offsides there is no wiggle room.

But surely that's an added benefit of an automated system that if you want to build in a tolerance level then you can and it will consistently be applied across all offside calls. It would be a very simple addition to make it so that any offside calls less than 10cm are considered to be level and deemed to be onside. You even see this in tennis where the automated system flashes up with "close call"

The tolerance level when lining up by eye is far more open to error with manual addition of lines compounded by obscured views.

Yiddo100 · Oct 3, 2023

chaotic as you like, the fact it was the replay guy who picked it up first and seemingly none of the officials isn’t great.

Led's Zeppelin · Oct 3, 2023

aliyid said:
But surely that's an added benefit of an automated system that if you want to build in a tolerance level then you can and it will consistently be applied across all offside calls. It would be a very simple addition to make it so that any offside calls less than 10cm are considered to be level and deemed to be onside. You even see this in tennis where the automated system flashes up with "close call"

The tolerance level when lining up by eye is far more open to error with manual addition of lines compounded by obscured views.

But then we'll end up with a 10cm line and the issue will be exactly the same, just 10cm further from where it would have been. It'll still come down to a hair's breadth numerous yards away from the player with the ball, and no one will persuade me that represents a materially unfair advantage.

I'd much rather rely on human judgement, complete with the possibility of error, deciding whether it was materially offside or not.

neilp · Oct 3, 2023

Yiddo100 said:
chaotic as you like, the fact it was the replay guy who picked it up first and seemingly none of the officials isn’t great.

Chaotic yes, but it’s clearly a mistake rather than the feared conspiracy.

Yiddo100 · Oct 3, 2023

neilp said:
Chaotic yes, but it’s clearly a mistake rather than the feared conspiracy.

That was only coming from some of the liverpool fans though, who as expected reacted in a calm and normal manner.

luRRka · Oct 3, 2023

vegassd said:
This is the saving grace of the whole situation... VAR can be improved upon in stages.

Had this offside decision been made in "the good old days" then Diaz would have been flagged offside when the ball is played through. Sky would have the replays on TV within seconds, and fans/pundits/journalists would be complaining about the "best league in the world living in the dark ages".

VAR will never be perfect but I think it will improve over time. The on-pitch referees are not going to improve over time.

But in the "good old days" he would have been flagged offside 35 yards from goal and wouldn't have got the shot off. So no one would know if he scored or not, it would just go down as a slight chance and people would get on with it.

The fact the flag stays down and the goal is scored is what causes the controversy.

Overall I agree though and think as long as it's used properly its good. Hate not being able to celebrate a goal though

Tucker · Oct 3, 2023

neilp said:
Chaotic yes, but it’s clearly a mistake rather than the feared conspiracy.

This kind of transparency is a good thing.

Matrix · Oct 3, 2023

Sky hamming it up….they want the games to be wound back up to 2 mins earlier. Say if there’s a goal in that 1 min that they investigate.
Pundits all full of ideas but never think about the intricacies.

Matrix · Oct 3, 2023

Who would wanna be a ref with all this noise.

LeSoupeKitchen · Oct 3, 2023

Yiddo100 said:
chaotic as you like, the fact it was the replay guy who picked it up first and seemingly none of the officials isn’t great.

The complete lack of initiative of referees is depressing.

When you've f***ed up that badly then they should have the common sense to know it's better to break a rule to correct the decision than rigidly obey the law.

Forums

What's new

Matches

Sportsbook

Members

Spurs and VAR

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Can't Re Member

The ghost of Johnny Cash

Well-Known Member

Unknown Member

Well-Known Member

This is the place to be

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Can't Re Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Shitehawk

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads