Player Watch Player watch: Son Heung-min

Sandros Shiny Head

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2013
Messages
4,715
The way the ref changed his mind just shows how bad play acting/diving is in football these days. He actually had to see a guys foot facing the wrong way up close to know this one actually wasn’t taking the piss
 

Lighty64

PC huh what a joke, avatar changed
Joined
Aug 24, 2010
Messages
9,667
Pleased he won't have a suspension hanging around his neck. Witnessing what happened is bad enough but to then be punished in that way was salt in the wound.
I agree. just not sure we will see Son for a few weeks as he was in a right mess
 

MK Yid

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
969
[

Is the system accurate to 1CM? My understanding was that the frame rates used means they can't guarantee that level of accuracy.
No it isn’t. But having best available picture of when ball is kicked is infinitely better than having an assistant referee that could be 80 yards away having to decide at the exact millisecond the ball was kicked, was that very marginally onside or not. And why move line to say an arbitrary 15cm is offside, you will just get arguments if VAR says was 14.95cm or 15.05 cm (plus how could that be enacted into law and grass roots level play to that ?)
For me someone being a few millimetres offside isn’t the main issue, if it can be demonstrated clearly, love them when work for us, think it is most corrupt system in world when they go against, it is the knee or armpit being adjudged offside by that distance that is the bit that is hardest to swallow, with those arbitrary lines that are drawn from the body part. Get rid of the need for that with just applying the feet, would solve majority of the issues with it.
 
Last edited:

guernman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2013
Messages
256
One element of VAR I have not seen mentioned is the creation of a grey area where penalties which would probably have been given before VAR now no longer are. Son's penalty appeal against Everton is a point in case. I think it was hard to call, but probably would have been given last season. Now however, if the ref is not certain he leaves it to VAR and gives nothing, but then VAR won't overturn the decision if it is borderline as it is not a clear and obvious error.

This was also the case when Jan should have blatantly given a penalty away recently (can't remember the match but everyone will know the action I mean as it was blatant). Again the ref left the decision for review but VAR couldn't overturn it as an obvious error. It's a bit mad but I think the very situations which VAR was supposed to be brought in for are the very ones which will slip between the gaps with the way the system is currently being implemented as neither ref dares make the call...
 

MK Yid

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
969
One element of VAR I have not seen mentioned is the creation of a grey area where penalties which would probably have been given before VAR now no longer are. Son's penalty appeal against Everton is a point in case. I think it was hard to call, but probably would have been given last season. Now however, if the ref is not certain he leaves it to VAR and gives nothing, but then VAR won't overturn the decision if it is borderline as it is not a clear and obvious error.

This was also the case when Jan should have blatantly given a penalty away recently (can't remember the match but everyone will know the action I mean as it was blatant). Again the ref left the decision for review but VAR couldn't overturn it as an obvious error. It's a bit mad but I think the very situations which VAR was supposed to be brought in for are the very ones which will slip between the gaps with the way the system is currently being implemented as neither ref dares make the call...
I think there is an element of truth to that happening, especially early in season, but the Son one is poor example to give, don’t think that would be given this season or any really, (Just wasn’t a penalty in my view, or view of anybody I have heard or seen apart from some people on Spurs forums).
 
Last edited:

TEESSIDE1

Wedding booked :D
Joined
Jul 3, 2006
Messages
11,838
I think there is an element of truth to that happening, especially early in season, but the Son one is poor example to give, don’t think that would be given this season or any really, (Just wasn’t a penalty in my view, or view of anybody I have heard or seen apart from some people on Spurs forums)
one of the ex refs said Son wasn’t in control of the ball therefore it wasn’t a pen but if you apply that logic then walking up to a random player in the penalty area and kicking him in the nuts also wouldn’t be a pen lol
 

MK Yid

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
969
one of the ex refs said Son wasn’t in control of the ball therefore it wasn’t a pen but if you apply that logic then walking up to a random player in the penalty area and kicking him in the nuts also wouldn’t be a pen lol
I just felt the contact was minimal, he realised he had wasted good opportunity, so then just made a blatant dive to try and win one, and didn’t fool anyone apart from a few Spurs fans, the same ones that would argue vehemently if it was given against us.
 
Last edited:

DannyNZ

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 3, 2017
Messages
262
The decision didn't cost us 2 points, we are more than capable of costing ourselves 2 points at the moment!
It might be argued the decision to keep Eriksen on the pitch had more to do with not closing out the game.
 

1966

Neutral England supporter
Joined
Nov 5, 2019
Messages
86
Great news. Really wouldn't think serving it has any less form of guilt for Son. He shouldn't even feel so bad even, it was purely an unfortunate accident.
He's clearly a sensitive guy with a strong conscience. I'd feel pretty shit as well if I accidentally broke someone's leg, regardless of circumstance. It speaks to the character of the man that he took it so harshly.

Intention doesn't really matter because you can trace the cause-and-effect chain back to your own actions in your head and justify guilt to yourself quite easily. In this case, it's probably easier for Son to rationalise his guilt than his innocence in his mind.
 

nailsy

SC Supporter
Joined
Jul 24, 2005
Messages
24,749
No it isn’t. But having best available picture of when ball is kicked is infinitely better than having an assistant referee that could be 80 yards away having to decide at the exact millisecond the ball was kicked, was that very marginally onside or not. And why move line to say an arbitrary 15cm is offside, you will just get arguments if VAR says was 14.95cm or 15.05 cm (plus how could that be enacted into law and grass roots level play to that ?)
For me someone being a few millimetres offside isn’t the main issue, if it can be demonstrated clearly, love them when work for us, think it is most corrupt system in world when they go against, it is the knee or armpit being adjudged offside by that distance that is the bit that is hardest to swallow, with those arbitrary lines that are drawn from the body part. Get rid of the need for that with just applying the feet, would solve majority of the issues with it.
I can understand why they try and judge offsides with any goalscoring part of the body, but it would make it a lot easier if they just used the feet. I'd also suggest that if the offside is so tight that the two lines are touching then benefit of the doubt should go to the attacking team. The decision might go against your team, but people want to see goals in football matches and if the system isn't 100% accurate then let the goal stand.

Do you know at what point they judge the pass to have been made? Is it when the players foot first makes contact with the ball? When it leaves the foot? With the level of accuracy that we've currently got that could be the determining factor in an offside decision, but we never see footage of VAR lining up when the pass was made.
 

cliff jones

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
2,447
I just felt the contact was minimal, he realised he had wasted good opportunity, so then just made a blatant dive to try and win one, and didn’t fool anyone apart from a few Spurs fans, the same ones that would argue vehemently if it was given against us.
no doubt there were two contacts, but he did go to ground after the second when it was easier for him to stand up. Not a blatant dive, IMHO. Did you think the Kane pen v Lascelles should have been given? I would have had no problem at all with something like that being given against us.
 

skiba

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2006
Messages
91
One element of VAR I have not seen mentioned is the creation of a grey area where penalties which would probably have been given before VAR now no longer are. Son's penalty appeal against Everton is a point in case. I think it was hard to call, but probably would have been given last season. Now however, if the ref is not certain he leaves it to VAR and gives nothing, but then VAR won't overturn the decision if it is borderline as it is not a clear and obvious error.

This was also the case when Jan should have blatantly given a penalty away recently (can't remember the match but everyone will know the action I mean as it was blatant). Again the ref left the decision for review but VAR couldn't overturn it as an obvious error. It's a bit mad but I think the very situations which VAR was supposed to be brought in for are the very ones which will slip between the gaps with the way the system is currently being implemented as neither ref dares make the call...
Completely agree with this. I think a lot of the issues and complaints would be solved by just letting the refs look at the pitchside monitors. So many of the calls are subjective and can be argued either way and therefore I get why the VAR refs are reluctant to overturn the decisions of the on field ref. Much easier for the VAR official to say 'I think you might want to look at that again' instead of 'You got that wrong and I'm overturning your decision'.
 

worcestersauce

"I'm no optimist I'm just a prisoner of hope
Joined
Jan 23, 2006
Messages
21,086
I can understand why they try and judge offsides with any goalscoring part of the body, but it would make it a lot easier if they just used the feet. I'd also suggest that if the offside is so tight that the two lines are touching then benefit of the doubt should go to the attacking team. The decision might go against your team, but people want to see goals in football matches and if the system isn't 100% accurate then let the goal stand.

Do you know at what point they judge the pass to have been made? Is it when the players foot first makes contact with the ball? When it leaves the foot? With the level of accuracy that we've currently got that could be the determining factor in an offside decision, but we never see footage of VAR lining up when the pass was made.
Totally agree with you on the lines touching, I've said this before and it is clear and obvious, if everyone knows that will be the case it is over and done with immediately and people will accept it, just like they do when the ball does or doesn't touch the line with goal line technology.
 

MK Yid

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
969
I can understand why they try and judge offsides with any goalscoring part of the body, but it would make it a lot easier if they just used the feet. I'd also suggest that if the offside is so tight that the two lines are touching then benefit of the doubt should go to the attacking team. The decision might go against your team, but people want to see goals in football matches and if the system isn't 100% accurate then let the goal stand.

Do you know at what point they judge the pass to have been made? Is it when the players foot first makes contact with the ball? When it leaves the foot? With the level of accuracy that we've currently got that could be the determining factor in an offside decision, but we never see footage of VAR lining up when the pass was made.
It is meant to be when it leaves the foot, but to be honest the 2 things should happen in unison really, and should be obvious which is the most appropriate frame to use, and I am certainly not for take the most obvious and then also the frame before and the one after and check them all to see if offside, one reason, time, another, why judge an offence on something at a clearly different time (may have not, or already played ball)
 
Last edited:

MK Yid

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
969
Totally agree with you on the lines touching, I've said this before and it is clear and obvious, if everyone knows that will be the case it is over and done with immediately and people will accept it, just like they do when the ball does or doesn't touch the line with goal line technology.
How wide are the lines to be then ?
Lines are only reasonably wide on VAR screen so viewers can see it that way, they could just as easily reduce them to a piece of string size.
However wide you want that line to be, is the tolerance level you want to give to the attacker gaining an unfair advantage,
 

Nicki78

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
255
Completely agree with this. I think a lot of the issues and complaints would be solved by just letting the refs look at the pitchside monitors. So many of the calls are subjective and can be argued either way and therefore I get why the VAR refs are reluctant to overturn the decisions of the on field ref. Much easier for the VAR official to say 'I think you might want to look at that again' instead of 'You got that wrong and I'm overturning your decision'.
100% agree with this and have said it since day one. whilst the world cup not perfect it worked way better than this and seemed quicker too.
 

MK Yid

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
969
no doubt there were two contacts, but he did go to ground after the second when it was easier for him to stand up. Not a blatant dive, IMHO. Did you think the Kane pen v Lascelles should have been given? I would have had no problem at all with something like that being given against us.
Actually I didn’t, thought Kane initiated the contact by making the sideways move away from ball, but can certainly see the argument for the penalty, At top referee level there was apparently roughly a 60:40 split of officials that thought it was correct not to award the penalty, so the decision not to overturn it was right as not clear and obvious, however on flip side if penalty had been given, VAR would not have overturned it either.
 

nailsy

SC Supporter
Joined
Jul 24, 2005
Messages
24,749
How wide are the lines to be then ?
Lines are only reasonably wide on VAR screen so viewers can see it that way, they could just as easily reduce them to a piece of string size.
However wide you want that line to be, is the tolerance level you want to give to the attacker gaining an unfair advantage,
How inaccurate is the system? How far could the ball travel between frames? That's the width of the line.

The offside rule wasn't created to stop attackers being a couple of inches ahead of a defender. It was designed to stop goal hanging. Looking at offsides in such minute detail is harming the sport, especially when the system isn't accurate enough to make the decisions.

And I've just realized that this is the Son thread, not the VAR thread.
 
Top