Pochettino getting criticised but he wasn't wrong

Dinghy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2005
Messages
5,647
Not for offside
And I quote
the "clear and obvious error" consideration within VAR will only be used for subjective decisions -- penalties, fouls, possible red cards. They are decisions which are open to interpretation, and they are also the calls that the VAR can ask the match referee to look at again on his pitchside monitor.

But offside is different. You are offside or you are not. It's a factual decision based on the position of, usually, two players on the pitch. The same goes for the ball going out of play, it is objective and will never be judged on being "a clear and obvious error."
That's all well and good... But we saw yesterday that whilst offside or not might, at one level be a factual decision, the position of the lines drawn and the exact frame to use is entirely subjective and is in fact (worryingly) subject to manipulation.
Why use that exact frame? Why not the previous one? When does a player 'play' the ball? When he first touches it or when it leaves his foot(/head etc)? Which part of the body is used to judge whether a player is in an offside position or not? Where precisely does the arm end and the shoulder begin (if that is to be the position on the body that is/can be used) ? Then if you can objectively decide where the shoulder is, can the position of the shoulder be objectively decided when a player is wearing a non-skin tight shirt on an image that is not particularly well defined?
Much too much grey area here to be stating that it can be stated objectively certain in cases such as this.
 

yiddopaul

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2005
Messages
2,367
Because that was always the rule before.
Well it was, correct. That's because we didn't have the benefit of VAR replays, so we had to use the 'benefit of the doubt'. We do not need to anymore as it's proven. If we are offside, even by just 1cm, then we're offside. It's not harsh, it's the rules being carried out properly. Were it on the other foot, we would all be saying 'that's the rules'.
 

yiddopaul

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2005
Messages
2,367
That's all well and good... But we saw yesterday that whilst offside or not might, at one level be a factual decision, the position of the lines drawn and the exact frame to use is entirely subjective and is in fact (worryingly) subject to manipulation.
Why use that exact frame? Why not the previous one? When does a player 'play' the ball? When he first touches it or when it leaves his foot(/head etc)? Which part of the body is used to judge whether a player is in an offside position or not? Where precisely does the arm end and the shoulder begin (if that is to be the position on the body that is/can be used) ? Then if you can objectively decide where the shoulder is, can the position of the shoulder be objectively decided when a player is wearing a non-skin tight shirt on an image that is not particularly well defined?
Much too much grey area here to be stating that it can be stated objectively certain in cases such as this.
Well it's the most accurate system that exists. 99% of decisions will be correct. How many calls were given against teams incorrectly pre-VAR? This is a good addition to the sport. (IMO of course). Anything that helps get the right result, is welcome.
 

Japhet

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2010
Messages
9,119
I wouldn't criticize Poch for taking Sissoko off. He was sailing close to the wind and the Leicester crowd were howling for a red card and their players were going down easier than cheap hookers. What I would question though is having Wanyama on the bench but no sign of Skipp who looked sharp and hungry in pre season. Sadly, Wanyama is clearly a spent force which makes him a liability.
 

jolsnogross

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 17, 2005
Messages
2,442
But offside is different. You are offside or you are not. It's a factual decision based on the position of, usually, two players on the pitch. The same goes for the ball going out of play, it is objective and will never be judged on being "a clear and obvious error."
But you're not offside if you're level with the 2nd last defender. And the ball isn't out of play if a millimeter of it is still aligned with the touch line. The idea that these things are always clear cut, which you are equating with "objective", is simply not true. A subjective decision on those very marginal calls will be a feature of using a new technology like VAR.

How many times can you look at still images or reruns of a tiny incident and disagree. You're describing this like its goal line technology. It isn't.
 

ernie78

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2012
Messages
3,797
If it takes 3minutes to check then can it really be classed as a “clear and obvious error” by the official? My opinion is no so shouldn’t change the original decision.
 

whitesocks

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2014
Messages
3,181
This part of the article....

“VAR technology isn't advanced enough to know if they have stopped the ball at the exact moment the ball is kicked due to camera frame rates, so there's believed to be 5cm that can't be accounted for either way, rendering the ability to judge such a tight decision where players look level even more difficult to come to an undoubted conclusion.”

If it can’t be accurate then what is the point of it?
Agree. Every measurement has a margin of error. They are still useful, but once you are playing in the margins then it is no longer objective.

The frame with Son supposedly in front of Evans, with the red and blue lines, actually proves nothing. This is not a horse race. We all know Son burns past him.

It seems we just have to take it on faith that was the exact moment the ball was played. I suggest this would have been very hard to determine with that degree of accuracy.
 

sausage

Elongated Member
Joined
May 17, 2018
Messages
1,777
If it takes 3minutes to check then can it really be classed as a “clear and obvious error” by the official? My opinion is no so shouldn’t change the original decision.
Exactly - we've heard all sorts of bullshit about "VAR can't intervene because it wasn't clear and obvious", yet this (and other) scenarios where it's obscure and subjective, VAR suddenly over-rules.


The PL is murdering its own product with such a shonky implementation of something that has otherwise been a success in other competitions.
 

cliff jones

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
2,355
the most talked about problem with VAR is how long it takes. Clearly, Saturday took far too long.

IF they can't spot the margin on a very tight offside call within a minute then get on with the fking game.

When Sterling was eventually called off at Wham on the first weekend by a finger nail I immediately thought this isn't football, WALOB.

And soo typical of the rule making mafia that there will be no decisions overturned as clear and obvious errors, will there- despite there being loads of them already.
 

C0YS

Just another member
Joined
Jul 9, 2007
Messages
8,947
Well it was, correct. That's because we didn't have the benefit of VAR replays, so we had to use the 'benefit of the doubt'. We do not need to anymore as it's proven. If we are offside, even by just 1cm, then we're offside. It's not harsh, it's the rules being carried out properly. Were it on the other foot, we would all be saying 'that's the rules'.
You might be. I wouldn't mate. It was silly for man city at the start of the season it was silly with Chelsea the other day.

Football has laws not rules laws that are interpreted. Understanding why the offside law was written and to serve what purpose is important.

Giving offside for decisions that tight does not only fail to give the attacker and advantage but it also means that attackers can't time their runs properly anymore, because they have no idea if they will be level or not anymore.

Also the double punishment of having momentum taken away and given to the other team is going to change football probably for the worse. Footballers are much more likely to mute their celebrations and fans too. Ive already muted mine.

Personally I'd rather have human error then something that just changes the emotional engagement with football too much.

Ok now we get maybe more accurate decisions but it doesn't seem to get rid of any of the boring controversy and its not going to benefit anyone over human error.

I understand that VAR is here to stay. But it does need to change, because I just turned off the game after the var call, something I don't normally do, because it just took me completely out of the game, and made me a little sick. But I didn't really care for the game after.

Also count how many goals come right after a VAR disallows a goal for the opposite team. There were three this week alone!
 

C0YS

Just another member
Joined
Jul 9, 2007
Messages
8,947
Well it's the most accurate system that exists. 99% of decisions will be correct. How many calls were given against teams incorrectly pre-VAR? This is a good addition to the sport. (IMO of course). Anything that helps get the right result, is welcome.
Considering a study in Spain found 7% of VAR decisions regarding offsides were incorrect (probably because there they actually give the striker the advantage in super close calls and the CL) I'm not even sure about the accuracy.

Similarly the line in which clear and obvious is in the PL is so high we have already seen a lot of penalties not given, which may even not be given originally because the ref now thinks if its tight not to make the call cos VAR will sort it and 'I don't want to make a fool out of myself'.

Ultimately, football rules require interpretation a foul in the PL is different than a foul in serie A. This will always be the case. Its very hard to say that 99% of decisions will be correct, partly because that's not what has been found to be the case in series A, LA liga ect (La liga says 96% of penalty decisions were correct with the help of VAR, but this statistic is misleading because all we know is VAR got it wrong 4% of all given penalties but we dont know how many of those penalties actually required VAR) but also because their is no universally understood idea of what a correct decision is. Because of this fans will always argue that they have been hard done by. Only know it will be some mystical VAR and not the ref.
 

yiddopaul

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2005
Messages
2,367
Considering a study in Spain found 7% of VAR decisions regarding offsides were incorrect (probably because there they actually give the striker the advantage in super close calls and the CL) I'm not even sure about the accuracy.

Similarly the line in which clear and obvious is in the PL is so high we have already seen a lot of penalties not given, which may even not be given originally because the ref now thinks if its tight not to make the call cos VAR will sort it and 'I don't want to make a fool out of myself'.

Ultimately, football rules require interpretation a foul in the PL is different than a foul in serie A. This will always be the case. Its very hard to say that 99% of decisions will be correct, partly because that's not what has been found to be the case in series A, LA liga ect (La liga says 96% of penalty decisions were correct with the help of VAR, but this statistic is misleading because all we know is VAR got it wrong 4% of all given penalties but we dont know how many of those penalties actually required VAR) but also because their is no universally understood idea of what a correct decision is. Because of this fans will always argue that they have been hard done by. Only know it will be some mystical VAR and not the ref.
Well at least VAR hasn't done away with controversy and 'pub chat'! The controversy has just shifted.
 

Daytripper

Active Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2011
Messages
66
We need an independent body to look after VAR, not the same bunch of referees who ref match days. If someone like Kevin Friend is on VAR duty of course he's going to agree with his mate who's the match day referee, even if its the wrong call. If they keep over ruling each referees original decision, its going to make the standard of refing in this country seem even worse than it already is. And as for Saturdays offside decision, no way can that be given as offside. 3 minutes to decide that, and its not even conclusive, if its that tight the advantage needs to be given to the attacker like it always has been.
 

Sir Henry

Facts > Feelings
Joined
Aug 18, 2008
Messages
2,658
The new Mr Tinker Man. He needs to stop this, how the fuck can he ask for consistency from his players when 1, he loves a formation switch every other game, and 2 he makes countless changes nearly every single game. Players will buy into what you say when we win, when we clearly dont, which is every other game, they lose confidence. So do the fans.
 
Top