Nick
Administrator
Again, what happens when a player drags it back and then forwards with their foot always in contact with the ball?
If they change the rule to the moment when the ball leaves the passing player’s foot, 9 times out of 10 it will disadvantage the attacking side. On this occasion the existing policy ruined our day though.
Yep that’s why I think it needs clarifying in the laws for that exact reason.If they change the rule to the moment when the ball leaves the passing player’s foot, 9 times out of 10 it will disadvantage the attacking side. On this occasion the existing policy ruined our day though.
It’s just crap I’ve asked a number of referees who have run the line locally and the decision is made from when the ball is released. It’s so annoying that they followed the normal var protocol that didn’t fit at all with what was happening in front of themAgain, what happens when a player drags it back and then forwards with their foot always in contact with the ball?
Last night moved me onHow does this work?
At what point does the inconsistency get questioned?
Last night moved me on
Collins and Bobby gifting them the winner when we were on top just reminded me this is a game and those involved even at a rally high level aren’t perfect
Just moved me onWhat's that got to do with it?
What a farce
It's nuts.Otis is right. The game wasn’t supposed to have this level of detail unless it’s where the ball is really as in has it crossed a line. Otherwise with moving players and the like you’ve got to give benefit to the attacker if they’re not obviously off. An error of a couple of cm isn’t clear and obvious in anyone’s book IMO.
Agree, and then things like this don’t get checkedIt's nuts.
I believe in the concept of VAR and do feel that it could be for the greater good, but watching that clip, they have created a monster.
Absolutely ridiculous the petty levels they have brought it down to and worse of all, they have done so using a low level technology at hand that simply isn't up to the job.
I would have laughed at that Spurs clip if it hadn't been so utterly ludicrous and jaw-droppingly insane.
What immediately comes to mind, is the speed at which this bureaucracy takes place; no time to reason, to process, to make the squiggly lines less shit and wonky.What a farce
This is why you need a big fat margin of error.Sympathise with them because they are being asked to do so much & everything about it is subjective & imo unnecessary.
Look at the way they just guess where to put the lines for the offside too. I don't think people realise there is absolutely zero science behind it, just total guesswork using poor framerate cameras & terrible angles.
Again brings into question the line appearing to go through Wan-Bissaka's boot which we're seemingly never going to get an answer for.
I make you right, the argument against is always "offside is black and white, you're either offside or your onside".Otis is right. The game wasn’t supposed to have this level of detail unless it’s where the ball is really as in has it crossed a line. Otherwise with moving players and the like you’ve got to give benefit to the attacker if they’re not obviously off. An error of a couple of cm isn’t clear and obvious in anyone’s book IMO.
Maybe a tennis style system would be better , where a team gets 1/2 calls against a referee or linesman decision per game to use VAR
VAR in its current form can't stay
It's nuts.
I believe in the concept of VAR and do feel that it could be for the greater good, but watching that clip, they have created a monster.
Absolutely ridiculous the petty levels they have brought it down to and worse of all, they have done so using a low level technology at hand that simply isn't up to the job.
I would have laughed at that Spurs clip if it hadn't been so utterly ludicrous and jaw-droppingly insane.
As someone who supports VAR in principle, I find this 5 minute conversation completely bonkers and unacceptable. They are playing around with centimeters when the lines drawn for offside should be a foot wide, with any overlap meaning onside. Give them 20 seconds max to announce a decision, if it's not clearly offside in that time it's fine.What a farce
Been a lot of talk about frame rates, which is 100% a problem because the maths simply doesn't support the level of accuracy they're applying.There are so many variables, and like you say, the guesswork to determine the frame and the body part are so basic. The Chelsea offside and ours are to close to call, inconclusive.
Be manipulated by the team's,I mean not literally, no form of alteration will work,bin it?Maybe a tennis style system would be better , where a team gets 1/2 calls against a referee or linesman decision per game to use VAR
VAR in its current form can't stay
Agree 100%Yeah there’s definitely a play for replays in the game. Modern football is well covered enough. I like the idea of giving teams one or two requests a game, but I’d have the ref going to the sidelines to review the footage, not sending a request to some people in a portacabin miles away.
Not sure how you could work this in football but in ice hockey if you challenge and you're wrong your team gets a penalty - which means you're a player short for 2 minutes. End result is teams don't challenge just because they hope something will be found, they are 99% certain any challenge is going to be successful- Each team gets two challenges a game
No just bin it off and go back to blaming the ref!So “VAR” done right:
- Each team gets two challenges a game
- Ref can request footage review at any time he’s not sure
- Min 4 x 240fps cameras recording, perhaps an assistant video guy who can quickly get different views/slow mo’s to the ref.
- 30 sec review at most
- Ref watches on monitor at pitch side
- Goes with his best judgement after review
- Offside law modified to give attacker margin of error
- Goal line tech remains/expanded for all edges of the pitch if possible
Would most back that?
On the one the seem to not take the fame where the player first makes contact with the ball?What a farce
I’d be happy with goal line technology and that’s it.So “VAR” done right:
- Each team gets two challenges a game
- Ref can request footage review at any time he’s not sure
- Min 4 x 240fps cameras recording, perhaps an assistant video guy who can quickly get different views/slow mo’s to the ref.
- 30 sec review at most
- Ref watches on monitor at pitch side
- Goes with his best judgement after review
- Offside law modified to give attacker margin of error
- Goal line tech remains/expanded for all edges of the pitch if possible
Would most back that?
nah, it needs to be there but for actual fuck ups, say like the Leeds goal against Boro.I’d be happy with goal line technology and that’s it.
If they’re overly blatant then fair enough but I wouldn’t have it in it current form, it’s shit.nah, it needs to be there but for actual fuck ups, say like the Leeds goal against Boro.
Absolutely not. Slows down the game, encourages more tactical/cynical stoppages, gives a new advantage to bigger/wealthier teams, and exposes the ref to yet another genre of partisan criticism (“They deliberately took more than/less than 30 seconds” etc etc)So “VAR” done right:
- Each team gets two challenges a game
- Ref can request footage review at any time he’s not sure
- Min 4 x 240fps cameras recording, perhaps an assistant video guy who can quickly get different views/slow mo’s to the ref.
- 30 sec review at most
- Ref watches on monitor at pitch side
- Goes with his best judgement after review
- Offside law modified to give attacker margin of error
- Goal line tech remains/expanded for all edges of the pitch if possible
Would most back that?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?