If we conceded a goal like that, I’d probably argue it was offside.An appeal won't get us anywhere, we just have to let it go.
VAR should have no place whatsoever in the game though.
It was given.Savage says without var the goal is given
Yeah, we should do that and we can all stand in line, but have the line just ever so slightly wonky.There should be an anti VAR day next season where fans from all teams boycott by not attending the scheduled games.
VAR is so hated by the majority of fans surely one day off would be worth it.
Let’s pick a day and get the word out
Yeah I agree, the thing that I hate the most is that it will eventually kill off emotion during the game.If we conceded a goal like that, I’d probably argue it was offside.
The issue is the implementation not so much the concept. VAR should be referred to when the referee and is his team believes there could be an infringement. Only in niche instances (e.g. violent conduct) should VAR flag something to the ref. In this case, everyone believed that is was a goal because the Man U players collapsed rather than protesting.
It’s wrong that the referee can be essentially overturned by some bureaucrat in the box. If the ref looked at a screen of the incident and decide ‘offside’, I could live with that more than him being told the answer.
Emphasis on the ‘assistant’, atm it is king. When VAR refers something to the ref, it is unduly influencing the referee’s decision making process. In contrast, in rugby and other sports, the officials use the technology to decide on a call.VAR = video assistant referee, not the overall arbiter of any decision.
It’s gone way past what it was intended for.
What’s the difference? Deemed implies subjectivity.Apparently the offside is judged from when the pass is deemed to have been played, not when the ball has left the foot
I think the final call should be that of the referee and they should be the ones reviewing the footage at the side of the pitch.Emphasis on the ‘assistant’, atm it is king. When VAR refers something to the ref, it is unduly influencing the referee’s decision making process. In contrast, in rugby and other sports, the officials use the technology to decide on a call.
Is VAR under as much scrutiny in other countries? I genuinely believe it’s the English FA that has absolutely botched VAR’s implementation.
Surely the referee’s themselves are against a system that makes them more or less irrelevant.
Is that the calculated margin of error or a guesstimate?The margin of error is around 15cm when you factor in frame rates, speed of players and speed on the ball. But you also can't reliably draw lines based on something in the air like a shoulder so that adds something else in.
Which brings us back to clear and obvious. Nobody would have an issue with VAR if it was only being used to stop the massive errors.
Agreed.I think the final call should be that of the referee and they should be the ones reviewing the footage at the side of the pitch.
Agree 100%.Agreed.
To use rugby as an example, the phrase ‘clear and obvious’ actually means something. In my view, I’m sure in that context, a rugby referee would straight up say that the offside is not ‘clear and obvious’ because of the things mentioned earlier about frame speeds and what not. Wright certainly hadn’t gained an advantage either as he received the ball behind the last man.
This is what VAR actually used on the day. Under the current rules, this is offside.
I agree that the use of VAR is problematic, but it was the correct interpretation of the current regulations:-
Exactly. VAR can work, but it certainly isn't working they way they are implementing it. It's become ridiculous.VAR = video assistant referee, not the overall arbiter of any decision.
It’s gone way past what it was intended for.
Because its impossible to know when O Hare released the ball, its a split second desicion which even a computer wouldn't know, it's inconclusive and should of been givenI was ready to call you all crackpots but the more I see it, the more I'm actually not sure it was off...
Yep. Was fine this morning. Feel a bit sick now.Because its impossible to know when O Hare released the ball, its a split second desicion which even a computer wouldn't know, it's inconclusive and should of been given
the FA have too much time on their handsVAR fan account
Was that in the past I am sure !It was shit, Haji gained nothing from whatever marginal millimetre he was ahead as AWB was running back and Haji was side on.
I honestly don't know why they don't say there has to be clear daylight between last man and striker for offside. Any part is level it's on side. Make it the same rules as when a ball is checked to see if it has crossed the line... the whole of the ball has to be over the whole of the line. The whole of the man is passed the whole of the defender. Would clear stuff up surely? At the very least it would mean more goals. Football is an entertainment why are they hell-bent on stubbing out goals for bullshit like today
Calculate margin of error it should beIs that the calculated margin of error or a guesstimate?
I don’t think it didJust to throw something else in there. Just listened to the commentary and they say it took a deflection on the way through. So is that even the right frame?
Yep I think it’s the wrong frameI was ready to call you all crackpots but the more I see it, the more I'm actually not sure it was off...
Just to throw something else in there. Just listened to the commentary and they say it took a deflection on the way through. So is that even the right frame?
It looks convincing but how do we know those lines are correct, calibrated and not suffering from parallax error?This is what VAR actually used on the day. Under the current rules, this is offside.
I agree that the use of VAR is problematic, but it was the correct interpretation of the current regulations:-
It looks convincing but how do we know those lines are correct, calibrated and not suffering from parallax error?
Nothing it means nothing, it's absolute bullshit.What does that even mean?
ThisIf we conceded a goal like that, I’d probably argue it was offside.
The issue is the implementation not so much the concept. VAR should be referred to when the referee and is his team believes there could be an infringement. Only in niche instances (e.g. violent conduct) should VAR flag something to the ref. In this case, everyone believed that is was a goal because the Man U players collapsed rather than protesting.
It’s wrong that the referee can be essentially overturned by some bureaucrat in the box. If the ref looked at a screen of the incident and decide ‘offside’, I could live with that more than him being told the answer.
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?