|
Post by PotterLog on Dec 1, 2020 16:33:29 GMT
I think we should either: 1) Fuck it off completely 2) Change the offside rule so that it's the position of the feet taken into consideration and no other body part. 3) Use a version of Umpire's Call like they do in cricket. Basically, the technology can't be 100% accurate so in cases where the computer images shows that less than 50% of the ball would/might have hit the stumps in the case of an LBW decision, they go with the original decision made by the on-field umpire. The football equivalent would probably be, if you've got to start drawing lines on the pitch, fuck that, just go with what the liner said. 2 wouldn't have that much effect on the problem as it stands though. There are plenty of examples where a forward player checks his run and is leaning slightly backwards, where his whole body is level or even behind the last defender who is leaning the other way, only for VAR to show the forward's trailing boot was a millimetre beyond the line of the defender. The thing that VAR has eliminated is doubt, and consequently the concept of giving the benefit of the doubt (to the attacker), which, while imprecise, was actually a pretty sound principle to base offside decisions on. The authorities spent years trying to loosen and relax the offside law to allow for fluid attacking play and more goals. VAR has totally reversed that.
|
|
|
Post by AlliG on Dec 1, 2020 17:29:25 GMT
I think we should either: 1) Fuck it off completely 2) Change the offside rule so that it's the position of the feet taken into consideration and no other body part. 3) Use a version of Umpire's Call like they do in cricket. Basically, the technology can't be 100% accurate so in cases where the computer images shows that less than 50% of the ball would/might have hit the stumps in the case of an LBW decision, they go with the original decision made by the on-field umpire. The football equivalent would probably be, if you've got to start drawing lines on the pitch, fuck that, just go with what the liner said. 2 wouldn't have that much effect on the problem as it stands though. There are plenty of examples where a forward player checks his run and is leaning slightly backwards, where his whole body is level or even behind the last defender who is leaning the other way, only for VAR to show the forward's trailing boot was a millimetre beyond the line of the defender. The thing that VAR has eliminated is doubt, and consequently the concept of giving the benefit of the doubt (to the attacker), which, while imprecise, was actually a pretty sound principle to base offside decisions on. The authorities spent years trying to loosen and relax the offside law to allow for fluid attacking play and more goals. VAR has totally reversed that. That might have been true until they introduced the "T-Shirt" rule. Everyone can see where the head, foot, knee etc are, yet VAR is now trying to measure with millimetre accuracy an imaginary T-Shirt line on the arm of a moving player using cameras that are not in line with the incident.
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Dec 1, 2020 17:46:13 GMT
2 wouldn't have that much effect on the problem as it stands though. There are plenty of examples where a forward player checks his run and is leaning slightly backwards, where his whole body is level or even behind the last defender who is leaning the other way, only for VAR to show the forward's trailing boot was a millimetre beyond the line of the defender. The thing that VAR has eliminated is doubt, and consequently the concept of giving the benefit of the doubt (to the attacker), which, while imprecise, was actually a pretty sound principle to base offside decisions on. The authorities spent years trying to loosen and relax the offside law to allow for fluid attacking play and more goals. VAR has totally reversed that. That might have been true until they introduced the "T-Shirt" rule. Everyone can see where the head, foot, knee etc are, yet VAR is now trying to measure with millimetre accuracy an imaginary T-Shirt line on the arm of a moving player using cameras that are not in line with the incident. Absolutely, I probably phrased that badly. When I say it has eliminated doubt, I just mean it offers a definitive judgement so there is no need for a human referee to consider any doubt. If you look at my previous post, I'm sceptical as to how accurate that judgement can be.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Dec 1, 2020 18:01:50 GMT
It just seems like a level of precision that the game and the rule are not designed for, and arguably can't accommodate at all. Football is played on a huge grassy field with wonky white lines painted on it, and the "moment the ball is played" probably lasts several milliseconds from the first contact to when it leaves the boot. Can the technology genuinely ascertain which player's boot or armpit is closer to a line painted on grass 35 yards away at the exact correct moment, with 100% accuracy and down to the millimetre? The variation in the thickness and straightness of that line on the pitch is probably greater than the measurements in some of these offside calls we're seeing. I'm sure the developers would have a reassuring answer but I'm sceptical. And even if they can show it's valid and reliable, if you can't perceive a rule infraction with the naked eye, even with video replays, is it an infraction at all? Difficult to know what to do about it though. Unless someone can show that it's not as reliable as claimed, I don't think we can just bin it off now it's here. It is, after all, positive and beneficial much of the time. And all the other proposed solutions are problematic to me.. I think it's probably just one of those things we're going to have to get used to. Exactly. Decisions are being made at the level of pixels on a video monitor. This means if you watch the footage on a screen with HD precision it could be called onside while if viewed on a 4k screen it could be called offside due the difference in the size and precision of the pixels. It's a joke. Football is a living breathing sport - not a video game. The officials - warts and all - are part of the game. VAR is killing football as a live experience and wants binning. I loathe it with a vengeance.
|
|
|
Post by mcw on Dec 1, 2020 20:44:55 GMT
Bloody awful, get it gone. Perhaps the best thing about us not being in the premier league is that we are not subjected to this farce week in week out.
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Dec 2, 2020 12:00:11 GMT
The problem isn’t with the drawing of the lines to see who is off/on. The rule talks about ‘when the ball is kicked.’ The lines are only drawn after the video has been stopped. My issue is with the stopping of the ball being kicked - is it absolutely in the right place in order to make the judgement? I’d have the criteria to feet only being on/off so that no other part of the body counts. I’d also have a 30cm ‘grace distance’ in favour of the attacker. This kind of makes sense actually. Because even if the decision is still razor thin at least the attacking team know it was definitely offside no questions asked. Maybe make it 15cm and this could actually be the simple solution.
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Dec 2, 2020 16:28:20 GMT
I don't understand why we don't have the VAR ref making the decision and if it's very close sticking with the original decision like they do for lbw in cricket. In my opinion having the ref going to a monitor to decide is not how VAR should be used. I'm sure subconsciously if you are told to go and look at the monitor you go thinking you have made a mistake and are looking at it from that point of view. As far as I know no other sport asks a referee or umpire to reflect on his decision. It also seems to me that other sports shows the replay on the big screen so that fans can see how the decision is reached. A lot of sports have embraced the system and it has almost become an enjoyable part of the spectator experience.
|
|