VAR

wellsworld said:
I thought it was to be used only for clear & obvious errors?
Click to expand...
Yep, that's it right there. Seeing it a lot in NFL football. Looking and looking and looking from various angles. Proposal has been put forward that if call cannot be proved/disproved within 30 seconds, call stands. However, not in the laws yet.
 
maybe someone could educate me. To be offside does it have to be any part of the body nearer to the goal, or is it the leg, lower body or whatever. Because looking at the pic on the BBC website the scummers players arm is at least level if not nearer the goal. Looks like a cock up to me (and I don't mean that part of the anatomy was nearer !!!!!!!).
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/football/46531601
 
Pretty strange when its centimetres like tonight yet without VAR, we had a Newcastle goal last night that was two yards offside and the linesman failed to see it.
 
redharry said:
maybe someone could educate me. To be offside does it have to be any part of the body nearer to the goal, or is it the leg, lower body or whatever. Because looking at the pic on the BBC website the scummers players arm is at least level if not nearer the goal. Looks like a cock up to me (and I don't mean that part of the anatomy was nearer !!!!!!!).
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/football/46531601
Click to expand...

Any part of the body that you can use, so not arm but shoulder.
 
redharry said:
maybe someone could educate me. To be offside does it have to be any part of the body nearer to the goal, or is it the leg, lower body or whatever. Because looking at the pic on the BBC website the scummers players arm is at least level if not nearer the goal. Looks like a cock up to me (and I don't mean that part of the anatomy was nearer !!!!!!!).
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/live/football/46531601
Click to expand...

It's any part of the player that can play the ball, so pretty much anything other than arms.

Coobster said:
Haven't seen it, so don't know how close it was, but was it offside or not?
Even if it's a toenail offside, you have to draw the line somewhere don't you? Whatever that line is - and this is the problem, it needs to be the same for every game and team.
I wonder if we can get the computer to do that bit, the VAR pauses when the ball was played (yes this could be done a frame or so later to help the big boys) and the computer program draws the lines and says which player is furthest forward? I would be surprised if that sort of technology isn't possible?
Click to expand...

Looks like he's kept onside by Vestergaard's shoulder. The decision to rule offside would be impossible to call with the camera.
 
Also, you can’t see the second defender’s foot, so for all anyone knows the guy could have been onside
 
So basically, for VAR to be 100% accurate it needs to be in line at all times.

So either a camera every yard down the touchline, or I don’t know maybe just a person with a flag running up and down having a look?!
 
DJ said:
So basically, for VAR to be 100% accurate it needs to be in line at all times.

So either a camera every yard down the touchline, or I don’t know maybe just a person with a flag running up and down having a look?!
Click to expand...

A coin toss would be more accurate than the man with a flag in our last few games .
 
Coobster said:
Haven't seen it, so don't know how close it was, but was it offside or not?
Even if it's a toenail offside, you have to draw the line somewhere don't you? Whatever that line is - and this is the problem, it needs to be the same for every game and team.
I wonder if we can get the computer to do that bit, the VAR pauses when the ball was played (yes this could be done a frame or so later to help the big boys) and the computer program draws the lines and says which player is furthest forward? I would be surprised if that sort of technology isn't possible?
Click to expand...
 

Attachments

  • 1547694649203.png
    1547694649203.png
    312 KB · Views: 13
John Nicholson is bang on. It really doesn't matter if his toe was offside. What matters is that the lino calls it one way or another so we can all enjoy the big moments when they actually happen. There aren't many goals in a game of football so don't take away the moment of celebration for some arbitrary (and frankly unachievable) idea of 'correctness'.
 
It’s not VAR that’s wrong, it’s the stupid incompetents that administer it.

Oh hang on, they’re the same stupid incompetents that 'referee' our games live, so what chance is there that VAR will actually work?
 
tednphil said:
It’s not VAR that’s wrong, it’s the stupid incompetents that administer it.

Oh hang on, they’re the same stupid incompetents that 'referee' our games live, so what chance is there that VAR will actually work?
Click to expand...

No. VAR as a concept is the problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DJ
Would help if the person running the line came equipped with a cap or similar to keep the sun out of their eyeline.

A bad workman blames his tools, VAR is a tool not the decision maker, though at least it could easily provide the log of decisions in favour of afcb this season.
 
I asked the ref before the Burnley home game last year why the East Stand Lino doesn’t wear a cap on a sunny day. He told me the referees’ association rules don’t allow it because they don’t think it would look right. Style over substance I think.
 
Coming back to the main current topic, I thought there were two key questions:

- wasn’t there a directive a few years ago that the benefit of the doubt should go to the attacker in tight offside decisions

- isn’t the underlying policy with VAR that it is only there to correct clear and obvious errors

If the answer to both of these is yes then the officials in the VAR bunker should not be overturning goals based on the position of someone’s toe.

Of course in reality the purpose of VAR will be to favour the big six, as with current refereeing decisions.
 
Last edited:
Sorry Roger said:
Coming back to the main current topic, I thought there were two key questions:

- wasn’t there a directive a few years ago that the benefit of the doubt should go to the attacker in tight offside decisions

- isn’t the underlying policy with VAR that it is only there to correc clear and obvious errors

If the answer to both of these is yes then the officials in the VAR bunker should not be overturning goals based on the position of someone’s toe.

Of course in reality the purpose of VAR will be to favour the big six, as with current refereeing decisions.
Click to expand...

I don't think offsides are part of the "clear and obvious error" part of the rules. They are a binary matter of fact like with goaline technology.
 
Sorry Roger said:
Coming back to the main current topic, I thought there were two key questions:

- wasn’t there a directive a few years ago that the benefit of the doubt should go to the attacker in tight offside decisions
Click to expand...
In some ways it would be much simpler (and more exciting to watch) if they just allowed all "tight" situations to continue, i.e., you need to be a full body width beyond the defender for it to be called back.
We'd see a lot more goals that way!
And anyway, how does it actually add to the game when the margins are so fine that no defender (or attacker) can really know whether it was offside without a replay? If it's that close, what's the point in pulling play back?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;