The VAR thread

[Foxdiamond]

31 minutes ago, Super_horns said:

You know a ref has made a bad error when even Dermot Gallagher says the player in question was very lucky not to be sent off .

 

https://www.skysports.com/football/live-blog/11095/12815779/ref-watch-former-premier-league-referee-dermot-gallagher-on-lee-masons-departure-nick-pope-red-card-and-much-more-live

 

”

He was extremely lucky. I think it's a red card. If you put your studs into someone's knee that high, it's dangerous. 
 

"The one thing it can't be is a free kick only. The referee should punish on the field. If the referee gives a red card, it would never get overturned."”

There we are then. If ref missed it then Tierney on VAR should have picked it up. Crying out loud who sponsors this lot Specsavers! 

[Babylon]

1 hour ago, AKCJ said:

"Armpit" is the word they use in the rules.

Is says the arm starts at the bottom of the armpit. As you can see, the green line extends across the width of the "arm", so you choose the bit closet to the goal and not the armpit. 

[Babylon]

2 hours ago, jmono84 said:

 

I disagree with how you see this and not convinced it’s as accurate you you seem to believe.

No, the spurs pictures DO NOT show this at all for the 1000th time. 

[AKCJ]

53 minutes ago, turtmcfly said:

 

You posted the *handball rules* to define where the arm starts (they use the armpit because there's no equivalent fixed point on the outer arm), not the rule to say which part of the arm should be used in an offside decision

 

Tbh your other reply (to me this time) means I'm pretty sure we're in 'bored and boring troll' territory now

 

You cannot be offside because of your arm. That is why I posted the handball rule. Apologies I just assumed that part was common sense/well known.

 

The offside rule states;

 

Quote

The hands and arms of all players, including the goalkeepers, are not considered. For the purposes of determining offside, the upper boundary of the arm is in line with the bottom of the armpit.

Yet we all saw the VAR draw the line from the end of Wout Faes' elbow.

 

It's either incompetence, laziness or outright corruption.

[Legend_in_blue]

13 minutes ago, AKCJ said:

You cannot be offside because of your arm. That is why I posted the handball rule. Apologies I just assumed that part was common sense/well known.

 

The offside rule states;

 

Yet we all saw the VAR draw the line from the end of Wout Faes' elbow.

 

It's either incompetence, laziness or outright corruption.

 

Indeed we did.  The line was also over the top of Rashford's foot when drawn from Faes' elbow.

[st albans fox]

1 hour ago, Foxdiamond said:

There we are then. If ref missed it then Tierney on VAR should have picked it up. Crying out loud who sponsors this lot Specsavers! 

specsavers did tweet in the skysports twitter thread this morning - 'we'll be along shortly' or words to that effect

[turtmcfly]

20 minutes ago, AKCJ said:

You cannot be offside because of your arm. That is why I posted the handball rule. Apologies I just assumed that part was common sense/well known.

 

The offside rule states;

 

Yet we all saw the VAR draw the line from the end of Wout Faes' elbow.

 

It's either incompetence, laziness or outright corruption.

 

... but you can be offside because of your shoulder, or the bit of the [insert your word here, I'm going with 'arm'] between the shoulder and what IFAB is defining as the 'arm' for football specific purposes.

 

And if you have your arm pointing straight down as Faes does, your elbow will be a line with the outer edge of your upper (sorry, I'm going to do it again) arm, and that's a part which you can be offside for. I'm going to really quite strongly suggest that this is exactly why the line drawn below extends beyond the elbow up to his unowot

 

 

[Super_horns]

2 hours ago, Foxdiamond said:

There we are then. If ref missed it then Tierney on VAR should have picked it up. Crying out loud who sponsors this lot Specsavers! 

I think they do in Scotland!

 

[Otis]

 

It's 2023 and this is the best quality the richest sport in the world can come up with. 

[Super_horns]

The fact people are debating if lines  have been drawn correctly or not kind of sums the problem up.

There is no consistency in how it’s done.

[LVFox]

The main problem with VAR is usually the referee operating it. It's the standard of officials which is the main issue. 

 

I still personally think there should be the use of a thicker line on offsides which gives more power to the linesmans original decision. Cut out this mm "half his toes offside" nonsense.

[foxinsocks]

3 hours ago, turtmcfly said:

 

... but you can be offside because of your shoulder, or the bit of the [insert your word here, I'm going with 'arm'] between the shoulder and what IFAB is defining as the 'arm' for football specific purposes.

 

And if you have your arm pointing straight down as Faes does, your elbow will be a line with the outer edge of your upper (sorry, I'm going to do it again) arm, and that's a part which you can be offside for. I'm going to really quite strongly suggest that this is exactly why the line drawn below extends beyond the elbow up to his unowot

 

 

good work soldier.  
basically the refs are crap and don't know what they're doing

[casablancas]

3 hours ago, Super_horns said:

The fact people are debating if lines  have been drawn correctly or not kind of sums the problem up.

There is no consistency in how it’s done.

What’s your view as non Leicester? Goal out no goal outta interest? 

[yorkie1999]

The problem with var is that they are trying to capture an exact position and it’s simply not possible,  a toe offside is about 20mm, the frame rate the cameras use is 50fps, a player running at speed can be in a different position by up to 200mm between frames, so can the ball leaving the players foot. The technology is not accurate enough . They need to be working with cameras that are at least 500fps to measure a toe offside/onside. It’s like trying to measure a pound coin with a metre ruler that only has 200mm divisions on it. Impossible.

[Super_horns]

1 hour ago, casablancas said:

What’s your view as non Leicester? Goal out no goal outta interest? 

I think it’s very tight - certainly not many would have complained had it been ruled out .

[foxinsocks]

Does any one know if they draw the limes in isolation...ie.  when they draw the line on the defender can they see the line they drew on the attacker? and or visa versa?

This is imporatant as it removes them setting the lines to their narative.

[st albans fox]

16 minutes ago, foxinsocks said:

Does any one know if they draw the limes in isolation...ie.  when they draw the line on the defender can they see the line they drew on the attacker? and or visa versa?

This is imporatant as it removes them setting the lines to their narative.

It’s software - they pinpoint the furthest point back on the defenders and the furthest point forwards on the attackers - mark all of them with a point. If they aren’t sure which is furthest point then they mark several. 

 

then the software takes over and draws the vertical lines down and at the same time the horizontal lines. It will show the lines which are the relevant ones 

 

last year we saw the vertical down lines ……this season we generally don’t - the image of faes with that line down is not from PGMOL - someone has just drawn it 

Edited 20 February 2023 by st albans fox

[Ricey]

6 hours ago, AKCJ said:

You cannot be offside because of your arm. That is why I posted the handball rule. Apologies I just assumed that part was common sense/well known.

 

The offside rule states;

 

Yet we all saw the VAR draw the line from the end of Wout Faes' elbow.

 

It's either incompetence, laziness or outright corruption.

You have to be trolling at this point.

 

You can be offside with the upper part of your arm/shoulder. The line is clearly drawn from the shoulder.

[Ricey]

This from Dale Johnson should hopefully clear things up for everyone moaning about the camera angle and any other conspiracy nonsense:

 

”It's a classic example of how the positions of players on a 2D image can be misleading to the human eye. Because Rashford is ahead of the nearest defender, Timothy Castagne, and the other defender is in the middle of the field, making a judgement is very difficult without technology -- which removes issues around the camera angle.

 

The tech is mapped individually to each Premier League pitch, taking into account variants such as the camber. Depending on the position and height of the calibrated camera, it may not look as though a line is straight, but all are produced automatically and how they are generated isn't controlled by the VAR.

There's a small green dot from the pitch line to Rashford's toe as his front foot is just above the ground, and the line is draw to the outer arm of Faes as that the farthest forward point of his body.

Fans regularly argue that we'll see another like this that's given offside. And that's correct, because every offside decision is unique. No two players are ever in the same position. Some situations will be onside, and others will be offside.

In VAR terms, this wasn't even a close call. The "tolerance level," or "margin of error," didn't need to be used -- as shown by the presence of both the blue defensive live and the green attacker's. If the "tolerance level" was required, just a green line to the defender would be displayed.”

Edited 20 February 2023 by Ricey

[Sly]

The technology isn’t perfect and we’ve benefitted from this previously. I preferred the day light rule, rather than this (Mk) stupidity we seem to be running with now. 
 

I remember a few seasons ago, we benefited when Son scored against us. A game which we went on to win from memory. 
 

We just need to forget that this game happened. 

[st albans fox]

32 minutes ago, Ricey said:

This from Dale Johnson should hopefully clear things up for everyone moaning about the camera angle and any other conspiracy nonsense:

 

”It's a classic example of how the positions of players on a 2D image can be misleading to the human eye. Because Rashford is ahead of the nearest defender, Timothy Castagne, and the other defender is in the middle of the field, making a judgement is very difficult without technology -- which removes issues around the camera angle.

 

The tech is mapped individually to each Premier League pitch, taking into account variants such as the camber. Depending on the position and height of the calibrated camera, it may not look as though a line is straight, but all are produced automatically and how they are generated isn't controlled by the VAR.

There's a small green dot from the pitch line to Rashford's toe as his front foot is just above the ground, and the line is draw to the outer arm of Faes as that the farthest forward point of his body.

Fans regularly argue that we'll see another like this that's given offside. And that's correct, because every offside decision is unique. No two players are ever in the same position. Some situations will be onside, and others will be offside.

In VAR terms, this wasn't even a close call. The "tolerance level," or "margin of error," didn't need to be used -- as shown by the presence of both the blue defensive live and the green attacker's. If the "tolerance level" was required, just a green line to the defender would be displayed.”

Babs will  be pleased to see this and hopefully it removes the conspiracy stuff

the only issue is the freeze frame - the auto offside system with ball sensors will solve that 

 

[StanSP]

Like that explanation from Dale Johnson. Explains it clearly. 

 

Surprised no one else on here has done that.

[Brooksy]

I'm still convinced it's offside.

[adam]

It's a sad state of affairs what football has turned into. Arguing about the way a line is drawn. The beautiful game 😆

[jayfox26]

1 hour ago, Ricey said:

This from Dale Johnson should hopefully clear things up for everyone moaning about the camera angle and any other conspiracy nonsense:

 

”It's a classic example of how the positions of players on a 2D image can be misleading to the human eye. Because Rashford is ahead of the nearest defender, Timothy Castagne, and the other defender is in the middle of the field, making a judgement is very difficult without technology -- which removes issues around the camera angle.

 

The tech is mapped individually to each Premier League pitch, taking into account variants such as the camber. Depending on the position and height of the calibrated camera, it may not look as though a line is straight, but all are produced automatically and how they are generated isn't controlled by the VAR.

There's a small green dot from the pitch line to Rashford's toe as his front foot is just above the ground, and the line is draw to the outer arm of Faes as that the farthest forward point of his body.

Fans regularly argue that we'll see another like this that's given offside. And that's correct, because every offside decision is unique. No two players are ever in the same position. Some situations will be onside, and others will be offside.

In VAR terms, this wasn't even a close call. The "tolerance level," or "margin of error," didn't need to be used -- as shown by the presence of both the blue defensive live and the green attacker's. If the "tolerance level" was required, just a green line to the defender would be displayed.”

As interesting and correct as this is, it's not as interesting as a conspiracy theory. So for me, it was still definitely 100% offside and the refs are all corrupt and out to get us!