Bats8711 Posted 17 October 2020 Share Posted 17 October 2020 2 minutes ago, Shane said: Look close in line with the CB , did var check it? THIS is the problem with VAR. the commentators will breeze by it: “and it looks like the initial check is complete” but there’s no way they actually got to the point they drew lines, it would have taken longer (and also wouldn’t they show it? If not why not? Surely if they show the real time var review with lines etc they should do it every time?) how can a cursory glance at a replay of that goal definitively tell you that’s onside? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st albans fox Posted 17 October 2020 Share Posted 17 October 2020 6 minutes ago, Shane said: Look close in line with the CB , did var check it? They check every possible offside .... especially when there is a goal 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuntman_Mike Posted 17 October 2020 Share Posted 17 October 2020 Anyone else fancy Arsenal to win at Man City?* please don't quote me at 19:30pm 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trabuch Posted 17 October 2020 Share Posted 17 October 2020 (edited) 5 hours ago, Bats8711 said: See - I think what you suggest exacerbates the problem. How does giving a margin of error do anything to solve the current issue? You’d have close decisions where the width or allowance barely does or does not overlap and you still have the core issue which is how / where they draw the lines. Also - wow they really breezed through that last Chelsea goal. The one view I saw (not the one pictured above) looked very close. Certainly enough to see some lines drawn. There is a margin for error though. VAR uses a frame rate of 50fps. So regardless of the speed the players are moving they can't be mm accurate on when the ball leaves the foot of the passer. EG - if the ball is moving at 5 m/s (only 11 mph) then it will travel 10cm in one frame. So in this case the accuracy is 10cm. That's not taking into account players moving. It is not as black and white as people claim. Someone might want to check my maths though. Edited 17 October 2020 by trabuch 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turtmcfly Posted 17 October 2020 Share Posted 17 October 2020 1 minute ago, Bats8711 said: See - I think what you suggest exacerbates the problem. How does giving a margin of error do anything to solve the current issue? You’d have close decisions where the width or allowance barely does or does not overlap and you still have the core issue which is how / where they draw the lines. The suggestion isn't aimed at absolute accuracy. As I say, I think that aim is part of the problem, because it's not realistic when there's human involvement. Instead, it's aimed at returning to the idea of the benefit of the doubt going to the attacker. So, reducing the number of offsides given in general, and trying to make sure the ones given are as close as non-contentious as possible. For the sake of argument, use a football's width* as the equivalent line width. Even with the 'worst' (i.e. tightest) possible call where VAR gave offside, you would effectively be saying that the player was still 'a football's width minus a littlle bit' offside. That, instead of what currently is akin to splitting hairs. The hair-splitting with wider lines doesn't make as much difference. * I know repeated use of the word 'football' instead of 'ball' seems clumsy/pedantic. It's almost entirely a function of my own lack of maturity that I don't want to invoke the phrase 'a balls' width' into what is a deadly serious discussion about marginal offside decisions 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whoareyaaa Posted 17 October 2020 Share Posted 17 October 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paninistickers Posted 17 October 2020 Share Posted 17 October 2020 Fack off, rent boys! 😂 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st albans fox Posted 17 October 2020 Share Posted 17 October 2020 Chelsea fans on social media were drooling at 2-0 ....... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bats8711 Posted 17 October 2020 Share Posted 17 October 2020 Awesome Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingsX Posted 17 October 2020 Share Posted 17 October 2020 Abramovitch is hardly the only billionaire who likes to collect lots of Ferraris and Lamborghinis ... But most have enough sense to get doors and locks for the garage 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surrifox Posted 17 October 2020 Share Posted 17 October 2020 Someone explain to Frankie that he really does need to get to chapter 2 of “Football management for dummies “ and look at the bit about organising a defence and investing in goalkeepers 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bats8711 Posted 17 October 2020 Share Posted 17 October 2020 Just now, surrifox said: Someone explain to Frankie that he really does need to get to chapter 2 of “Football management for dummies “ and look at the bit about organising a defence and investing in goalkeepers I’d prefer nobody explain it to him 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gw_leics772 Posted 17 October 2020 Share Posted 17 October 2020 (edited) 13 minutes ago, turtmcfly said: The suggestion isn't aimed at absolute accuracy. As I say, I think that aim is part of the problem, because it's not realistic when there's human involvement. Instead, it's aimed at returning to the idea of the benefit of the doubt going to the attacker. So, reducing the number of offsides given in general, and trying to make sure the ones given are as close as non-contentious as possible. For the sake of argument, use a football's width* as the equivalent line width. Even with the 'worst' (i.e. tightest) possible call where VAR gave offside, you would effectively be saying that the player was still 'a football's width minus a littlle bit' offside. That, instead of what currently is akin to splitting hairs. The hair-splitting with wider lines doesn't make as much difference. * I know repeated use of the word 'football' instead of 'ball' seems clumsy/pedantic. It's almost entirely a function of my own lack of maturity that I don't want to invoke the phrase 'a balls' width' into what is a deadly serious discussion about marginal offside decisions A balls width would definitely be preferable to the pubes width they currently use! Bit big though. The above post about frames per second equating to 10cm definitely sounds too big and with the technology available they should definitely be doing better there. You can't judge it on a gnats gnacker if the video gives 10cm margin for error. Who cares though. Chelsea and Liverpool have both had shit results as well as Everton dropping points. That'll do for me. Edited 17 October 2020 by gw_leics772 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surrifox Posted 17 October 2020 Share Posted 17 October 2020 I said we should have signed Vestergaard back up to 4th 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corky Posted 17 October 2020 Share Posted 17 October 2020 Sky really are spoiling us with Sherwood and Merson. Mangling of the English language mixed in with Merson screaming "OH OH AGH WOAH" when a throw in is given and Sherwood shouting at the TV- "COR FACKIN ELL WORRA SHAAAMBULLS CHEWLSEE, SAFAMPTUN BRILYUNT JEFF!" Bring back Tiss. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mozartfox Posted 17 October 2020 Share Posted 17 October 2020 Really enjoyed that tussle between 2 of the ‘big’ 9. You can see why Chelsea want preferential Voting rights i.e to preserve their Big 6 status. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turtmcfly Posted 17 October 2020 Share Posted 17 October 2020 5 minutes ago, gw_leics772 said: A balls width would definitely be preferable to the pubes width they currently use! Bit big though. The above post about frames per second equating to 10cm definitely sounds too big and with the technology available they should definitely be doing better there. You can't judge it on a gnats gnacker if the video gives 10cm margin for error. Who cares though. Chelsea and Liverpool have both had shit results as well as Everton dropping points. That'll do for me. I knew my late addition of 'almost' before 'entirely' in my footnote would be warranted! As I said in my OP, half the width or some such might work. Just enough to allow the timing of the VAR image to be a frame off with no real harm done I honestly don't care that much either. Certainly less bothered by the actuall calls than the bedshitting about them. Anything that reduces the latter would be smashing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tuna Posted 17 October 2020 Share Posted 17 October 2020 Can't put my finger on why but Geoff Shreeves really irritates me. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bear Posted 17 October 2020 Share Posted 17 October 2020 2 minutes ago, Tuna said: Can't put my finger on why but Geoff Shreeves really irritates me. It's because he's irritating. Asks pointless questions. "Is your victory in the FA Cup going to influence your preparation for this game?" Er.... Yeah obviously you daft twat. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bear Posted 17 October 2020 Share Posted 17 October 2020 2 hours ago, Bats8711 said: Lol what? Wider? That’s the opposite of what I want. Those lines should be razor thin. No the idea is that the line for the defender is wider so that they introduce a small margin to make it clear and visible that he's off. If they overlap then it's onside. At least you'd be able to clearly see the offside rather than it being microscopic and having to trust the technology and framing being perfect. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinkenzo Posted 17 October 2020 Share Posted 17 October 2020 I just hope for Rodri's and Sterling's sake that Arsenal come out and play some proper football tonight 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuntman_Mike Posted 17 October 2020 Share Posted 17 October 2020 Arsenal should be in red. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lambert09 Posted 17 October 2020 Share Posted 17 October 2020 I think eventually we will go the way of the NFL. They have a margin for error of about 3 inches. It will be annoying when someone gets a goal when they look offside but it will be better for the sport once we all get used to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheUltimateWinner Posted 17 October 2020 Share Posted 17 October 2020 Have PGMOL given a reason yet on why Pickford wasn't sent off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingleicester Posted 17 October 2020 Share Posted 17 October 2020 13 minutes ago, Stuntman_Mike said: Arsenal should be in red. Very good point, why the hell are they in that kit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts