Greenlizard0 Weekend Football Thread ** spoilers ** [1st - 2nd January 2020]

Snax said:
From the limited TV replays, it looks like the leg that kicked out at Ali was sufficiently impactful to move Ali's standing leg in the mud.
Click to expand...

I didn't say it wasn't a foul. I said it wasn't considered clear and obvious under the current var guidelines. VAR for these calls are far more inconsistent and controversial than offsides imo. It was explained that for a subjective decision to be overturned then the refs reasoning for his decision needs to be totally wrong. In other words, if the ref says he saw the challenge but couldn't be satisfied that it was a foul then VAR won't overturn it. If the ref says he saw the incident but there was no contact, but the replays show there was, then VAR can overturn the decision.
Jokester said:
Accounting for the margin or error means it's more accurate as it you are confident the decision is correct - that's a requirement of making a refereeing decision.
Click to expand...
How on earth would the decision be more likely to be accurate? If hawkeye says he's 4.9cm offside but the margin of error is 5cm then the range is anything from 0.1cm onside to 9.9cm offside. If that scenario played out 100 times, everytime they would be given onside when the reality is 99 times they were offside. We'd end up with more wrong decisions.

And watch the link I provided earlier and see what the requirements are for a linesman to make a decision. They admit they're having to guess.
 
BaZ87 said:
I didn't say it wasn't a foul. I said it wasn't considered clear and obvious under the current var guidelines. VAR for these calls are far more inconsistent and controversial than offsides imo. It was explained that for a subjective decision to be overturned then the refs reasoning for his decision needs to be totally wrong. In other words, if the ref says he saw the challenge but couldn't be satisfied that it was a foul then VAR won't overturn it. If the ref says he saw the incident but there was no contact, but the replays show there was, then VAR can overturn the decision.

How on earth would the decision be more likely to be accurate? If hawkeye says he's 4.9cm offside but the margin of error is 5cm then the range is anything from 0.1cm onside to 9.9cm offside. If that scenario played out 100 times, everytime they would be given onside when the reality is 99 times they were offside. We'd end up with more wrong decisions.

And watch the link I provided earlier and see what the requirements are for a linesman to make a decision. They admit they're having to guess.
Click to expand...
Agree with you - the offsides are binary decisions that aren't contraversial. The lack of consistency on what should/shouldn't be overturned in subjective decisions is infuriating
 
BaZ87 said:
How on earth would the decision be more likely to be accurate? If hawkeye says he's 4.9cm offside but the margin of error is 5cm then the range is anything from 0.1cm onside to 9.9cm offside. If that scenario played out 100 times, everytime they would be given onside when the reality is 99 times they were offside. We'd end up with more wrong decisions.

And watch the link I provided earlier and see what the requirements are for a linesman to make a decision. They admit they're having to guess.
Click to expand...
That's not really how margin of error works in reality, but the "wrong" decisions are so small in terms of the level of offsidedness that it doesn't matter. Once you're down to measuring things within the margin of error of the thing your using to measure it with, it's pointless.
 
Jokester said:
That's not really how margin of error works in reality, but the "wrong" decisions are so small in terms of the level of offsidedness that it doesn't matter. Once you're down to measuring things within the margin of error of the thing your using to measure it with, it's pointless.
Click to expand...
Not as pointless as using technology, having huge delays, killing the atmosphere of the game, only to make the same decision that the lino gave, even though you know it was almost certainly wrong. As I said, if it comes to this then scrap VAR because we'll see next to no benefits of using it and all the same drawbacks.
 
I think the Jose problem is that he doesn't have a system of play and doesn't build teams anymore. He takes over teams and tweaks them to counter specific opponents.

At both Man Utd and now at Spurs (where the teams had essentially collapsed into chaos) he struggles to build a cohesive approach from the ground up.
 
Snax said:
I think the Jose problem is that he doesn't have a system of play and doesn't build teams anymore. He takes over teams and tweaks them to counter specific opponents.

At both Man Utd and now at Spurs (where the teams had essentially collapsed into chaos) he struggles to build a cohesive approach from the ground up.
Click to expand...
I'm not one for defending Mourinho but I think you need to give him a bit of time before criticising him for not building something just yet. He's taken over at the start of a very busy period where your options as a manager are incredibly limited. Managers are picking teams and formations on a game by game basis, depending on who's available and their fitness levels, without much time to work on anything on the training ground. Once things settle down he'll have more time to stamp his mark on the team but it probably won't be until next season that we see what Mourinho has in mind.
 
BaZ87 said:
Not as pointless as using technology, having huge delays, killing the atmosphere of the game, only to make the same decision that the lino gave, even though you know it was almost certainly wrong. As I said, if it comes to this then scrap VAR because we'll see next to no benefits of using it and all the same drawbacks.
Click to expand...
It's not pointless though, it gives you the right call when it's needed, but using it try and decide to mm scale decisions isn't what the system is likely to be capable of (and therefore you can't be sure it's the wrong decision). And does it really to be?
 
Jokester said:
It's not pointless though, it gives you the right call when it's needed, but using it try and decide to mm scale decisions isn't what the system is likely to be capable of (and therefore you can't be sure it's the wrong decision). And does it really to be?
Click to expand...
How many times is it needed in the way you've suggested though? I might be wrong but from what I've seen, the vast majority of VAR overturns have been for marginal calls. If you're not going to use the system for these (but still have to waste time looking at them) then what are you left with? A tiny number of overturns. Maximum disruption for minimum benefit.
 
Jokester said:
It's not pointless though, it gives you the right call when it's needed, but using it try and decide to mm scale decisions isn't what the system is likely to be capable of (and therefore you can't be sure it's the wrong decision). And does it really to be?
Click to expand...
I think that is the biggest limitation. Offside is literally is in cms and beyond the accuracy of technology. But for everything else it is inconsistent just like we have now. For example, the awarding of a penalty missed by the ref is very hit and miss, from not awarding obvious decisions to awarding penalties with minimal contact. Far from reducing the variation of officiating it seems to be worse. It is even more galling if you have had a marginal goal ruled out to then have a hand ball in your opponents build up deemed inconsequential to play and allowed to stand.
 
BaZ87 said:
How many times is it needed in the way you've suggested though? I might be wrong but from what I've seen, the vast majority of VAR overturns have been for marginal calls. If you're not going to use the system for these (but still have to waste time looking at them) then what are you left with? A tiny number of overturns. Maximum disruption for minimum benefit.
Click to expand...
For the marginal calls though where it's within the limitations of the system, then yeah that's fine, it's for the likes of that one earlier where it's dubious that the system is accurate enough to be correct. But until the refs know what the limitations are, and are honest about it we'll be sat here arguing over it every other week. As someone mentioned before, the margin of error could easily just be represented by the lines being thicker. At least the fans can then visually see what's going on and with better education as well, understand the decision. At the moment, plenty of people seem to think this is an "unfallible" automatic system like goal line technology, though ideally this is what they should be aiming for to remove the human VAR who'll be adding a massive level of uncertainty to the system.
 
That looked to be a pen under current laws, the irony being that he was a bit disoriented and had absolutely no idea that ball was coming in like that.

The Spurs game plan relies on chaos theory.
 
Jokester said:
For the marginal calls though where it's within the limitations of the system, then yeah that's fine, it's for the likes of that one earlier where it's dubious that the system is accurate enough to be correct. But until the refs know what the limitations are, and are honest about it we'll be sat here arguing over it every other week. As someone mentioned before, the margin of error could easily just be represented by the lines being thicker. At least the fans can then visually see what's going on and with better education as well, understand the decision. At the moment, plenty of people seem to think this is an "unfallible" automatic system like goal line technology, though ideally this is what they should be aiming for to remove the human VAR who'll be adding a massive level of uncertainty to the system.
Click to expand...
We'll never know what the margin of error is because each case is different. I can't recall the exact speed but somebody calculated that if the defender standing still and the striker is sprinting directly straight then the margin of error is 15cm based on the cameras being used. Change the speed of the attacker, the angle of his run, whether the defender is moving in one direction or the other, the speed that he's moving and the margin of error is completely different. You cannot calculate and change the margin of error for every decisions so do you use the maximum possible margin of error, possibly 20cm+? In which case that will pretty much cover every marginal call.

The tech has to be used for every call (you don't know whether something falls within the margin of error until you've meansured the starting point) and the moment we revert back to the on-field decision just once, we're losing more than we're benefiting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom