So there will be no set margin of error, it will just be off the cuff, that's on and that's off? So you're going to still have delays, albeit not quite as long, you'll still be making wrong decisions but they will just be hugely inconsistent as one officials 'clear' will be different to anothers (without a set margin of error) and as a result it will become even more controversial. At least as it stands, it's even for everybody. Sorry but this would be the absolute worst outcome imo. I can't see how we can use VAR like this successfully, it's either all or nothing.
Poll: VAR or No VAR?
- Thread starter BaZ87
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 May 2003
- Posts
- 11,191
VAR - The onfield referee needs to make the final decision.
I would like to see some AI technology introduced that can help the ref when making the decison from the monitors.
I would like to see some AI technology introduced that can help the ref when making the decison from the monitors.
Associate
I would also add that using a 20cm gray area wouldn't work very well and would take ages to calculate. There aren't rulers lined up out on the pitch. They would be using camera views from different angles and distances from the play. you can pick a point on the players like a knee and measure if it's in front of a foot but saying preciously how much further it's ahead? you're not going to know if that's 15, 17 or 22cm. The calculations would be worse on the system than they're on now and inaccurate.
What if the ref said offside at the time and the var review shows they were onside by a bit but maybe within the gray zone? You're just gunna say screw it disallow the goal because its close even though it can be measured?
What if the ref said offside at the time and the var review shows they were onside by a bit but maybe within the gray zone? You're just gunna say screw it disallow the goal because its close even though it can be measured?
There needs to be a balance, it's pretty much taking over matches as things stand both during and after (due to controversy).
I would give teams 2-3 challenges per match like in cricket and tennis, if they don't review something they should have then it's their own fault, if they fail they lose a challenge. I don't like the fact that the VAR team get to choose what is reviewed and can even ignore stuff.
Also whatever happens ban the use of MSPaint in offside decisions, if it's not a "clear and obvious" error to the naked eye then just go with the linesman's decision. We are seeing too many situations where attackers who are half a yard further away from goal than the defenders are being given offside either because they're leaning or have their legs wide apart, offside was introduced to prevent goal hanging not being 1mm closer to goal with a particular part of your body.
I would give teams 2-3 challenges per match like in cricket and tennis, if they don't review something they should have then it's their own fault, if they fail they lose a challenge. I don't like the fact that the VAR team get to choose what is reviewed and can even ignore stuff.
Also whatever happens ban the use of MSPaint in offside decisions, if it's not a "clear and obvious" error to the naked eye then just go with the linesman's decision. We are seeing too many situations where attackers who are half a yard further away from goal than the defenders are being given offside either because they're leaning or have their legs wide apart, offside was introduced to prevent goal hanging not being 1mm closer to goal with a particular part of your body.
VAR is needed, but it's current implementation is a complete horror show/farce.
I don't enjoy wrong decisions, but this "he was offside by a single hair's width" is absolutely nonsense.
This weekend something like 5 or 6 goals were disallowed for offside when the players were, for all intents and purposes, level with each other.
That's crazy. The delay is because they're trying to measure 2mm offside and that isn't the need for VAR. The need for VAR is to overrule *clear and obvious* errors. I agree with that principle.
A player being 2mm offside - and the attempting to determine this via video replays, ignoring possible margin for error - is absurd.
I don't enjoy wrong decisions, but this "he was offside by a single hair's width" is absolutely nonsense.
This weekend something like 5 or 6 goals were disallowed for offside when the players were, for all intents and purposes, level with each other.
That's crazy. The delay is because they're trying to measure 2mm offside and that isn't the need for VAR. The need for VAR is to overrule *clear and obvious* errors. I agree with that principle.
A player being 2mm offside - and the attempting to determine this via video replays, ignoring possible margin for error - is absurd.
If you want to change the poll to "today's use of VAR or nothing", I'd have to vote for nothing.
I'd rather human error than the number of disallowed goals based on 2mm margins.
It seems there are now *more* incidents of controversy with today's VAR, plus delays.
Also I'd disagree with you anyhow.
It's not one person it's VAR+the pitch side officials.
Basically it should be onside until proven offside. And you aren't allowed to get the rulers out. If it's clearly offside without using rulers then the VAR official should invite the ref to use those pitch side monitors.
If the ref agrees it's clear and obvious he make the decision to overturn, and remains in control of the match.
The reason the ref currently defers to the VAR ref is because the VAR ref has all the stupid rulers out, and the ref feels that it must be the correct decision.
Instead the rulers should be banned, and the VAR ref should invite the pitch side ref to review on the pitch side screen.
Then let the ref decide.
Clear and obvious mistakes will be overturned, and 2mm offsides won't happen.
It's not a science atm. If it was a science computers would calculate if it was offisde or not, and the computer's decision would be final, based on tracking data.
It's a VAR ref looking at a screen with stupid rulers/guidelines, and that is *not* a science, at all.
Last edited:
Bear in mind the 'clear and obvious error' phrase is only in relation to subjective decisions that VAR believe the ref has called wrong.
It doesn't apply to objective decisions even though commentators and pundits keep bringing it up for things unrelated to the subjective error rules.
I think the '3 challenges' approach has merit though, or maybe even just 2. Leave it up to the managers if they want a decision questioned, then you'd at least only see it being used for decisions that the teams feel matter.
Soldato
Cant understand that one either
It's subjective to say that someone is offside because their toe is 1mm closer to goal despite the majority of their body being behind the defender, yes I know the rule says it is so either the rule or VAR need changing as things stand because like FoxEye said there's been half a dozen goals in the last week that have been disallowed that anyone not sitting at a computer screen with MSPaint and the rule book next to them would all agree is onside and should stand.
They've taken the offside thing to far too much of an extreme, if they're going to be so anal about things then why do they allow players to steal 10 yards at throw ins? why do they ignore all of the pulling etc at corners?
As I asked earlier, what is clear and obvious with offsides? One week the VAR official will look at something and say it was a clear mistake and the next, a near identical decision will decide it wasn't a clear mistake. The whole point of using technology will be lost. The only reason for using it is to get more correct decisions so it's a more consistent and fairer game. Also due to the camera angles, without the use of the hawkeye technology, a TV replay could make something look clearly on/off when in fact it's clearly off/on.
They don't pick and choose what gets reviewed. They check every goal for an offside or foul in the build-up, all penalty appeals and possible red cards.
The fact that he didn't handle the ball is one very big reason. The 2nd reason is that this crazy handball rule doesn't apply if the ball travels a long distance and or multiple passes before the goal.
As I said in the matchday thread yesterday, this isn't an issue with VAR. The issue is with the offside rule. It's very possible that the issues that have been highlighted because of VAR will lead to a change in the offside rule. I don't think you'll find anybody that thinks these armpit decisions should be offside however under the current rules they are and VAR has no choice but to uphold them.
Offside isn't a subjective decision, it either is or it isn't. So the clear and obvious soundbite doesn't apply, that's related to a different element of VAR and it doesn’t help to conflate them. What people have issue with is what the offside rule classes as offside - the way VAR determines it is pretty good really and about the most accurate, repeatable and transparent way it can be done without piling way way more tech into stadiums. It's definitely more reliable than a bloke running up and trying to stay level whilst looking in two places at once.
I answered your last question earlier in another thread - offside is only being checked in goal scoring circumstances. It's only being used for 'game changing' things, positions of throw ins are nowhere near this level of influence on a game outcome.
Like I said, the VAR ref should look at the replay and invite the pitch side ref to do the same, if there's a case to be made.
In any case, I think we can probably agree that this weekend's 1mm or 2mm offsides were *not* clear and obvious.
My simple answer is that if you need to get the rulers/guidelines out to determine it, then it is not clear and obvious.
Ultimately the pitch ref should use the screen and it should be his deicision. VAR+rulers is utterly crap for the experience of the game.
It's not drama, it's not science (true science would be real-time laser scanning of all the players on the pitch, and a computer being able to make a 3D picture based on 99.9% accurate location data). What we have atm is great goals being scratched off by some bloke in a computer room with fake rulers, looking at a picture on a 2D screen, where camera angle can change the result.
That's not science, it's not even accurate beyond margin of error.
It's naff.
Clear and obvious doesn't apply to offside.
Fair enough, the rule needs to change imho.
Right now I'm increasingly turned off football entirely, and the current VAR implementation is a lot of it.
Watching MotD is increasingly frustrating, to the point of rolling eyes when VAR gets used. Or shouting at the screen.
And every match the pundits have to talk about crazy VAR offside decisions.
It really is killing my interest, personally.
Don
Just watch the Championship, it's amazing.
I agree they weren't clear and obvious but I 100% disagree with the idea that we should only use VAR for clear and obvious errors in regards to offsides. My view is you either don't use it at all or you use it to get as close to all decisions correct as possible. Whether it's using a margin of error or your suggestion of the ref going and looking at the replay, it won't improve anything.
There's 2 reasons why we shouldn't use VAR, it takes too long to make decisions and it kills the emotion of celebrating a goal, not knowing if it will stand or not. That's countered by 1 big reason for using VAR, we get as many major decisions correct as humanly possible. The current VAR system for offsides is resulting in as many correct decisions as possible but the delays and uncertainty are making it terrible for supporters. What you're suggesting or others wanting a set margin of error would still result in delays and uncertainty for supporters but to make things worse, we'd not be getting many more correct decisions than not using VAR at all.
Re your next post and motd pundits. This is one of the biggest issues with VAR, most pundits are morons and have no idea about the rules and VAR.
edit: When you actually look at what most people are annoyed with re var and offsides, it's that it's highlighted an issue with the offside rule. The issue is the offside rule, not VAR and that may and hopefully will be addressed at some point in the future.
I don't think delay in itself is bad. In other sports they show the review on the big screen so the fans can see what's happening. Football, of course, has to be different.
The delay would perhaps be shorter if "clear and obvious" was a requirement.
Camera angles are a real problem tho. I'm not sure how you solve that one. No matter how many cameras you have the chances are you won't get a 90 degree angle to make a precise measurement.
I'm not overly familiar with the technology, but it looks like Hawkeye only creates a 3D model/prediction for goal-line decisions (did the ball cross the line). The other decisions appear to be based purely on replays of different camera angles.
This is arguably not at all scientific or accurate.
If you're asking do I like the 2019 VAR? Not at all.
But I hope things will improve with future iterations and better technology.
The delay would perhaps be shorter if "clear and obvious" was a requirement.
Camera angles are a real problem tho. I'm not sure how you solve that one. No matter how many cameras you have the chances are you won't get a 90 degree angle to make a precise measurement.
I'm not overly familiar with the technology, but it looks like Hawkeye only creates a 3D model/prediction for goal-line decisions (did the ball cross the line). The other decisions appear to be based purely on replays of different camera angles.
This is arguably not at all scientific or accurate.
If you're asking do I like the 2019 VAR? Not at all.
But I hope things will improve with future iterations and better technology.