Poll: VAR or No VAR?

[BaZ87]

The worst thing is that due to the slow camera frame rates in use, it's possible that a defender running one way and an attacker another, the distance between them can be 30cm per frame.

This is based on two players sprinting in the opposite direction and 50 FPS cameras. A) How often do we see this happen? B) How accurate do you think a linesman's call is in real time in this scenario?

Even with the limitations of the current technology, it's 100x more accurate than a human making the decision in real time. I've seen a few people claim that VAR are actually using much higher quality cameras than we're aware of but there's nothing concrete on that however one thing is for certain, they're coming and any margin of error will be much smaller by next season.

 

[BaZ87]

yeah, I agree VAR is better than a linesman.

what I don’t agree with is that drawing lines on stills is the best way to judge offside.

they do need faster frame rate cameras, an algorithm that works out when the ball was played, some level of 3D modelling like goal line tech is and adjustment to the offside law so decisions can be made more easily and look fair and consistent to fans.

The VAR tech isn't simply drawing a line on a TV replay though, it does have a 3D element to it. That's why they're able to judge offsides when the camera is not in line with the last defender.

If we're using VAR then we all want it to improve and I'm sure that hawkeye are already working on the next upgrade (12 months ago the tech was just a straight line across the pitch) and better cameras with higher frame rates will be used (again, some say they're being used now) but this is currently the best way to judge offside.

VAR for offside, imo, has been much better and consistent than VAR for pens & red cards but the reason why we're talking about it in this case more is because of the offside law. A change to that law needs to be made so that it gets back to what it was intended to be.

 

[BaZ87]

I understand the difference, I was just commenting on the fact that we're complaining more about VAR in relation to offsides than we are subjective calls when in fact offside calls have been more accurate and consistent. That shows me that the real issue isn't VAR but the offside law.

Heard on the radio this morning that FIFA are looking at the offside rule, daylight between players was mentioned.

I mentioned it last night. They're discussing changing the law so that instead of 1mm of the attacker being ahead of the defender being flagged as offside, as long as 1mm of the attacker is level or behind the defender they'll be onside. Assuming FIFA agree to this, it then needs to be proposed to IFAB and if they agree it will need to be trialled. I'm sure, at least I hope, this will never pass because it's a terrible idea.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1211968003799207936

If the above suddenly becomes onside, defenses will just drop deeper and deeper. Teams will be defending set-plays with defenders practically on the goal line and in open play they'll be on the edge of the 18 yard box.

 

[BaZ87]

I thought the rule would mean it's much like it is now but on close calls if there is no daylight between the players they are onside. The above picture would still be offside.

Nope. There's two different reports come out last night.

1. IFAP are reportedly going to recommend changing how VAR is used for offsides (which could be introduced this season) so that if they cannot determine a player is either on or offside using the tech within a few minutes, the original on-field decision stands. So we're going to still spend those minutes looking at the decision but we'll then just stick with the on-field decision, which imo is totally pointless - we'll get all the delays and uncertainty of VAR but with the exact same decisions as we had without it.
   
2. FIFA are reportedly discussing changes to the entire offside law which could be years away if it happens. As above the possible change will be to flip the current rule whereby if 1mm of the attacker is onside then they're onside rather than 1mm being offside = offside. I don't think this will ever happen though, it's a short-sighted idea that will be terrible for football.

 

[BaZ87]

It should be the same as it is now but measured from their feet. So in the image above, no part of Sterling's foot could be ahead of the defenders foot. He can lean offside but no part of his foot can be in an offside position. That will give the benefit to attackers without allowing them a huge headstart that will lead to defenders camped on the edge of their 18 yard box.

 

[BaZ87]

That would work as well. Basically, it just needs to go off the feet..

That edited image above looks really bad, but if you were to stand Stirling upright, his body is inline with the defender.

He's not stood upright though, he's sprinting forwards and if the rules changed how FIFA are reportedly in discussions about then he'll have a huge advantage over a defender.

No it wouldn't.

The game will not change, team tactics and philosophy isn't going to be uprooted because the defenders have to give an extra yard

They absolutely will change. I mentioned earlier in the thread how Liverpool are actively doing the opposite at the moment because they're confident that these 10cm offside decisions will be given off. If suddenly attackers are going to have 70-80cm advantages then defensive lines will naturally drop deeper to counter it.

 

[BaZ87]

Natural body position is not an advantage. There's nothing that can be done to counter the fact that the attacker will be leaning in a different direction to the defender most of the time. Its the right thing to do, go off feet, since it is football after all.

Like i said, defenders giving an extra yard is not changing how the game is played, it's such a trivial point. There will be no discernible difference in how the game plays.

First of all, I've suggested going off the feet but crucially it should be no part of the foot is ahead of the defender, not one small part of the foot being onside. It may seem a small difference in theory but in practice it makes a huge difference.

Rewind to the start of this season and watch every pundit discussing how high Liverpool were defending. You cannot say there will be no difference when we've seen with Liverpool this season that teams will defend differently due to a tiny difference in the way offsides are called - that difference being that VAR will pick up the 10cm offsides that a lino wouldn't. If Liverpool are willing to defend 10 yards higher up the pitch because VAR has meant defenders get an extra 10cm or so leeway, they will absolutely drop deeper if the change in the offside law means a 70+cm swing towards the attackers.

 

[BaZ87]

There won't be any discernible difference i said, Liverpool aren't going to drop 10 yards because of this rule change, they might drop off a few yards, but it won't make any real difference to how the game is played, the average punter won't be able to tell that a team is defending a couple yards deeper than previously. An average pitch is 115 yards in length, a couple of yards isn't going to do anything to how the game is played basically. People here are overstating what impact its going to have..

How can you say there won't be a discernible difference when we've seen one this season as a result of a marginal difference in how offsides are called? Everybody noticed at the start of the season that Liverpool were defending noticeably higher simply because they trusted offsides to be called correctly. That's with 0 change to the actual law. Any of the proposed changes to the offside law will have a far greater effect on how teams defend than the introduction of VAR and if Liverpool are willing to push up a lot more now, you can be 100% certain that we'll drop a lot deeper if any of these changes are made.

I don't accept that.

The average depth or width of a human being is a few tens of centimetres.

You won't suddenly be able to be on-side standing on the goal-line when the defenders are up the pitch.

The depth of a player isn't relevant. If a player is leaning forwards, about to or already sprinting, they'll effectively have a headstart on a defender of anything up to a meter. With forwards already having an advantage over defender's in these foot races (as defenders typically are reacting to a forwards run) it will be 10x harder for defenders to defend balls in behind. The consequence of that is teams will defend much deeper to prevent teams running in behind at all.

 

[BaZ87]

If you told the athletics people to just use a TV camera situated at angle to the finishing line and to draw lines they would laugh at you, the only way it can be totally accurate is to be DIRECTLY in line with the last man and be of a high enough frame-rate for the captured moment not to be a blur. Anything else is a digitally manipulated interpretation so I don't buy into the "offside is a matter of fact" argument, it's only a matter of fact if you can be 100% accurate which it will never be using the current method.

The current method isn't what you think it is though! The hawkeye technology caliberates the cameras to factor in the angle of the replay so that the line going across the pitch is effectively the same as if it was directly in line.

The frame rate is another matter but it's still better than the non var alternative from an accuracy pov anyway.

 

[BaZ87]

Liverpool haven't started defending massively higher because of any rule changes at all.

Massively is subjective but we 100% have been defending higher since the introduction of VAR. It was noticeable within the first few weeks of the season to the point that Carragher and Neville done something on it on Monday Night Football and if you subscribe to the athletic, there's an article on their about it.

 

[BaZ87]

Would you have noticed if Carragher and Neville had not talked about it?

It's their job to analyse small differences in tactical play, but it isn't obvious to the average fan.

Yes, I did notice. I also noticed how Klopp responded to interviewers questioning him about teams getting in behind our defence and how he'd reply by pointing out they were offside only that the flag wasn't raised because of VAR (and if a goal had been scored they would have been ruled out of course).

It might not be obvious to you but to anybody that watched Liverpool every week, it was clear. And again, this change is a result of just more accurate decisions being made, not a change of the rules. If the rules were changed the difference in defensive lines would be even greater.

I'm not sure if you watched the Liverpool Wolves game the other night. There was an incident in the first half where a Wolves attacker made up about a 2 meter headstart on Joe Gomez (one of, if not the quickest defender in the League) simply because Gomez was having to react to his run, rather than setting off at the same time. Gomez only just beat him to the ball. If the attacker would have been able to start 50cm-1m further forwards and still be onside when the ball is played, he beats Gomez to that ball. If this starts happening to the quickest defenders around, what do you think will happen to almost every other defender? Getting in behind back lines will become too easy and defending will change to counter that and when you end up with almost every side in the League playing with their back line barely beyond their 18 yard box, football will be much worse off.

 

[BaZ87]

I'd rather have more goals and attacking play, than some tactical masterclass where every goal is chalked off for 2mm off-sides.

This is the short-sighted view that I'm talking about. There will be no more goals or attacking play. As soon as teams start conceding more goals as a result of attackers finding it easier to run in behind without being offside, they'll just defend deeper to the point at which it's no longer possible (or at least incredibly difficult) for an attacker to run in behind. The rule will mean there will be less attacking play and less goals.

Liverpool already face teams that defend deeper than they do against most other opponents so it's not going to be massively different for us but when you see a load of 0-0's between mid-table and lower sides because both sets of defences are 20 yards from their own goal then you'll wish the law was never changed.

 

[BaZ87]

I watch every Liverpool game, i noticed a slightly higher line, but that's because i analyse Liverpool weekly for my coaching.

The point still stands, and you won't be able to convince me otherwise, there will no major difference with how a team plays because the defensive line has to adjust a few yards or not.
It's absolutely not true that every side's back line will be just off the penalty area, i've no idea why you think it'll create such a massive change. We'll agree to disagree and we'll review if that's true in the future.

So you did notice a change, glad you've admtted that finally and what was the only reason for the change? VAR. So teams are defending differently simply because the current law is being more accurately measured. Now if you're admitting that, to then say you don't think a massive change in the law will result in a big change in the way teams will defend is simply mind boggling.

We'll not have to review this in the future because I don't believe this law will ever be approved. As Dale Johnson said in another one of his tweets, previous changes to offside have been trialled and weren't approved because of the massive negative implications they caused.

I don't think you can ever engineer a situation where the attacker doesn't have some kind of advantage. The attacker can have a massive advantage even if he starts well onside. Simply because he's running toward the goal and your defender is either facing away or sideways on.....

It's almost as if you haven't read my posts where I've stated that attackers already have an advantage. As I've also already pointed out, it's already incredibly difficult for defenders to defend high up the pitch because of this advantage. If you give attackers and even greater advantage it will only make it even harder and that will mean they will stop doing it. It's just common sense, not scare mongerng.

edit: It's actually baffling that you two can't see the consequences of this possible change. Ignore the offside law completely for a minute. Why do teams defend deeper vs Liverpool and City than they do vs most other side? Because Liverpool and City terrorise teams in behind. The easier you make it for a side to run in behind, the deeper defenders will drop. It's incredibly easy to understand.

 

[BaZ87]

Sorry if that's not going to suit Liverpool. There are other teams and fans to consider.

I'm not sure if you're just on the wind up or you lack a basic understanding of football. It will benefit Liverpool more than anybody else. We already have to play against sides that sit as deep as possible to prevent us running in behind. There will be no more room for these sides to drop any deeper without being even more suffocated than they already are. It's the quality of football in matches not involving the likes of Liverpool and City that will suffer.

the defensive line might be slightly different, sure, as i said previously.

So zero change in the actual law, just the law being more accurately implemented, has resulted in a difference yet a major change to the law won't make a noticeable difference to the way teams defend?

 

[BaZ87]

Like i said in a previous post, i think your are overstating how big of a change it is. Fans won't really notice the difference in tactical battles between the different sides, that'll stay the same essentially.

Even Stevie Wonder can see the difference between how a side defends vs Liverpool or City compared to how they defend vs Newcastle (for example) because of the increased likelihood of them running in behind. There is a clear correlation between the more likely an attacker is to run in behind and the deeper a defence plays. It's probably not worth going round in circles anymore though.

 

[BaZ87]

That's not new.

"Parking the bus" was a thing long before VAR.

It's only a thing when the top sides play the bottom sides. It would become an even bigger thing if this rule change were to happen and would involve sides not capable of breaking down deep defences and as a result lead to more boring matches.

 

[BaZ87]

Well it looks like everyone who would rather defer to the less accurate linesman for tight calls will be seeing their preference enacted and IFAB will be reissuing guidance in a couple of months to say VAR should only be used for clear and obvious in ALL circumstances, including offside.



I have my reservations whether this will be any better, you'll correct all the calls that are yards offside/onside but anything closer than that and we're just going to defer to the linesman and hope his guessing game is up to par.

IFAB have now backtracked on or at least clarified these comments:

https://www.espn.co.uk/football/eng...ar-even-to-the-tightest-of-margins-ifab-chief

'Clear and obvious' will not be applied to offsides, hawkeye lines will stand no matter how tight the call and all he wanted to say with his previous comments was that VAR officials need to work quicker to establish their decision. He also appears to rule out any margin of error being used too.

 

[BaZ87]

It's a terrible idea that will have huge knock on effects to how the game is played. The image in the tweet below would now be considered onside - at the very least forwards would have a full yard headstart on defenders making playing somebody offside both nigh on impossible and incredibly risky. What will be the consequences of that? Teams will drop as deep as they possibly can to make it as hard as possible for attackers to run in behind them.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1230096972738179074

 

[BaZ87]

It wouldn't be extreme if the rules were different though. Forwards would actively position themselves ahead of the last defender with just part of their foot in-line. Defenders are already disadvantaged in the sense that they are reacting to the forwards run, if the forward is now permitted to be more than a meter ahead of them too it would become impossible for them.

I mentioned earlier in the thread that Liverpool have made a conscious decision to defend higher up the pitch since the introduction of VAR because the 10-20cm offside calls that weren't being given pre-var are now being given. If teams are defending higher because an extra 10-20cm advantage for defenders then what will they do if a rule change gives forwards a 1 meter advantage? I seriously doubt IFAB would allow this rule change without trials and I'd bet anything that the trials resulted in teams defending much deeper than before.

 

[BaZ87]

No it doesn't, we've done testing with this already, these past 2 months we've run games using this application of the law. Nothing changes, you are using extreme examples in the above tweets and the fact that it's a snapshot makes it far worse than it actually plays out on the field.

There will be slightly more goals in games, and that can't be a bad thing.

With the greatest of respect, I don't believe a word you say Trusty.

IFAB done testing for a change in the offside law from free-kicks before and the change was scrapped after it resulted in both sets of teams camped in the 6 yard box.