Sam-AVFC Posted January 24, 2022 Share Posted January 24, 2022 31 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said: I’m probably being thick but shouldn’t the VAR lines run parallel with the line for the edge of the area? They do. If you stand between 2 parallel lines they look like they move towards the middle in the distance. It will be skewed a bit as the camera wont be equidistant. e.g. You can only eyeball offside using an image if the camera is directly in line. At least if you want any degree of accuracy. I wouldn't worry about being thick. VAR made it clear very few football fans understand how deceptive perspective can be. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aston_Villan4 Posted January 24, 2022 Share Posted January 24, 2022 2 hours ago, bannedfromHandV said: I’m probably being thick but shouldn’t the VAR lines run parallel with the line for the edge of the area? It’s perspective. The line at the edge of the area lines up perfectly with the camera and as you move for either side it starts to angle away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aston_Villan4 Posted January 24, 2022 Share Posted January 24, 2022 6 hours ago, blunther said: Ball hasn't left his foot yet. If it was Man United concdeing the goal, they'd be doing the VAR check one frame further forward, which is 1/60th of a second (I believe 60FPS cameras are used). Doesn't sound a lot but if the defender is static and Cavani is running at 10M/s, then he'd be 17cm further on in the next frame and therefore offside. That's the thing with VAR. They make out like offside is cut and dry. It isn't. The cameras aren't fast enough to make accurate decisions. The choice of the frame is subjective, and is never discussed. Absolutely. That’s easily the #1 reason why VAR as it stands is really kind of stupid. And the you add on the rule which makes it even more subjective. Its not just when it leaves his foot. It stays when the player has played or touched* the ball. “*the first point of play or contact with the ball should be used.” So really, good luck with interpreting all that in the moment. It shouldn’t surprise anyone that it takes so long for determination with how this rule is written. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted January 24, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted January 24, 2022 The resolution is also bobbins from the perspective of accuracy. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blunther Posted January 25, 2022 Share Posted January 25, 2022 (edited) 21 hours ago, bannedfromHandV said: I’m probably being thick but shouldn’t the VAR lines run parallel with the line for the edge of the area? Perspective ennit. For instance, looks at the six yard line which also runs parallel to the edge of the area. Edit, sorry, been answered a few times already! Edited January 25, 2022 by blunther Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fightoffyour Posted January 25, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted January 25, 2022 It's all to do with perspex 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Posted January 25, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted January 25, 2022 Really good point raised by Adam Crafton on the bbc football daily monday night club. He said why dont we leave the whole decision on whether VAR is used up to the referee. For example if he feels he hasnt seen an incident well enough he calls for a replay on the screen without the need for an outside influence to tell him to look. If he thinks hes seen it well enough then thats final. Simple but it could be effective. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted January 25, 2022 Author VT Supporter Share Posted January 25, 2022 On 23/01/2022 at 20:26, bobzy said: FWIW, I don't think Jota has deliberately stepped across to get contact. It looks like he's attempting to flick the ball over the goalkeeper using the outside of his boot - which would naturally change his line of running - but completely misses the ball, which goes harmlessly one way whilst he changes direction. It should still never ever be given as a penalty, of course, but I don't think it's Jota playing for a penalty. If Jota hasn't deliberately stepped across to get contact, then what's the difference between this incident and the incident with Ederson and the Newcastle player a few weeks back which wasn't given and everyone was annoyed about it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jono62 Posted January 25, 2022 Share Posted January 25, 2022 5 minutes ago, Nigel said: Really good point raised by Adam Crafton on the bbc football daily monday night club. He said why dont we leave the whole decision on whether VAR is used up to the referee. For example if he feels he hasnt seen an incident well enough he calls for a replay on the screen without the need for an outside influence to tell him to look. If he thinks hes seen it well enough then thats final. Simple but it could be effective. This is my thinking too. Like in Rugby, they will say I'm not sure if there was a foul or not, I've given the try, is there a reason not to. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted January 25, 2022 Author VT Supporter Share Posted January 25, 2022 7 minutes ago, Nigel said: Really good point raised by Adam Crafton on the bbc football daily monday night club. He said why dont we leave the whole decision on whether VAR is used up to the referee. For example if he feels he hasnt seen an incident well enough he calls for a replay on the screen without the need for an outside influence to tell him to look. If he thinks hes seen it well enough then thats final. Simple but it could be effective. Wouldn't this fall down when a ref misses an incident all together? If something happened off the ball, VAR wouldn't be able to tell him to look at it because he hasn't asked them to. I think it should be a combination of both. It should be a discussion between VAR and the ref. At the moment they appear to work independently. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Posted January 25, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted January 25, 2022 1 minute ago, Stevo985 said: Wouldn't this fall down when a ref misses an incident all together? If something happened off the ball, VAR wouldn't be able to tell him to look at it because he hasn't asked them to. I think it should be a combination of both. It should be a discussion between VAR and the ref. At the moment they appear to work independently. Obvious the system would have to be backed up ifor if he didnt see the incident, but a quick radio message between the 2 could sort that out in seconds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted January 25, 2022 Share Posted January 25, 2022 51 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: If Jota hasn't deliberately stepped across to get contact, then what's the difference between this incident and the incident with Ederson and the Newcastle player a few weeks back which wasn't given and everyone was annoyed about it? The difference is that Jota stepped into the goalkeeper whereas Ederson wiped out Fraser. As I say, Jota's movement is because he's tried to flick the ball over the goalkeeper with the outside of his foot but has completely missed it. He doesn't mean he's deliberately run into the goalkeeper to win a penalty, but his movement causes the collision rather than Ederson vs Fraser in which Ederson flies into him and takes him out. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a m ole Posted January 25, 2022 Share Posted January 25, 2022 54 minutes ago, Nigel said: Really good point raised by Adam Crafton on the bbc football daily monday night club. He said why dont we leave the whole decision on whether VAR is used up to the referee. For example if he feels he hasnt seen an incident well enough he calls for a replay on the screen without the need for an outside influence to tell him to look. If he thinks hes seen it well enough then thats final. Simple but it could be effective. I suggested that on here, I really think it’s the way forward (or backward). Then if there’s an incident the referee completely misses then the VAR can get in touch - “hi Jon Moss, VAR again, did you see that incident on the other side of the pitch because you can’t run?”, “No”, “Ok we’ll fire up the monitor” or “Yes, no further action necessary” They need to sort out the rules and the refs first too though. I mentioned making them watch footage in training until every ref agrees with every small and big decision they see. Learn to apply the law consistently as it is written. Then, fans will quickly learn what is and is not allowed and will give referees less shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreveryoung Posted January 25, 2022 Share Posted January 25, 2022 Comon lads, we all know ow it's about giving the decisions to the top 4 sides who bring the most money into the Prem, not about VAR. The big wigs obviously didn't think about the clarity VAR would bring to the amount of curruption within the sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomav84 Posted January 25, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted January 25, 2022 1 hour ago, Jono62 said: This is my thinking too. Like in Rugby, they will say I'm not sure if there was a foul or not, I've given the try, is there a reason not to. the video referee still does step in to alert the ref that he's missed something in rugby though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted January 25, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted January 25, 2022 Should have 10 second time limit for the decisions, if it takes longer than that then it's not clear and obvious and the refs decision should stand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkyvilla Posted January 25, 2022 Share Posted January 25, 2022 1 hour ago, Nigel said: Really good point raised by Adam Crafton on the bbc football daily monday night club. He said why dont we leave the whole decision on whether VAR is used up to the referee. For example if he feels he hasnt seen an incident well enough he calls for a replay on the screen without the need for an outside influence to tell him to look. If he thinks hes seen it well enough then thats final. Simple but it could be effective. Problem is that inevitably the ref will stop the game more and more often just to double check things that really shouldn't need to be checked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Posted January 25, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted January 25, 2022 5 minutes ago, sharkyvilla said: Problem is that inevitably the ref will stop the game more and more often just to double check things that really shouldn't need to be checked. I suppose the point is that its him who will be held accountable for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted January 25, 2022 Share Posted January 25, 2022 It should be used as a clear and obvious thing where the referee has missed something/got it wrong. You don't need forensic examinations of close call decisions - just the things that are blatantly wrong. (Although as with Ederson on Fraser, they miss these too... maybe there's just no **** hope). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomav84 Posted January 25, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted January 25, 2022 2 minutes ago, bobzy said: maybe there's just no **** hope pretty much where i'm at. stopped getting annoyed at the whole thing now. officiating in this country is beyond help IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts