MLS is Back offside VAR review

socal lurker said:

You assume a lot there. Why in the world would the AR put the flag up because he wants the VAR to check?!? He wouldn’t. The VAR checks every goal. And the AR is evaluated on getting the call right. If the AR puts up the flag, he’s concluded it’s OS. That’s the instruction—nothing changed. The only difference is that the AR is to delay the flag for a goal scoring opportunity.

Btw, OSP is objective, so it isn’t governed by C&O—if the VAR can determine the OSP part of an OS decision was wrong, the call is reversed. MLS doesn’t have line drawing technology, so the scope of can’t tell for sure is going to be higher. I, for one, think that’s a good thing, as it means we don’t get toenail callbacks from the VAR booth.

Click to expand...

I take the point about the protocol. Do they really not have any line drawing tech? How on earth do they get a "level" view? Tinker around with a clear ruler to estimate the angle?

bloovee said:

I take the point about the protocol. Do they really not have any line drawing tech? How on earth do they get a "level" view? Tinker around with a clear ruler to estimate the angle?

Click to expand...

You simply don't use lines. You watch the video without lines, a ruler, or anything other than the ability to slow the video down. If there is clear video evidence that the player is in an offside position and then becomes involved, it's an offside call. If it's obvious, you won't need a level view.

I can appreciate the whole theoretical idea of "offside is a binary decision", "He's either on or off", etc. The problem is that we now have made a mockery of VAR for offside decisions. I know there will be fans mad that maybe - maybe - their team was "wronged" because of a tight offside/onside call. I don't really care. I want to see the obvious offside/onside calls overturned. Two calls that come to mind (and please know that I'm not singling out big clubs - these are the first two that came to mind for me) are the Aguero goal against Swansea in the 18-19 FA Cup and the Liverpool goal against West Ham. Those are obvious calls that don't require any lines, and they would have been overturned in seconds.

Otherwise, be sensible about it. Give the benefit of the doubt to the attacker, start with the call on the field as the default call, and don't interrupt the flow of the game too much by spending four minutes (or, honestly, even two minutes) on a call. If it's obvious, VARs will be able to see it.

bloovee said:

I take the point about the protocol. Do they really not have any line drawing tech? How on earth do they get a "level" view? Tinker around with a clear ruler to estimate the angle?

Click to expand...

My understanding is that they took a decision based mainly on logistics considerations, not to go with the use of line-drawing technology, but that they also had a "philosophical" disagreement with it as well.

See article below where Howard Webb talks about the decision not to use it.

No virtual offside line technology in MLS

As the article says (in part):

Webb said PRO’s goal is to “make our VAR interventions as effective as possible." Though he didn’t go too deep into philosophy, it seems the aim is to not be overly intrusive.

“The on-field officials make an onside/offside judgment and that will be considered correct unless the VAR identifies, in their opinion from looking at the footage, a clear and obvious error,” Webb said. “[It] will then be deferred to the match referee to make a final judgment by reviewing the footage at the pitch-side monitor.”

Click to expand...

Thanks for posting that @Peter Grove --I hadn't seen that article and had assumed that the decision was driven by cost. I do like the MLS version better, but hadn't given them credit for doing it by design.

socal lurker said:

Thanks for posting that @Peter Grove --I hadn't seen that article and had assumed that the decision was driven by cost. I do like the MLS version better, but hadn't given them credit for doing it by design.

Click to expand...

Honestly, I do think cost did have something to do with it. However, the "MLS way" to me is a better process. Deep down, I would say neutral fans would be fine if VAR got the major "howlers" corrected. It would be interesting to see what changes (if any) Howard Webb would make to the Premier League's VAR process if he was in charge of PGMOL . . .

RefIADad said:

Honestly, I do think cost did have something to do with it.

Click to expand...

I agree, but I also think it sounds like a combination of cost and logistics - the article partly reflects that when it says that, "the technology was tested [...] but didn’t work right because games here don’t have enough TV cameras." However I think it also hints at a philosophical disagreement.