The Ref Stop

Man C v Wolves (another VAR offside decision)

B

bloovee

RefChat Addict
I know not being straight on can distort but really, given the choice of when to freeze the play, and that no-one can say exactly where the boundary is on any one player between shoulder and arm, how much money would you have put on this being offside?

www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk

Gary Lineker mocks Man City disallowed goal against Wolves

Aymeric Laporte's goal for Man City against Wolves was ruled out for offside.
www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk

About a minute in:
Www.mancity.com/citytv/mens/man-city-wolves-premier-league-extended-highlights-2-march-63750303
 
The Ref Stop
where to draw the vertical line on laporte is absolute guesswork (as is which frame to take) which is my biggest issue with VAR on offsides and using subjective decisions to make incredibly tight decisions that could easily determine a title or relegation one way or another.

that said, the lino gave offside so i'm not aggreived with the outcome here as he wasnt clearly wrong (which is how i'd really like to see offside decisions managed using this tech)
 
VAR was partly brought it to correct some outrageously bad decisions by ARs. Since VAR I can't recall many truly awful calls by an AR. Make of that what you will, but I think the issue is that VAR is not objective on these close calls, and that not many believe that VAR can be absolute on whether an incident like this is or is not offside.
 
I think this is just a further example of the ridiculous corner football has backed itself into re offside. It looks like the line has been drawn from lower down the arm, but the pictures just aren't clear and which frame to use/where to draw the line is a very imprecise art.

For what it's worth I think it was onside (certainly looked like it with the naked eye), but it's no different to the decisions that we see every weekend and will continue to see until they find a better way. I'd be all for a margin of error where it stays with the on field call (similar to umpires call in cricket); it would at least give some consistency with decisions week to week.
 
the dutch are doing this in exactly the way i'd look at offsides using VAR and current technology. they've built in a 10cm margin of error into the process and if these lines overlap then the original call stands, if not, it's overturned. very straightforward way to account for the obvious accuracy errors in the current process
 
There is actually very good point in the article. Is there ever any time the players are level? if not why is it in law, if yes how come we have never seen it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: es1
one said:
There is actually very good point in the article. Is there ever any time the players are level? if not why is it in law, if yes how come we have never seen it?
Click to expand...
I think I've made that exact point a couple of times already. Why is it that we've never seen an example yet where the VAR decides that the lines are exactly on top of each other, therefore the players are level and there is no offside?

The fact that they always end up with a situation where one line is closer to the goal line than the other, tells me that they're not doing it totally objectively. It indicates to me, they're setting out with the objective of forcing a clear decision one way or the other when just by the law of averages we know that occasionally the players must actually be level.
 
es1 said:
the dutch are doing this in exactly the way i'd look at offsides using VAR and current technology. they've built in a 10cm margin of error into the process and if these lines overlap then the original call stands, if not, it's overturned. very straightforward way to account for the obvious accuracy errors in the current process
Click to expand...
I hate to cite him yet again, but Dale Johnson did a thread a while ago explaining why this 10cm margin of error is basically little more than lip service to people who moan about VAR and would make very little difference to actual decisions. He went through each "armpit offside" call we'd seen up to that point this season and proved that the 10cm margin of error would have resulted in the same decision in the vast majority of the incidents where people bring up the "Dutch system".

It might sound helpful, but a 10cm margin of error doesn't really get us anywhere and needs to be dropped as a potential solution.
 
Peter Grove said:
I think I've made that exact point a couple of times already. Why is it that we've never seen an example yet where the VAR decides that the lines are exactly on top of each other, therefore the players are level and there is no offside?

The fact that they always end up with a situation where one line is closer to the goal line than the other, tells me that they're not doing it totally objectively. It indicates to me, they're setting out with the objective of forcing a clear decision one way or the other when just by the law of averages we know that occasionally the players must actually be level.
Click to expand...

I don't like the lines but if you have to use them there is a simple solution to remove subconscious bias or the tendency to do what you mentiined. Draw one line, 'lock it in' and hit a button to hide it. Draw the second line, 'lock it in' and then hit a button to unhide the first line. No moving of one line when you can see the other.
 
GraemeS said:
I hate to cite him yet again, but Dale Johnson did a thread a while ago explaining why this 10cm margin of error is basically little more than lip service to people who moan about VAR and would make very little difference to actual decisions. He went through each "armpit offside" call we'd seen up to that point this season and proved that the 10cm margin of error would have resulted in the same decision in the vast majority of the incidents where people bring up the "Dutch system".

It might sound helpful, but a 10cm margin of error doesn't really get us anywhere and needs to be dropped as a potential solution.
Click to expand...

i dont mind it coming to the same conclusion tbh

whatever we do there needs to be some sort of change of procedure to account for the fact that the technology we use is not accurate or objective, whether it's a margin of error (ARs call) or do away with the lines altogether and go down the MLS route (which you'd need more cameras for) or something else entirely based around some new GPS tech? or if we come back to the laws themselves and see them rewritten to help by only specifying that feet are used to determine offside?

something needs to be done as the current procedure is not fit for purpose
 
es1 said:
i dont mind it coming to the same conclusion tbh

whatever we do there needs to be some sort of change of procedure to account for the fact that the technology we use is not accurate or objective, whether it's a margin of error (ARs call) or do away with the lines altogether and go down the MLS route (which you'd need more cameras for) or something else entirely based around some new GPS tech? or if we come back to the laws themselves and see them rewritten to help by only specifying that feet are used to determine offside?

something needs to be done as the current procedure is not fit for purpose
Click to expand...
The problem as always is that I can easily pick holes in every one of the solutions you've suggested.

Margin of error - we just end up arguing about the decision that falls "an armpit" outside the margin instead
MLS route - sounds fine until BT start drawing lines on the pictures again and "prove" that VAR should have overturned a decision
GPS tech - results in different rules for pro and amateur football, which is something FIFA will not allow
Feet only - has been proven to be much harder for actual AR's to do. The solution to VAR not being good enough isn't to change the rules so that it's needed more often! And ditto for the often proposed "daylight" rule.

And so it all just comes down to a discussion of which problem do we decide we want to be arguing about. Sick of the "armpit offside" discussion? OK, let's change it so that we can have a few seasons of "Margin of Error" argument instead, then change it again so that we have "The AR's aren't good enough" for a few seasons and so on and so on....
 
GraemeS said:
The problem as always is that I can easily pick holes in every one of the solutions you've suggested.

Margin of error - we just end up arguing about the decision that falls "an armpit" outside the margin instead
MLS route - sounds fine until BT start drawing lines on the pictures again and "prove" that VAR should have overturned a decision
GPS tech - results in different rules for pro and amateur football, which is something FIFA will not allow
Feet only - has been proven to be much harder for actual AR's to do. The solution to VAR not being good enough isn't to change the rules so that it's needed more often! And ditto for the often proposed "daylight" rule.

And so it all just comes down to a discussion of which problem do we decide we want to be arguing about. Sick of the "armpit offside" discussion? OK, let's change it so that we can have a few seasons of "Margin of Error" argument instead, then change it again so that we have "The AR's aren't good enough" for a few seasons and so on and so on....
Click to expand...

dont disagree with any of that...

my biggest issue is that we're attempting to dress VAR offsides up as accurate and objective calls when they're anything but and you're right, any of the above either relies on more objectivity or gps which you rightly say IFAB wont allow

urgh...
 
one said:
I don't like the lines but if you have to use them there is a simple solution to remove subconscious bias or the tendency to do what you mentiined. Draw one line, 'lock it in' and hit a button to hide it. Draw the second line, 'lock it in' and then hit a button to unhide the first line. No moving of one line when you can see the other.
Click to expand...

just coming back to this, i think it's a really good idea and would remove any hint of VARs manipulating the results in any way (from a fan perspective)
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
From a City fan website - nothing to do with the technical stuff, but the whole concept of benefit to the attacker:

It definitely favours the defence. The natural position for an attacking player is to face the goal and lean in that direction. It's the opposite for a defender. So when the positions are compared if the players are more or less in line the attacker is going to be penalised. Its against the spirit of attacking football and completely daft.
 
GraemeS said:
...
GPS tech - results in different rules for pro and amateur football, which is something FIFA will not allow
...
Click to expand...
We're past that surely, with goal-line tech and VAR itself.

I'm put in mind of when (as AR) I last wanted to challenge an assessor, but kept quiet for the sake of the CR. Assessor said I'd missed two offsides, in the same move. Seeing he wasn't anywhere near level for the first, and 40 yards back for the second, I thought just that, but said nowt...
 
bloovee said:
We're past that surely, with goal-line tech and VAR itself.

I'm put in mind of when (as AR) I last wanted to challenge an assessor, but kept quiet for the sake of the CR. Assessor said I'd missed two offsides, in the same move. Seeing he wasn't anywhere near level for the first, and 40 yards back for the second, I thought just that, but said nowt...
Click to expand...
Both systems use the same laws, but pro level just has a few extra tools and gadgets to help them implement them. Changing the offside line to the position of a GPS gadget on the chest or in the boots would result in the actual "correct" position of the offside line being different depending on if the match is covered by VAR or not.

I get that it's a very picky distinction, but it seems to be something IFAB take (and intend to continue taking) very seriously. I still think we're a way off the use of any system that actually requires that kind of change to the laws in tech vs non-tech supported games.
 
GraemeS said:
Both systems use the same laws, but pro level just has a few extra tools and gadgets to help them implement them. Changing the offside line to the position of a GPS gadget on the chest or in the boots would result in the actual "correct" position of the offside line being different depending on if the match is covered by VAR or not.

I get that it's a very picky distinction, but it seems to be something IFAB take (and intend to continue taking) very seriously. I still think we're a way off the use of any system that actually requires that kind of change to the laws in tech vs non-tech supported games.
Click to expand...
There's no change in the offside law, just how it's decided (AR or tech).
 
GraemeS said:
The problem as always is that I can easily pick holes in every one of the solutions you've suggested.

Margin of error - we just end up arguing about the decision that falls "an armpit" outside the margin instead
MLS route - sounds fine until BT start drawing lines on the pictures again and "prove" that VAR should have overturned a decision
GPS tech - results in different rules for pro and amateur football, which is something FIFA will not allow
Feet only - has been proven to be much harder for actual AR's to do. The solution to VAR not being good enough isn't to change the rules so that it's needed more often! And ditto for the often proposed "daylight" rule.

And so it all just comes down to a discussion of which problem do we decide we want to be arguing about. Sick of the "armpit offside" discussion? OK, let's change it so that we can have a few seasons of "Margin of Error" argument instead, then change it again so that we have "The AR's aren't good enough" for a few seasons and so on and so on....
Click to expand...
Whoa there - thought we decided a long time ago that with VAR there ARE different rules for VAR and non VAR games.

In this exact thread, as someone claims, there is no 'level' in VAR land, when I have the flag, I am surprising good at calling an attacker 'level' ;)

On a general more serious point, myself and others have been 'called out' many times for pointing out laws and interpretations that are different at the top to grassroots, to use that as a reason for not tweaking with VAR, just doesn't wash with me.
 
GraemeS said:
Both systems use the same laws, but pro level just has a few extra tools and gadgets to help them implement them. Changing the offside line to the position of a GPS gadget on the chest or in the boots would result in the actual "correct" position of the offside line being different depending on if the match is covered by VAR or not.

I get that it's a very picky distinction, but it seems to be something IFAB take (and intend to continue taking) very seriously. I still think we're a way off the use of any system that actually requires that kind of change to the laws in tech vs non-tech supported games.
Click to expand...
From what I know of current GPS technology, I'm not convinced it would give a higher accuracy than current video systems. Phones/watches are typically refresh at 1 second or slower and have margins of error measured in feet. How accurate GPS is also depends on where the satellites are. There are definitely more accurate technologies than what is in a phone/watch, but they rapidly get more expensive, and I'm not sure they ever get precise enough to be practicable for determining OS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top