I came into this thread to post exactly this point. The lines used by the actual VAR are pixel-wide and therefore are almost impossible to be "overlapping". The pictures sent to broadcasters then thicken these lines slightly to make them actually visible, but then can give the impression that two players are level when the VAR is looking at a picture that says they're not. Why they made this barmy decision I don't know (conspiracy?), but that does go some way to explaining how player who appear "level" actually aren't.
and the issue deciding which frame shows the actual first point of contact by the man making the pass?
OK, you can, but why? The player scored so the assumption is that they did gain an advantage. Nobody can categorically say what would happen had the player been millimetres in another direction but as referees, we aren’t there to guess/predict these sorts of things, we are there to react to what has happened.
Was the player offside? Yes
Was it by millimetres? Yes
Does that matter? No
Like the idea, but as the speed of sound is lower than the speed of light, reckon we're better off with pictures!If no one's gonna take up my VAR App idea, then maybe it's time to put squeakers in the matchballs. Not only will it be amusing for dogs watching at home, but you could use the sound technology to determine precise point of being kicked then use like maths and stuff to work out distance of sound v light v fps v an attacker's stray pubic hair and then still give Liverpool the decision.
Hence the maths and stuff!Like the idea, but as the speed of sound is lower than the speed of light, reckon we're better off with pictures!
It would help to know where the shoulder becomes the arm. We seem to have defined the arm as a lot longer than it was in my younger days.As soon as you can convince me that VARs can do the following three things with 100% accuracy each and every time, I'm good with accepting the overturn of these microscopic offside/onside decisions.
1) The VAR selects the right frame showing the precise point of first contact.
2) The VAR selects the most advanced goal-scoring part of the attacker's body as defined in the Laws and draws the line precisely from that point.
3) The VAR selects the legal body part of the defender closest to the defender's goal line, OR the most advanced point of the ball relative to the defender's goal line, and draws the line precisely from that point.
The offside law does not need changing. It's fine as written. The issue lies with the perception that human beings can utilize the technology with 100% precision all of the time. Until they can do that, it's very difficult for me to accept these microscopic reversals of offside/onside decisions. At some point, we have to recognize the limitations of human beings working with technology and accept that a call on the field should stand - whatever that call may be - because the video evidence isn't conclusive enough to overturn the call.
It would help to know where the shoulder becomes the arm. We seem to have defined the arm as a lot longer than it was in my younger days.
No they wouldn't. What's disturbing this season is that some of the pundits seem better at the laws than the officials (and I don't just mean the spirit of the game or even "what football expects"). Perhaps they could give robotise VAR with a bit of self-learning, a sort of AIVAR, so that it thought "is this one of those 'F... VAR' decisions I should let go"? And grrr - at Old Trafford last night, at least one decision where the AR put the flag up with it looking a very fine line between attacker's shoulder and defender's knee - it's a terrible English disease, and totally unnecessary in a league where theyr'e miked up. I really do not believe ARs in that instance should be flagging - it's impossible to be sure - and if you've got VAR why do it?Let’s not forget that managers are in high pressure positions and owners of clubs will happily sack and replace them in an instant these days, so managers will take any opportunity to blame anyone but themselves. Referees, AR’s, VAR .. it doesn’t matter as long as it’s not them. That’ll get played over and over on media outlets, MOTD etc and then the standard armchair fan will adopt the same opinions and continue to spout it into social media.
Both the Sheffield United and Liverpool offside calls were the big ones for me. Stills and VAR showed this to be offside. Minimal yes, but offside non the less. Pundits and fans alike jumped all over this saying it was too close to call, benefit to the attacker etc etc but had this been 2 seasons ago, Shearer and Linekar would have happily moaned about an AR not spotting that
That's what I mean. In my day, you got down to level with the armpit (if the arm was at your side) so the "top" of the shoulder would include two or three inches of the arm if it was extended - maybe four for Peter Crouch.The definition I have always heard (and which was in the US Advice to Referees when it existed) is that the arm starts where a standard shirt seam would be--so to the side is part of the arm but the top of the shoulder is not.
And grrr - at Old Trafford last night, at least one decision where the AR put the flag up with it looking a very fine line between attacker's shoulder and defender's knee - it's a terrible English disease, and totally unnecessary in a league where theyr'e miked up. I really do not believe ARs in that instance should be flagging - it's impossible to be sure - and if you've got VAR why do it?
That's what I mean. In my day, you got down to level with the armpit (if the arm was at your side) so the "top" of the shoulder would include two or three inches of the arm if it was extended - maybe four for Peter Crouch.