I've explained this before. If the technology has the capability to do what I'm saying below, it really is not that hard. Let's say the margin of error is deemed to be 2 inches (the company providing the technology has to be able to identify this - it's not zero). So the lines used to mark offside positions represent 2 inches wide. If the defender and attacker lines have any overlap, then the call on the field stands. If the lines don't overlap, then it either confirms the correct call or provides valid evidence to overturn the call. If the technology doesn't have this, OK. But for anyone to say the technology is 100% precise and has no margin for error is not being realistic. When the leagues act like there's total precision, you get these amateurs on Twitter drawing lines and trying to use the right frames while people think it's gospel. At the end of the day, all I'm saying (and will continue to say) is that the false perception of 100% precision of VAR for offside is not doing the officials any favors. I can also go with @code1390 's idea of "the frame before/the frame after". That would at least recognize that the technology isn't perfect and won't provide 100% precision on judging offside.
Right, but there's still a margin of error in determining that. So you've only changed where the margin comes into play, which will still be a debatable point.
If the company developing the technology says, "We have a margin of error of 2 inches for our technology", what is there to debate? This is no different than a polling company saying their polls have a margin of error of 3 percentage points. They have a method of determining this margin of error. The company says the same thing. Don't overthink this. The technology has a margin of error. The company knows this and incorporates that margin of error into the lines used to determine offside. If the defense and offense lines overlap, then the video is inconclusive and the call on the field stands.
Because the margin of error applies across the board. If its +/- 2 inches determining where two players are its also +/- determining where 2 inches from that is. I think for your suggestion to work you'd have to double the margin of error. That way of both measurements are off by the margin the same direction you still know its accurate. Which would work I suppose, but then you risk missing some "obvious" offsides because you're being extra cautious. This reminds me of a fact I learned when working at Boeing. Some engineers calculated the margin of error in every part of the 747 (I think it was the 747) and determined that if every part was off by the maximum margin of error in the same direction the length of a 747 could differ by as much as 6 feet.
Wasn't entirely sure which thread to put this in but the current MLS thread seemed the most relevant Life in MB: Coaching an AYSO game at 2pm and see that Alexi Lalas has signed up to ref. God, I hope one of my parents doesn't question his knowledge of the game.— Peter Flax (@Pflax1) October 26, 2019
The margin of error is actually Time, not distance. It depends on the frame rate of the camera, and the relative speed vectors of the 2LD and the (potentially) offside attacker. Think about it: if the relative speeds of the 2LD and POP are zero (say, for instance, they're not moving), then the margin of error is zero. If the attacker is moving at the speed of light, relative to the 2LD, then the margin of error certainly exceeds the boundaries of the state in which the stadium is located. Even if it is Texas. It's impossible to determine the margin of error as a static number. So give it up. Eventually, they'll all have to settle on "Too close to overrule the call on the field"
Exactly. So if it's close enough to draw the lines, it should be too close to overrule. In my column, I made the point that a photo finish in horse racing works because you have a defined moment -- horse's nose hits static line. Not the way it works in soccer.