The pressure won't be "off the referee", but criticism of the referee will be lessened because some of the blame will be deflected to the manager. And to be clear, I'm advocating for a coaches challenge in addition to the current system, not in place of it. Anyway, as you pointed out, we're getting off topic, so I'll rest my case....
I’m curious on everyone’s thoughts on the Orlando review for offside. I get the attacker that scores is very much in an onside position but doesn’t the player in offside position force the defender to take a longer route to the ball? Isn’t it at least not clearly wrong to give offside here?
I need to go look at that one again, but I would figure they didn't have interference on the field so even if you *could* call it, it's a different offense than what was actually called, and it would still need to be a clear and obvious error in and of itself to not call that player specifically for interfering with an opponent.
So I thought that. But let’s imagine a scenario where the interference was even more obvious (like the attacker jockeyed and blocked the defender intentionally) and offside was 100% correct. We wouldn’t have expected them to recommend a review because the wrong offside offense had been called right? Does it really matter how we get there? And in fact, the only people who know what is actually called are the refs?
Back when I was still going to games they played a little video before every match that explained the VAR process. I don't know how many people in the stadium were ever paying attention. I'm not sure how much more the league or PRO could do. People are still going to complain no matter what they do. Is it really the fans who were clamoring for VAR? Or was it the leagues, teams, gambling interests? With respect to putting microphones on the referee and that leading to more yellow and red cards...good. I expect players would learn relatively quickly that they need to adjust their behavior.
I don't think I am breaking my commitment to not comment anymore on Week 27 by saying I've been reviewing the work of @OffsideModeling and I retract all snippy/ skeptical comments I've made on his work; it seems objective, well done and very convincing.
And maybe this reopens something we shouldn't, but OffsideModeling has used the new angle to revise his calculations. He now sees it as almost 2" offside. Hurray, more data makes a better model.With the addition of the new angle, I expect that Etienne was offside by almost 2". pic.twitter.com/1Dk27DS0Kw— SoccerPhotogrammetry AKA "A Nice Gentleman" (@OffsideModeling) August 29, 2022
So three days later we get something close to a conclusive answer and it's less than 2" offside using angles and data that weren't available to the VAR, anyway. Does anyone still think this should have been sent down for review as clearly wrong? It's worth noting that prior to VAR, keeping the flag down here on a 2" decision with the trailing flash leg would probably be lauded as a heroic AR decision under the "even is on" and "attacker benefit" principles. Now? Not so much, I guess.
So the advanced modeling shows that it is less than 2” offside which would be within the margin of error that the premier league would have. So all of this complaining to say that in the PL, the same outcome would have been reached. PRO officials are just horrible though…
Well, the interesting question is whether or not the EPL would have been able to correctly draw the lines, right? I plead ignorance here. No idea what the standard procedure is for EPL VARs if there is a relevant body part that no available camera angles can plot accurately.
The article I read said they use 5 calibrated cameras. The wide angle, the 2 cameras on the 18, and the 2 goal line cameras.
So does anyone see semi-automated offside becoming established in leagues that use VAR? Assuming the World Cup isn’t a disaster I don’t see how it isn’t implemented wherever possible
And remember it's also being used in the Champions League this fall. So it won't be brand new to everyone come Qatar.
I can’t speak for everyone, but I do feel that this is a problem lower down the soccer pyramid. I’ve definitely seen assignors who are pretty openly influenced by “feedback” from amateur coaches and teams. I get that you can’t have an assessor on every game and that maybe this team feedback is the best approximation they get, but it introduces a ton of biases that are unfair to referees. Everything from, similarly to the discussion in this thread, a bias in favor of referees who make popular but incorrect decisions, to a bias in favor of referees who bend or ignore competition regulations that the teams don’t want to follow, to subconscious (or even sometimes more explicit) biases in favor or against referees of various races or gender. In my view, it is completely unfair to referees to use feedback from teams as any sort of a basis for appointments, at any level of the game. Only the opinions of people who know about refereeing should matter.
You’ve got my vote. In reality though, assignors work for clubs, for conferences, or for leagues. Those are their customers and to keep their job they need to keep the customers happy. I’m sure assignor don’t black list a referee based on one negative review but if consistent feedback about an official is negative, well an assignor probably doesn’t need the headache of convincing their customers why they’re wrong.