The technology to improve VAR absolutely exists already. You can use this same technology as the video below to freeze the frame and move around to see virtually any other view of the field. https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=863681444073779
Wenger is not asking for daylight. “Arsene Wenger wants the offside rule, when used with VAR to make more sense. Instead of punishing a player for being a little bit offside, Wenger wants to reverse that so if a part of him that can score is in line with the defender, he is ruled on.” The Offside Law has been subject to multiple reinterpretations. IIRC you are right, at one point daylight was the law, though I believe that interpretation was short lived. Under the proposed interpretation Giroud would have been onside, as would players whose upper body lean on free kicks see them ruled offside while there feet are in line with the defender. While calls that are a matter of centimeters would still stretch the limits of the technology, if more of the attackers body is seen as offside, those calls will be less controversial.
Honestly I'm not sure what Wenger is saying/wanting exactly. But it's starting to remind me of the rule for the ball being over the line. The *entirety* of the ball has to be over the line (thus a little bit of daylight) for it to be a goal or out of play. So perhaps what Wenger is proposing is analogous... the entirety of the players body must be in front of the 2nd to last defender for it to be offside (thus daylight). At least the body minus the arms. I could go for that. And I don't think it would be as big a change to the game as many other rule adjustments over the years. p.s. I still hate that they allow passive offside... I really would like to go back to the old rule that if anyone is offside the team is offside, period. I know, I know that's not likely to happen soon because it's not consistent with giving the attacking team the advantage, but I still think it would simplify and clean up decisions a ton.
OK, OK I see where you were coming from. But frankly I'm a little more intrigued by your mobile provider being TESCO. Seriously? Your supermarket sells and manages your phone??
Yeah .. Tesco are massive over here and gave us a great price As regards the ‘daylight’ .. I’ve no idea what Wenger is really saying but those were the sites that mentioned daylight ..
This change would require defenders to re-learn how to defend. If FIFA makes this rule change, buy bus stocks.
I don't know if that is true, it might make the offside trap more difficult in practice. But the advantage to having runners from deep offensively is far greater than the theoretical 40 cm you might gain do to this rule for a CF. I think what it means is truly explosive strikers on the shoulder of a CB will get called offside less often. Where it remains just as hard is the winger being kept on/offside by the FB or CB on the opposite flank, which they might just let run and let VAR sort it out later. But, that has its own effect on the game.
I actually think the task is basic, and they no doubt have this already on their own screens. I mean if the cameras are not already synced to the same timeline then clearly VAR cannot work at all. My guess is the video streams already flow onto a master timeline where the operators can forward/rewind the views in sync But again - how precise is the sync? no one knows
Right VAR is basically pseudo-science and the reason is, the relative vertical velocity of the attacker is not accounted for in terms of tolerance where VAR purports to deliver an absolute YES/NO Say for example, a defender has zero vertical velocity, tracking sideways towards the ball. An attacker behind him accelerates through - lets say, at a relative vertical velocity of 5m/s. The ball is now played through. Now we must select the key frame to determine if the attacker is offside. But how accurate is that frame? Let's assume the camera shoots at an industry standard 60fps (it may actually be much higher for the slo-mo cameras) Which frame should be selected at which point you can say the ball is certainly played? Determining this frame can be quite difficult where the camera is far from the ball, elevated, and the ball screens the foot. Even at a tolerance of 1 frame = 1/60th of a second the attacker has already travelled 8cm. This is before you introduce further errors like camera angle, the line itself etc etc IMO the accuracy of VAR to determine these narrow decisions likely does not exist, were rolling back one frame may place the attacker onside. Does all this matter? Maybe not, but the difference i see between rugby and football is in rugby we largely trust TMO and accept it can't solve every problem, whereas in football, belief in VAR is low.
It’s a mess I would rather not use it for offsides but to review instances if it’s not clear then award the goal
You inspired me to look into this tech a little further. Those images are based on cameras (up to 38 based on the link below), and the technology uses 3D rendering (ie computers) to fill in the gaps to make it look seamless. Even without doing any rendering, having the same array of 38 5K HD cameras on a pitch during a match would seem to give us better views than those we seem to see on VAR. Even if we 100% trusted the accuracy of 3D rendering, my guess is that it would still take too long to create the massive renders without having even longer waits for VAR to evaluate and decide. https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/sports/technology/true-view.html
Exactly. The problem with VAR, as implemented in England, is that it gives too much deference to the referee for non-offside decisions, and no deference to the referee for offside decisions. That's understandable if you take the view that offside is binary yes/no and not a judgment call, but it doesn't take into account the limits of technology.
Yep - we had it from the RWC as well - takes a fair time to render! Amazing footage though - it will eventually be real time.
Yeah you basically made the same response I was going to make to Mebe. Players have already been forced to relearn their job, with the delayed flag on offside. And back in the day defenders had to completely relearn when backpass to keeper was made illegal. So if this new offside change were to go into effect, I don't think it would be so huge a challenge to defenders. It's really just an incremental change on the same rule, no?
Let's just say it right now: Mourinho's time has come and gone. In some ways he's become no different than Wenger at the end of his tenure at Arsenal.
True - i was thinking about that a bit Of course we do have the line marked on the pitch and the lighting up bails now? So most of the time, you get both info cues in one shot? No need to search for frames? But i agree there could be tolerance issues there.
I understand the defensive implications of a daylight rule. My reading of the article I cited was that if the the attackers head and feet are inches beyond the defender, that player is offside, this doesn’t imply daylight. If instead, what Wenger is proposing is a daylight rule as suggested by different articles cited above, I stand corrected.
You could try hockey style. In hockey it is a stationary line but for soccer it could be an imaginary line across the field from the position of the last (non-goalie) defender. No opposing player is allowed goal side of that line until the ball crosses the line. An opposing player is not deemed to be across the line unless the entirety of his body is across and the linesman is not to flag for offsides unless it is obvious (meaning you defer to VAR if a goal ends up being scored vs calling a potential scoring chance dead). This would get rid of passive offsides and would give a little more wiggle room to the offensive player but would balance that out by calling offside not when the ball is kicked but when the ball crosses the last (non-goalie) defender. Think it would actually become easier for the refs to correctly call vs the current rule and would give a new meaning to offsides trap for a well organized defense.