Right!!! Here’s a VAR answer to that: “Van Dijk was judged to be offside by the new boundary for handball on the arm for the 2020-21 season. The point by which he was judged offside was the bottom of his shirt sleeve, rather than his shoulder.” That was the moment that Pickford took him out forthe season and why the VARef. Vote refused a red card. However, Pickford still could have been sent off for serious foul play, despite the ball technically not being in play. But Coote decided that Pickford's challenge was not a red-card offence. Despite the Ref saying “after the match that he should have shown a red.” Still remembering that VAR is a “person” who still makes subjective calls.
Got to just LOVE calls like this: Patrick Bamford was given offside against Crystal Palace as he pointed for a pass. like Sam said. Got nothing else to do this morning. Note: these are not personal attacks. Just pointing out the vagrancies of the system and why they understandably cause people to lose faith and become upset.
as has been pounded to death on here, the current video technology isn't fast enough (fps) to determine positioning of ball+player. how will AI do any better than the human eye> answer - it won't. so all this AI thing would do is make offside decisions faster. it doesn't make them better. from that article: It will produce: - accurate kick point and ball detection [??does "point" = "time" or "place"?] - tracking using sensor technology and video data [what is being "sensed"? that's not explained] - skeletal modeling precise to tip of a player's boot .... it will: - Remove delayed flags by an assistant - Provide a near-instant decision - Remove almost all VAR delays on offside I've read that article several times and still can't see how it will prevent a decision like the Bamford one.
That's not due to "VAR", that's a referee's mistake. No VAR is going to do away with that kind of error.
It won't. As has been said many, many times, that Bamford incident is not about "VAR". It's about the offside law. What will happen with the Bamford incident is it won't take nearly as long and we won't be shown the placement of the lines because that will be removed from the process. It's not up to VAR to change the laws of the game, it merely rules on them.
No. Coote was the VA Ref who decided that it was not a red card offense. the VA ref and the on field ref both ********ed up.
Right. Refs ********ed up. Nothing to do with VAR, or VAR tech, or protocol. The VAR ref didn't even check if it was a red like he was supposed to. There's that human element that zaq loves to romanticize so much! Except of course when it goes against Liverpool... then it's a bad thing, obviously.
Hobo my friend you can’t do that. VAR means Video Assisted REFEREE If he fkd up then VAR fkd up. You.cant separate the VA from R. it’s not an “autonomous artificial intelligence” It’s still a human with all its foibles and failures. More than once we’ve heard Clatenberg? say At the Euros “That’s a subjective decision!” When explaining a VAR call. He actually said that was normally a yellow in the Wales red card incident.
wasting your breath, mate. I've told him that repeatedly, it goes in one Hobo eye and out the other. he's obviously trying really, really hard to get hired as a VAR.
If getting a better referee solves the problem you're talking about, which it does, then yes you can. It's simple -- one is about a black and white protocol, and the other is about a failure to uphold said protocol. Those are 2 distinctly different problems, both of which are important. No one ever claimed otherwise. That doesn't mean there isn't a difference between the system and the dumb refs/administrators ********ing it up. Yeah... that is by definition a subjective decision. They will never be eliminated from the game, ever, with or without VAR. And that red was given right away by the ref. It would be a red with or without VAR, so you're proving my point about the difference between refs and the protocol of VAR itself.
Because nothing I've said to you about "VAR protocol" vs "human referees implementing VAR" is incorrect. You don't see a line where one very clearly exists. For instance, you just seemed to, as far as I can tell, "blame" (or at least fault) VAR for a subjective decision which: a. wasn't initially given by VAR and b. is by definition subjective And the fact is that VAR will will never do away with subjective decisions. So if you don't understand why that's wrong to do, I'm not sure I can explain it to you any better than I have already.
Yeah, there's nothing subjective about the law... When is the ball is considered played for offside - the millisecond it first comes into contact with the foot or the millisecond it leaves the foot? How do we define sleeve length? What is the exact requirement in CM?
It was given as a yellow card in real time and only changed to a red after video review. So with no video review the Swedes would have completed the match with 11 players.
I agree those are/can be specifically subjective decisions, when it comes how an individual person is going to rule on an offside call... but the refs don't treat them subjectively. They do a thing where they have protocol that says "here's what you do to identify the proper frame to judge this". And they identify that frame according to the protocol, and make their call based on that frame. Them placing the lines is in some way "subjective" too! But that's not what I'm talking about when I say the offside call as enshrined in the law is not a "subjective" decision. The offside law is binary. You are either on or off, and despite any flaws with any measurement system you can think of, that makes that kind of call philosophically and definitively unique from something like a handball call, or whether or not a foul was worthy of a card. One is an objective call and is set up that way within the rules, and the other is the exact opposite.
usscouse brought up the "Wales" red card... he was talking about the Wales-Italy red on Ampadu and how Clattenburg's comments at the time suggested it was a harsh call and subjective, and if it were given as a yellow would likely not have been turned into a red by VAR. And in reaction to that specific play, the ref gave it as a red almost immediately like I said. I did not say that in reaction to any Swedish red card, and Wales have not played Sweden in this tournament. So you are talking about a different call which was not under discussion here.
One of these days the reality is going to sink in that VA’R‘ is a ref. One who watches TV. It’s not some android.
Yeah, and it's a human cop who gives you a ticket for speeding... but that has nothing to do with whether the speed limit, the law, is "subjective". Like offsides, it is completely binary -- you are either over the speed limit or you aren't, just like you are either offside or you are not. The classification of those two kinds of laws (one binary, one clearly not binary) is completely separate from how the refs might reach their ultimate decision when ruling on a specific incident.
But the quote you are responding to was responding to me... and I was never talking PKs. So I don't know what you mean.
I'll believe it when I see it https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/s...prove-Euro-2020-showed-works-light-touch.html
Some of the VAR numbers aren't that different during the Euros... by the numbers, there were more VAR reviews and overturns than in the prem last season. The actual difference was not in the tech, or even tech protocol. It should come as no surprise it was the level of refereeing. This is what the prem is lacking, a high bar for overturns upheld in a consistent manner by a number of different referees. That is something the prem has not seen yet and needs to find out how to implement. "Of the 18 VAR interventions at Euro 2020: - 6 led to the award of a penalty - 9 involved offside - 2 red cards - 1 disallowed for handball In each pen / red card / handball case, the referee played on and judged no offence." The other issue is the degree to which refs are held accountable, which is obviously more difficult in a league season vs a month-long tournament, but either way... "Antonio Mateu Lahoz, who gave France a dubious penalty against Portugal, didn't referee another game after that. The same fate befell Clement Turpin of France after the pen he gave to Russia vs. Denmark." So yeah... better refs = better VAR. Quelle surprise.
And that said, some inconsistencies will be simply unavoidable. It's the nature of the subjective call: We were certainly starting to see perceived inconsistencies appear as the games moved forward. You simply cannot avoid this, because referees aren't robots and they all have their own individual subjective judgement. Only one of these (Wales vs. Italy) was a red card. pic.twitter.com/NHGE23FJ5T— Dale Johnson (@DaleJohnsonESPN) July 13, 2021
this is from the Echo - PL rule changes for the upcoming season. these are to stay in place for about ...hmmmm ... probably a month or two before they start effing around with them. and of course, with a couple of weeks before the season begins, nobody knows how offside will be handled. bunch of bloody idiots. VAR interpretation of offside The Premier League are to implement a change to the way the Video Assistant Referee interprets the offside law in the new season following the success of the system in Euro 2020. VAR has been a major source of debate since its introduction to the League, with a number of contentious calls made by using the system. One of the main areas of concern is the offside law and the tendency to rule goals out due to marginal calls. But for this season, the Premier League will use thicker lines in order to determine offsides. However, it is still unclear how thick the lines will be or what model the Premier League will follow. The International Football Association Board (IFAB) has not set a requirement on how thick offside lines need to be when using VAR. But the Professional Game Match Officials Limited (PGMOL) have struck an agreement and fans should have more clarity once the season begins. According to FIFA, only the bottom of the armpit should be classed as offside from now on which may eliminate future controversy. How many substitutions are allowed Given that the Premier League remained at three substitutions per game last season, and with the EFL reverting back to it from five, it is hard to see that changing ahead of the new campaign. However, the Premier League are yet to confirm whether teams will be permitted an 18 or 20-man matchday squad this season, after amending the rule to 20 midway through last season. New handball rule As a result of the change, an accidental handball in the build-up to a goal will no longer be deemed an offence. The new language says: "A player is considered to have made their body unnaturally bigger when the position of their hand/arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the player’s body movement for that specific situation. By having their hand/arm in such a position, the player takes a risk of their hand/arm being hit by the ball and being penalised. In addition, the MEN is reporting that the new law no longer specifies that particular positions are inherently unnatural (i.e. the removed language of “the hand/arm is above/beyond their shoulder level,” which codified specific movements as unnatural by default) or that particular movements are always not an offence (i.e. the removed language specifying that it should not be an offence if “when a player falls and the hand/arm is between the body and the ground to support the body, but not extended laterally or vertically away from the body”).
Well we'll have to see how effective the changes will be given it's the same incompetent's making the calls.