[Albion] Offside?

[Acker79]

I've been trying, unsuccessfully to find a link that confirms the policy for which frame to use with regard to when the ball is 'played' for offside decisions. I remember reading something in the past two seasons that explained the debate was mainly around what constituted playing the ball and whether it was the frame with the first contact with the ball etc. I believe the agreed policy was to use the first frame that showed a gap between the ball and the foot of the player who kicked it. I also can not find a link I posted previously where the premier league website noted they used cameras with a 50-something frame fps frame rate, rather than the standard 24fps.

I did find this, which brings up some info on how the process is supposed to work, in case anyone is interested. I was not aware there are two sets of lines - single pixel lines that are drawn initially, then thicker 'broadcast' lines - if those over lap there it's considered onside.

How offsides are determined by VAR

See how the Video Assistant Referee uses Hawk-Eye to make offside decisions

www.premierleague.com

 

[banjo]

Thought the way it was checked during the WC using a clear graphic was better. Is this not an option?

 

[Stato]

The authorities are too far invested in VAR to ever scrap it. The only sensible way forward is to change the offside law. It was introduced to stop goal hanging. It's now not stopping goal hanging, it's ruling out goals where players are gaining no discernible advantage from their starting position. Change the law. Require VAR to only check for errors that feature clear space and return to the rule that gave the attacker the advantage of any doubt.

Cricket deals with this kind of thing much better because it admits that subjectivity exists and accounts for that with the rule that gives the umpire's call precedence unless proven undoubtedly wrong by technology. Football referees are in a search for impossible perfection because organising bodies are terrified of television criticism and legal challenge from powerful clubs.

 

[BHAryan]

Yeh that’s definitely my memory of NSC, we all accepted match official mistakes with a hearty good spirit and never mentioned them again - the chap whose name we couldn’t type into NSC at one point was actually a figure of immense respect really, we were just joshing

There were mistakes as I say but with regards to offside, generally the mistakes were so very close they were easier to accept.

General referee performances are different.

 

[Austrian Gull]

Co-commentator on the international feed was Leon Osman - he was very dubious about the goal being disallowed.

Considering he is about as Everton as it gets, he did a pretty fair job analysing the game.

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

One of the most clear criticisms of VAR I have read. Can Paul Barber ask you to come in and be present when Howard Webb hand delivers his next written apology?
Even better, can Webb resign and let you take over? I’m not being sarcastic.

If you hit 1000 shots, one’ll go where you want it, right?

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

How many titles and relegations were decided on poor decisions? Championship and below manage quite well without it.

How can you look at the stills for offside and think it works well? pixelated balls and images make it nearly impossible to call tight calls plus we have stadiums without big screens that allow more information to be given.

They are changing the rules because of VAR, the handball rule has changed almost every year since VAR was brought in.

You are demanding perfection from the referees, which is completely unrealistic, everyone else in football makes errors, refs are no different.

As for being corrupt, do you have proof?

I didn’t say it was corrupt, but it’s so bad it’s inevitably going to bring up questions of corruption. I just said that any half decent, non-corrupt, competent team would've had it working. You can debate amongst yourselves which of those boxes they aren’t ticking.

As to your first point, it’s impossible to know, isn’t it, unless someone does the work on that data.

As to whether they manage quite well without it, that’s simply not the case. I have a number of fans of Championship sides, and they moan weekly about awful refereeing, and regularly highlight that ‘VAR would’ve sorted that’.

I don’t think it works well. I’ve said that. But it’s the implementation rather than the technology that doesn’t work. Yesterday is a prime example. The ball had clearly left Gross’ foot a second earlier, so it wasn’t the right still. They took the lines from a place that makes no logical sense (see my earlier post). And they didn’t draw the lines straight. These aren’t technological issues - they’re issues relating to the people involved, whether that’s an issue of competence, corruption or decency is, again, up for debate. But the issue is still the people implementing.

And that goes to the crux of the overall point - the issue with VAR is the people implementing it, who seem to have zero common sense or ability. The fact that they’ve changed the rules so many times just further highlights my point.

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

Can we please introduce this into the Premier League?
View attachment 169200
EDIT: I have seen that this has previously been mentioned, but it really should be implemented.

Exactly. This is good implementation of the rule. Good tech and using the feet, rather than random body parts. It’s just common sense.

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

The worst thing they did was starting to apologise for things.

Ridiculous decision which open the floodgates

The issue isn’t the apology. People get things wrong. The issue is there’s no consequence other than an official getting dropped a league or two. That makes no difference to the wronged team.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Exactly. This is good implementation of the rule. Good tech and using the feet, rather than random body parts. It’s just common sense.

The foot is only used in this example, as it's the most forward part of that player's body.

 

[Seagull58]

This is all solved if they stop pretending it’s super accurate and bin off the poxy lines. Ref and Lino decide goal or no goal and VaR checks it with the naked eye. If they can’t see with the naked eye the decision is wrong then the decision stands. Similar to umpire’s call in cricket

It's not really like umpire's call, which doesn't rely on the naked eye at all. Umpire's call is a margin of error that is applied because hawkeye is calculating where the ball would have gone if the batter hadn't been in the way and is unable to predict within microns how much the ball will deviate in that situation.
What VAR offside could do is incorporate a margin of error by, for example, making the lines thicker and saying it's not offside if the lines are touching.

 

[Bodian]

Exactly. This is good implementation of the rule. Good tech and using the feet, rather than random body parts. It’s just common sense.

The foot is only used in this example, as it's the most forward part of that player's body.

Actually - I think they are drawing the line on the player in gold's knee. Presumably they were the defender - so if any 'scoring' part of the player in white is beyond the line, it's offside.

 

[Seagull58]

HawkEye run the system. Nobody said they’re tracking 22 people. From all the cameras available, they usually have a clear view which will allow the vertical line to be generated from the correct point on the body. From this the lines that show whether the player is onside or offside are generated, automatically taking into account the topography of that ground and - crucially - adapting the line to allow for the camera angle. Whether or not you can mark the exact frame is a moot point. The lines are NOT added on in the way they would have been on a traditional TV graphic. Don’t see the relevance of the incident you’re talking about. The issue was nothing at all to do with the technology - just the VAR forgetting what the on-field decision had been.

I’m no fan of VAR any more but it really is amazing that people are still saying things like ‘the lines are bent’ and ‘how can they possibly tell from that angle?’ You’re looking at a 2D image but it’s merely an illustration, constructed using information from several angles. If this article is up to date then it clarifies they no longer show the whole process - just a still image which illustrates the final decision. For obvious reasons, that will ideally be the one that shows the players in relation to the kicker, defenders and the goal - but it’s not necessarily the angle they initially used to mark the points on the body.
https://www.premierleague.com/news/1488423

The line was not drawn from the correct part of Dunk's body. It is meant to be from the armpit, not the sleeve or the elbow.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Actually - I think they are drawing the line on the player in gold's knee. Presumably they were the defender - so if any 'scoring' part of the player in white is beyond the line, it's offside.

I think we are looking at a different picture.

the player in gold is offside, the line is drawn from the defender's foot, as it is the last part of the pitch which could be onside.

 

[Bodian]

I think we are looking at a different picture.
View attachment 169204

the player in gold is offside, the line is drawn from the defender's foot, as it is the last part of the pitch which could be onside.

Aha, apologies. I was looking at post #162!

 

[Uh_huh_him]

View attachment 169202
Thought the way it was checked during the WC using a clear graphic was better. Is this not an option?

Not an option I believe, The World Cup had purpose built stadia.
I assume you need coordinated camera angles to produce a 3D representation of the pitch,.
Not feasible at the more antiquated Prem grounds.

 

[Seagull58]

But that requires a change to the way the law is administered. (because the technology is not precise enough).

The position of the feet is not the relevant factor.

IMO three things have to happen for VAR to work properly:-
1. The frame in which the ball is leaving the player's foot or head must be used
2. The line must be drawn from the correct point of the player who may be offside
3. The offside lines must be thicker, maybe 150mm, and the player is onside if the lines are touching.

 

[Bodian]

They might as well have used my photo for all the good theirs was.

 

[Seagull58]

This is where the 50 frames/s rate becomes an issue. A well struck ball will travel at about 30 m/s, which mean that it will travel 60cm per frame. Seeing as the ball in this shot looks to have travelled only 30cm, it's probably the first frame available that shows definitively that the ball has been struck. Hence the margin of error of whatever distance a player might travel in 1/50 of a second (approx 15cm).

It looks like it's travelled a metre or so to me.

 

[beorhthelm]

HawkEye run the system. Nobody said they’re tracking 22 people. From all the cameras available, they usually have a clear view which will allow the vertical line to be generated from the correct point on the body. From this the lines that show whether the player is onside or offside are generated, automatically taking into account the topography of that ground and - crucially - adapting the line to allow for the camera angle. Whether or not you can mark the exact frame is a moot point. The lines are NOT added on in the way they would have been on a traditional TV graphic. Don’t see the relevance of the incident you’re talking about. The issue was nothing at all to do with the technology - just the VAR forgetting what the on-field decision had been.

I’m no fan of VAR any more but it really is amazing that people are still saying things like ‘the lines are bent’ and ‘how can they possibly tell from that angle?’ You’re looking at a 2D image but it’s merely an illustration, constructed using information from several angles. If this article is up to date then it clarifies they no longer show the whole process - just a still image which illustrates the final decision. For obvious reasons, that will ideally be the one that shows the players in relation to the kicker, defenders and the goal - but it’s not necessarily the angle they initially used to mark the points on the body.
https://www.premierleague.com/news/1488423

stand corrected if Hawkeye the company are providing the tools. the point of the incident was we heard and saw video of exactly how they do the check, the assistant altering the frame/view, checking if thats the one the ref wanted, then moving lines to align with players. we did not see a push button operation, showing the lines in place immediatly, which would take seconds rather than the minutes we routinely observe.