[Albion] Premier League 7-10/5/21

[GT49er]

But offside is different - you're either offside or you're not. Handball can be subjective and if a hand means a goal is scored then sure, bring it back. But offside is like goal line technology - it's a yes or no decision.

You're missing the point - as does VAR. Sadly for football in England.

If the on-field referee gives a decision on something that's millimetres either way, he's made a decision; stick with it. Under a microscope it might (or might not) be a clear and obvious offside, but it is not a clear and obvious error - and that was always VAR's remit, to spot clear and obvious errors, not marginal offsides which weren't clear and obvious.
If the error cannot be seen in real time by the naked eye, it is by definition not clear and obvious.

 

[The Wizard]

As if that was a penalty, not all contact is a foul.

 

[GT49er]

It's yet another chance to go above Palace gone with two flukey goals.

We're bound to lose tomorrow now.

Look on the bright side. If Palace had lost or drawn we could have gone above them - and we all know what would have happened then. But Palace scraped another flukey win against a side that rolled over for them but fought us tooth and nail, so we can't catch them this weekend whatever we do.
So maybe - just maybe - the gods will decide it's OK for us to win.

 

[Gazwag]

That Aguero bloke isn't very good is he

 

[banjo]

That Aguero bloke isn't very good is he

That’s why he’s off.

 

[Acker79]

If it's that close, the referee has not made a clear and obvious error, whichever way he's called it. That's the salient point which the VAR in this country hasn't been able to grasp. If a player's a yard offside, and the ref misses it, that's a clear and obvious error; if the ref blows for offside and there is a player he hasn't noticed playing the attacker onside, that's a clear and obvious error.
If it's a millimetre either way, there is no clear and obvious error.

When VAR was brought in, it was said that clear and obvious isn't the standard for factual decision. Onside or offside is factual. In the box or out the box is factual (it's why the ref didn't go look at the screen when southampton's free kick was ugraded to a penalty). Did the ball touch an attacking player's arm in the build up to a goal or not is factual.

Completely disagree. Other posters have clearly explained why if it's that close then there is a significant element of doubt (when the ball leaves the foot, where the line is measured from etc) It's 100% NOT either offside or it's not. Which is why if it's that close the call should go with the onfield decision, there should be thicker lines and it should only be measured using feet. This bollocks is completely ruining the game..

Thicker lines won't change a damn thing. They are looking and seeing that the edge of one line is a pixel or more further forward than the other. If that line is a centimetre thick, they are judging the pixel's 1cm from the feet, if the lines are two metres thick, they are judging the pixels two metres from the foot. It is still a pixel's difference. It changes nothing.


This is what I mean about the fundamental difference. You're essentially arguing 'well, the technology can't tell us exaclty enough that someone is definitely offside, so we need some wiggle room when it is close'. The authorities are arguing 'this is the most accurate technology available and we trust it. It shows us with incredible accuracy whether someone is onside or offside. That is not an opinion call, it is a factual call so not subject to 'clear and obvious error'. We believe the technology tells us beyond reasonable doubt that a player is offside, and since we can actually know that, we can't let a goal stand - if you insist on clinging to clear and obvious, it is clearly and obviously an error to let a goal stand when you know (or believe beyond what you consider any reasonable doubt) it is offside.[/u]

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

That Aguero bloke isn't very good is he

Never a penalty in a million years. Jesus ran across the defender and the himself over.

VAR one again used arbitrarily and not used either when sterling went in studs up. Disgusting piece of equipment.

 

[Gazwag]

Completely disagree. Other posters have clearly explained why if it's that close then there is a significant element of doubt (when the ball leaves the foot, where the line is measured from etc) It's 100% NOT either offside or it's not. Which is why if it's that close the call should go with the onfield decision, there should be thicker lines and it should only be measured using feet. This bollocks is completely ruining the game..

It's been proven the frame rate isn't enough to prove a player is offside on millimetre decisions likewise how can they tell the thousandth of a second the ball is moving forward from a pass. They must bring in on field call like in cricket to account for the margin of error

 

[brighton_tom]

It's been proven the frame rate isn't enough to prove a player is offside on millimetre decisions likewise how can they tell the thousandth of a second the ball is moving forward from a pass. They must bring in on field call like in cricket to account for the margin of error

I work in tv dealing with frame/field based footage every day, and like you say the technology just isn’t there to make these millimetre decisions. There’s inches (at least) of movement from one frame or field to another when someone is walking, let alone someone sprinting or smashing a ball 50 yards, so you simply cannot be as precise as they’re attempting to be in knowing when the ball leaves a players foot to figure out the point you pause the cameras and draw the lines.

 

[Hendrax]

uhm, how is that NOT a penalty.

 

[The Wizard]

uhm, how is that NOT a penalty.

Probably because Sterling slowed down deliberately to make Zouma make the contact, trying to con the penalty.

 

[swindonseagull]

Oh poor Abu Dhabi City

 

[banjo]

Oh dear. Man shitty.

 

[The Wizard]

Always hilarious to see the passive aggressive golden spoon Guardiola angry.

 

[Cheeky Monkey]

Just need WH to steal Leicester’s CL place.

 

[Thompson720]

Asking for a friend x

 

[banjo]

If Welbeck’s wasn’t a pen that was never one.

 

[dazzer6666]

Never a penalty in a million years. Jesus ran across the defender and the himself over.

VAR one again used arbitrarily and not used either when sterling went in studs up. Disgusting piece of equipment.

It’s not ‘equipment’. It’s supposedly highly qualified and experienced wankers watching endless replays on a telly.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

It’s not ‘equipment’. It’s supposedly highly qualified and experienced wankers watching endless replays on a telly.

Yeah, agreed. Just couldn't be bothered to qualify it. Lots of people make defence of var by hiding behind the people and their interpretation of rules. However it's implemented, with people involved, there will always be problems and inconsistencies which will not always be fair on teams. It is hideous and is ruining the game. I believe more supporters are dissatisfied by injustice than before its untimely introduction.

 

[Easy 10]

Probably because Sterling slowed down deliberately to make Zouma make the contact, trying to con the penalty.

Sorry but anywhere else on the field, thats a foul. Zouma is all over the back of him, contact is inevitable, legs tangled with no chance of Zouma winning the ball. Clumsy as shite. Whatever you think of the Abu Dhabi regime, thats a stone wall pen for City. If that was a decision against BHA, I would have gone absolutely apeshit and would probably be spending my evening now looking for a TV repair man.