When you get the wrong player and when there’s an admitted margin of error possible for when the ball was kicked versus the still image it’s a guess.They’re really not guesswork. The still image is not the technology used to make the actual decision - it’s just a representation. But, if you did draw the line from the wrong defender as is being suggested, it doesn’t matter how accurate the technology is…
I hate it too but it’s 50 frames per second from several cameras specifically calibrated so that even the camber of the pitch is taken into account. So it’s not guesswork. When they use the correct player(!) it’s precise. Too precise. The issue I think is not the accuracy but whether finding someone’s kneecap offside is really what the law was meant to achieve.When you get the wrong player and when there’s an admitted margin of error possible for when the ball was kicked versus the still image it’s a guess.
Cricket has umpire’s call precisely because the ball tracking becomes a guess around the finer margins. Same with offsides
The system they had in the WC was pretty good, essentially fully automated with just a final human check.When you get the wrong player and when there’s an admitted margin of error possible for when the ball was kicked versus the still image it’s a guess.
Cricket has umpire’s call precisely because the ball tracking becomes a guess around the finer margins. Same with offsides
I don’t know what VAR’s trying to achieve full stop. Because, if it’s better and fairer decisions and less controversy it’s failed miserably. And it’s killing fan interaction. No way we all go mental if the flag goes up and no way the Nigels get just as big a celebration when it’s ruled out.I hate it too but it’s 50 frames per second from several cameras specifically calibrated so that even the camber of the pitch is taken into account. So it’s not guesswork. When they use the correct player(!) it’s precise. Too precise. The issue I think is not the accuracy but whether finding someone’s kneecap offside is really what the law was meant to achieve.
Just get rid, sucking the enjoyment out of a goal being scored.I don’t know what VAR’s trying to achieve full stop. Because, if it’s better and fairer decisions and less controversy it’s failed miserably. And it’s killing fan interaction. No way we all go mental if the flag goes up and no way the Nigels get just as big a celebration when it’s ruled out.
It might be 50 frames a second but I saw some examples a few years back where you couldn’t work out the exact frame when ball contact was made. If VAR is used in this scenario then it is guessworkI hate it too but it’s 50 frames per second from several cameras specifically calibrated so that even the camber of the pitch is taken into account. So it’s not guesswork. When they use the correct player(!) it’s precise. Too precise. The issue I think is not the accuracy but whether finding someone’s kneecap offside is really what the law was meant to achieve.
I hate it too but it’s 50 frames per second from several cameras specifically calibrated so that even the camber of the pitch is taken into account. So it’s not guesswork. When they use the correct player(!) it’s precise. Too precise. The issue I think is not the accuracy but whether finding someone’s kneecap offside is really what the law was meant to achieve.
As much as I love the narrative - cameras are supplied by the various OB companies that broadcast the games - and they change each match.The system they had in the WC was pretty good, essentially fully automated with just a final human check.
However, that needs decent cameras etc. which is fine for most, but clearly not the likes of palace who seem to have one camera on a crane.
I can see this can benefit either team, but it still a margin of error, depending on angle how do you discern when the ball has left the foot ? I take it that this is decided by a human. How many frames are there per second ? The errors accumulate and it makes no sense to call offside by cm. On top of this we clearly have fcukwits in charge of the lines.I believe it was noted when VAR came in that they take the first frame after the ball leaves the foot (the first frame in which there is a gap between the player's foot and the ball). It was framed around the discussion of whether 'playing the ball' means making contact, or when it leaves the foot.
I don't know that either way always offers an advantage to the attacker or the defender because there's so much variance - delay it a fraction and the defender stepping up (away from goal) is a bit further awat that before, or the defender tracking back may had pulled level with the attacker who stuttered to stay in line with the ball. Call it with the first frame the foot touches the ball, and the reverse applies.
I'm not so sure.The image posted on MOTD Twitter suggests to me that he would have been onside with lines from the correct defender.
I agree. Mess up like that and you should be out.How can they get away with impacting the integrity of the competition with no repercussions?