Never wanted it knew it would work. Know it will never be removed. Not here on on this Island.
-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Rules Video Assistant Referee
- Thread starter SpursNole
- Start date
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
I've just come into this thread specifically to post his post-match comments. (I didn't see any of the game last night as I opted to watch the chav one instead).
I don't hang around after games to listen to interviews, so I think this is one of the first times I've ever heard him speak. What a fantastic interview it is, calm and measured, by contrast to so many who rant and rave. I particularly love his comment about how he's okay if refs get it wrong in real time, acknowledging just how difficult it can be to spot everything.
But he's spot-on regarding it's fucking shit.
View: https://youtu.be/85Vlnk5EypQ?si=5QaLLeNn0tnUPN0H
I think what you mean is the people that using it are shit, the tech is fine.
VAR and the delays it causes has contributed to me stopping watching most games. Even the highlights shows like MotD seem to be dominated by discussing VAR. Now I record it and fast forward to the Spurs bit, and switch the rest off. Consequently, next season I'm likely to stop doing Fantasy League after 20 odd years, as I don't know who is in most of the other teams.
I also think the Tech is shit:
Off the top of my head
1. Images are graining as fuck
2. Lines drawn (no longer drawn at all now because it looks shit) are too fat and also blurry
3. Frame rates on cameras do not match freeze frames so 100% not accurate measurement - which is fascicle given offsides are ultimately now determined by cms.
4. It's so unwieldy it can take +5 mins to come to a decision as they faff about with it
5. None of this faffing around is shown in the stadium, so no one knows what the fuck is going on
6. Refusal to not have the audio on whilst all the faffing about is going on is braindead as it's the best opportunity to "sell" the decision and eliminate the social media and broadcast media speculation
7. No confidence in the TV angles used due to dodgy lines, graining images and faffing about
8. In League Cups & FA Cups (not sure about ECL teams) many teams don't have the Tech at their grounds, so it compromises the integrity of the competition as not everything is equal.
Then there are the broader aspects of the sport in general, VAR affects the fundamentals of how the game is played because the fundamentals of how it's officiated are different, which means now there exist almost 2 different codes to the game (with and without VAR). Kids learn football playing without it, whilst fat old bastards can no longer rock up on Sundays and play the same game they watch with professionals.
(I'll hold my breath on the automated offsides coming into play soon, on paper they might appear to fix some of those issues, for offsides at least but let's see it in play before I get carried away).
But the tech is definitely better than the human eye.
Having camera's and slow motion replays gives you the benefit of looking at the decisions.
But the tech isn't by any measure accurate, therefore the decisions using it, EVERY SINGLE ONE (when reviewing offside) are 100% wrong.
But back to Gordon's comments, he's okay to accept the ref's decision even if it's wrong. Where's the problem in that?
But it's more accurate than a human will ever be, which is my point.
Nothing will ever be 100% accurate but it's proven that VAR has got a lot more right than wrong and despite all the protestations it's an improvement than the old style therefore the tech works.
Just bring it back when the tech is improved and or the staff are trained, preferably both
When it comes to drawing lines on a screen, this is when the human eye can't be used (because of the angle of the TV picture freeze frame is not 100% on the 90 degrees and/or the margin of the possible offside is so small. In 100% of these calls the decision given by VAR is incorrect - EVERY SINGLE DECISION is incorrect (because of the frame rate).
Well apart from the offsides (which we have the semi automatic system coming in anyway) the other contentious decisions like pens and challenges VAR is better than the human eye.
I miss the old days when a ref's decision was final and we could celebrate a goal. It was a human part of the game for refs to make mistakes and linesman were called linesman...I hate the term assistant referee...it smacks of woke...of course I'm an old geezer so my opinion doesn't really count.
Rant over...
Rant over...
Apart from ruining the flow of the game, instead of VAR, the clubs should be going after the PGMOL.
Ya call that a rant? Pffff
Assistant Referees have been around for many years. At least everyone still says linesman anyway.
Thoughts on 'player of the match'?
I agree on the freeze frame point, they're deciding when the ball leaves the boot and they can't prove it unequivocally, especially when balls, feet and boots are flexible objects.
Not every DECISION is incorrect, sometimes they're right! But every tight call is being made on evidence with an excessive margin of error.
I do wish they would, in the absence of the FIFA semi-automatic system, use fatter lines to account for the inherently large margin of error described above. If they overlap, then we can't be sure, so it's not offside.
When it was introduced it was supposed to look at clear and obvious errors only.
But the officious little cunts couldn't help themselves, and what we got was every single goal being examined back to some indeterminate point where they hope to find any reason to rule it out and make themselves look big and clever in front of their nerdy PGMOL mates.
But the officious little cunts couldn't help themselves, and what we got was every single goal being examined back to some indeterminate point where they hope to find any reason to rule it out and make themselves look big and clever in front of their nerdy PGMOL mates.
I think(??) the margin for error is 30cm - I only heard this recently, so it's going to annoy me now where I heard this, if I can remember and I find it I'll post it.
I'm intrigued to see the semi-automated system in action, on paper it looks to address many of the current issues.
Still yet to find anyone who can explain how the length of a toe can give you an advantage in an offside decision: also I hate those decisions where the striker is 30feet away from goal, his and the defenders feet are level but a lean of the upper body makes them offside.