Goal line technology is a great addition to the game. The problem with that villa game is that when the technology didn't work, VAR didn't step up and fix the situation. The gutless pussies just sat there waiting for a watch to buzz instead of actually checking it out. VAR works for red cards and fuck all else.
-
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
So latest news
Son's toenail is offside so no goal - yeah sure !
Fleck stamps on GLC because he was our best player in midfield - no foul !
We should invade Stockley Park and insist the users are unfit !
Son's toenail is offside so no goal - yeah sure !
Fleck stamps on GLC because he was our best player in midfield - no foul !
We should invade Stockley Park and insist the users are unfit !
Translation: Should make a 3D animation that illustrates this better, but here is the reason why it is hopeless that #VAR measures the position (offside) of a player leaning in a three-dimensional space, based on a two-dimensional image.
This is fine IF they manage to EXACTLY get the moment that the ball was kicked.
IMO They should use the torso like in Athletics.
Anything that is an obvious fault ok but goals are being ruled out for toenails !
Well I don’t think that’s the remedy, but even if you do; you can’t see the ball in that image at all. It’s plainly obvious that it can’t be determined from that image and yet that’s exactly what they’ve done.
They should simply bin it off.
For the measurement to be accurate:
1. They should factor in the frame rate of the camera
2. Agree on is it when the ball is hit or when it leaves the boot
3. Measure point 2 when also measuring the player supposed to be offside
4. Take the offside measurement using the placement of the foot furthermost (before anyone says what about headers, I'd say fuck headers)
It should be binned as per above example renders the entire measurement ridiculous.
Son has not gained an advantage here. No defender or attacking player will no if a player is offside, there is zero skill involved from either a defender playing attacker offside or attacker beating the offside trap. It's just a guess.
Doesnt work for reds either
They have time matched images, use the image of ball and it ties to the other. Doesn't resolve framerates though
I've said it in another thread, but the FA could learn something from MLS on how to do the video reviews. Offsides are done in a fraction of the time, and based on clear and obvious review of the data.
The clip at 9:17 shows how quick and easily they make a decision. No drawing lines or other nonsense.
The clip at 9:17 shows how quick and easily they make a decision. No drawing lines or other nonsense.
Last edited:
I was assuming Stevie Wonder wasn't operating it
:bergwijnconfused:
Translation: Should make a 3D animation that illustrates this better, but here is the reason why it is hopeless that #VAR measures the position (offside) of a player leaning in a three-dimensional space, based on a two-dimensional image.
Thank you!
The fucking offside graphic bullshit is the flat earth theory of the 21st century, I feel like I'm taking crazy pills over here.
It should be the god damn feet or torso.
They should just stop using the lines altogether. If the VAR official cannot see a clear offside with just his eyes looking at the image, give the goal. We should be ruling goals out for clear and obvious errors not this GCSE Maths shit.
Kind of agree with this, however, no one can make an accurate call from the camera angles used to make that call. No one has a better view to call an offside than the lino, his view is far more important than anyone who views the TV Monitor, it's pointless using the monitor both with and without the lines.
The lino's toughest job is viewing the moment the ball is kicked, not whether the player is stood in an office position. He's more or less in-line with the attacker but could be 60yrs away from the passer.
Perhaps the best compromise is to use the lino's view of the attacker and whether he could see if the player is level or not and then have all the focus on when the ball was kicked??? Yes, this still doesn't get around the issues of frame rate speeds and trimmings of when the ball was kicked etc but at least it puts the only person with the best view back in some control and influence.
Should be binned anyway.
Do have to laugh at people saying offside by a toenail.
The lines were a full yard apart.
His whole body was nearer the goal than any part of the defender. It really was not even close.
On the Fleck/Lo Celso incident, the only person that really knows if it should have been a send off is Fleck himself. His foot has to go somewhere, Lo Celso was already rolling around on the ground.
Could he have done more to avoid it, probably yes, but intent has to be proven and it can't be in that instance in my view. Judgement call by the referee and VAR that it was incidental rather than violent conduct, I can live with that.
There are many reasons to dislike VAR, I especially dislike the slowing down of incidents which always make them seem worse, for example the West Ham send off last week which was subseuently overturned on appeal, and the very marginal offside decisions. The slowing down is poor implementation by PGMOL, the offsides are how the Premier League want it so many decision makers to blame for the issue.
However the decisions in our game this weekend are not reasons to dislike VAR, the first one was a clear offside to the naked eye, the second was not an obvious error that needed overturning.
The lines were a full yard apart.
His whole body was nearer the goal than any part of the defender. It really was not even close.
On the Fleck/Lo Celso incident, the only person that really knows if it should have been a send off is Fleck himself. His foot has to go somewhere, Lo Celso was already rolling around on the ground.
Could he have done more to avoid it, probably yes, but intent has to be proven and it can't be in that instance in my view. Judgement call by the referee and VAR that it was incidental rather than violent conduct, I can live with that.
There are many reasons to dislike VAR, I especially dislike the slowing down of incidents which always make them seem worse, for example the West Ham send off last week which was subseuently overturned on appeal, and the very marginal offside decisions. The slowing down is poor implementation by PGMOL, the offsides are how the Premier League want it so many decision makers to blame for the issue.
However the decisions in our game this weekend are not reasons to dislike VAR, the first one was a clear offside to the naked eye, the second was not an obvious error that needed overturning.
Last edited:
For me it's a red card for dangerous play. We can't know for sure there was intent - IMHO there was, I think he has a sneaky side eye - but there was I believe enough time for him to place his foot somewhere else at least, it didn't happen that quickly.
The intent is clear and very obvious - Fleck even had to change the direction of his leg and foot in order to bring it down onto Lo Celso's shoulder and face (you can see him bring his leg around)
No one gets a red card for "intent". It's not even mentioned in the laws of the game.
It was 100% a Red Card under the laws of the game, as highlighted below under serious foul play and/or violent conduct......
SENDING-OFF OFFENCES
A player, substitute or substituted player who commits any of the following offences is sent off:
- denying the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by a handball offence (except a goalkeeper within their penalty area)
- denying a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity to an opponent whose overall movement is towards the offender's goal by an offence punishable by a free kick (unless as outlined below)
- serious foul play
- biting or spitting at someone
- violent conduct
- using offensive, insulting or abusive language and/or gestures
- receiving a second caution in the same match
- entering the video operation room (VOR)
DENYING A GOAL OR AN OBVIOUS GOAL-SCORING OPPORTUNITY
Where a player denies the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by a handball offence the player is sent off wherever the offence occurs.
Where a player commits an offence against an opponent within their own penalty area which denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity and the referee awards a penalty kick, the offending player is cautioned if the offence was an attempt to play the ball; in all other circumstances (e.g. holding, pulling, pushing, no possibility to play the ball etc.) the offending player must be sent off.
A player, sent-off player, substitute or substituted player who enters the field of play without the required referee's permission and interferes with play or an opponent and denies the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity is guilty of a sending-off offence
The following must be considered:
- distance between the offence and the goal
- general direction of the play
- likelihood of keeping or gaining control of the ball
- location and number of defenders
A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.
Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.
VIOLENT CONDUCT
Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball, or against a team-mate, team official, match official, spectator or any other person, regardless of whether contact is made.
In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.