VAR question

[Owdsyker]

Whilst watching one of the usual offside toenail interventions it struck me that they freeze frame when the ball is touching the players foot, in other words before the ball has been played forward, therefore nobody can be offside. Maybe they should have one of their lines between the foot and the ball confirming that the ball has been played forward. Of course anyone with a toe offside would then be a toenail offside! I asked an ex ref friend the other day and he said "interesting"
Any ex refs out there with any thoughts?

[Devils_Advocate]

There will always be two frames where one has the ball touching the players foot who is making the pass and the following frame where the ball is not touching that players foot and has been played. The exact moment of the pass will have happened somewhere between the two frames so to give the advantage to the attacker they should use the frame where the ball is still touching the person who played the balls foot.

[quoonbeatz]

Yeah, bin it.

[dsr]

I don't think the laws have ever defined what "when the ball is played" means. It might mean when the foot first touches the ball, it might mean when the ball leaves the foot, it might mean the whole period between when it touches and leaves the foot, or it might mean any single instant within that period. Four options, any of them could give different results.

Of course, the ball is only in contact with the foot for 1/100th of a second or so (during which time a sprinter will cover about 3.5 inches, his back foot will cover twice that distance). The TV pictures are usually 26 frames per second. so between frames the player will move over a foot, the defender may move a foot in the opposite direction, and so there is a possible overlap of two feet. Which makes the odd hundredth of a second a bit irrelevant, really, because the system isn't designed to be accurate to that degree.

[Vegas Claret]

VAR isn't accurate, it was proven by some university that they don't have the technology to even get close to it being correct. I'll see if I can find the article

[Vegas Claret]

this isn't the one I was talking about but it's similar, i'll keep looking https://www.bath.ac.uk/announcements/mo ... decisions/

[bobinho]

It's a great idea...really great.

Doesn't work...really doesn't work.

[elwaclaret]

It can never be as accurate as they make out. Hairline stills are nonsense there are 24 frames a second for standard broadcast. No one has ever asked for anything but an end to obvious offsides decisions. Referees building up their parts.

[roperclaret]

It’s all a load of crap anyway. Offside was introduced to stop strikers ‘goal hanging’. They should draw a line across the pitch 25 yards out and say you can get not be offside in that part of the pitch. It would make for way more open games.

[roperclaret]

* can only be

[nonayclaret]

Bear in mind, in real life of the EPL , the linesman is giving himself repetitive neck strain injury trying to judge when the ball leaves the foot whilst at the same time watching the striker/defender positions. S9 VAR , if used correctly, should give a better answer.
That said, I hate the waiting game for goal celebs and also think there should be a tolerance to the offside line drawn. If too close to call, give it the striker.

[dsr]

Bear in mind, in real life of the EPL , the linesman is giving himself repetitive neck strain injury trying to judge when the ball leaves the foot whilst at the same time watching the striker/defender positions. S9 VAR , if used correctly, should give a better answer.
That said, I hate the waiting game for goal celebs and also think there should be a tolerance to the offside line drawn. If too close to call, give it the striker.

Or they could even remember the rule about level being onside. Go back to the old rule, allow goals when the players are level, and let VAR judge it by eye not by silly lines. If the layers look level, then they are level - and toenails and shoulders don't count. Torsos can be judged, so torsos should be used.

[Nonayforever]

VAR should be renamed ARO ( another refs opinion)
To make the matter worse the " other" ref isn't even there.
To make the matter even worse, the TV viewer can see the result minutes before the other buffoon ref decides to have a look at the incident.

[Clockwork Claret]

Simple this.

Increase the size of the VAR lines to 1 foot in width and call it the margin or error which needs to be overcome.

On field refs get the margin of error otherwise overturn the obvious.

Simple. They do it in cricket already with the width of the ball.

But. Sky want all this balls and conjecture for the TV viewing audience. No doubt they plan to market VAR decisions soon and squeeze an ad break in.

[Owdsyker]

I don't think the laws have ever defined what "when the ball is played" means. It might mean when the foot first touches the ball, it might mean when the ball leaves the foot, it might mean the whole period between when it touches and leaves the foot, or it might mean any single instant within that period. Four options, any of them could give different results.

Of course, the ball is only in contact with the foot for 1/100th of a second or so (during which time a sprinter will cover about 3.5 inches, his back foot will cover twice that distance). The TV pictures are usually 26 frames per second. so between frames the player will move over a foot, the defender may move a foot in the opposite direction, and so there is a possible overlap of two feet. Which makes the odd hundredth of a second a bit irrelevant, really, because the system isn't designed to be accurate to that degree.

That's the point I was making, it's not when the ball is played it's when it is played forward. If the ball hasn't yet moved forward nobody can be offside.

[kentonclaret]

Until Artificial Intelligence takes over the implementation of VAR there will always be inconsistencies and debate. When VAR was first mooted many fans feared that it would ruin the game by removing the refereeing errors and after match discussion. They needn’t have worried it hasn’t.

[dsr]

That's the point I was making, it's not when the ball is played it's when it is played forward. If the ball hasn't yet moved forward nobody can be offside.

Nothing to do with what direction the ball is played. You can be offside when the ball is played backwards, though it's unusual - but if the ball is played backwards a man in front of the ball in an offside position can run back and he will be offside.

[Clive 1960]

For me I would only use goal line technology and leave the ref to sort out the other crap because it gets worse and worse.

[wilks_bfc]

I’ve always thought the lines are placed in the wrong place being at the front of the player

If 2 players are stood with their heels in line and the attacker has size 12 boots and the defender has size 8, then technically it’s offside

The lines should be drawn from the heel of the back foot

[atlantalad]

The OP makes a good point that raises serious questions about the validity of VAR. May be this will eventually tested out next season when Everton bring court action when relegated a contentious VAR offside leading to a 0: 1 home loss in the last game and last kick of the season. From a mechanics point of view the VAR ref cannot possibly judge the precise moment a ball is passed forward.

A ball responds elastically when kicked/ headed. That means for a fraction of a second the foot/head will physically move into, and deform a ball, so the point of contact is actually obscured as it appears to be inside the ball. At the precise moment it leaves the foot i.e. there is a gap between ball and foot so no contact, the ball will still appear to be in contact with the foot as it is still deformed and looks to be inside the ball. Unless the ball has a sensor (accelerometer) in it then the exact time the ball leaves the kickers foot/head is going to be a subjective decision made by the VAR referee.

[dsr]

I’ve always thought the lines are placed in the wrong place being at the front of the player

If 2 players are stood with their heels in line and the attacker has size 12 boots and the defender has size 8, then technically it’s offside

The lines should be drawn from the heel of the back foot

Except then if the attacker is size 8 and the defender size 12 and they stand with toes in line, he'd be given offside!

[Stproc]

I was a metrologist for a while and I understand how to measure things but more importantly the ‘uncertainty of measurement’. This uncertainty applies at the point of kicking the ball, the movement of the attacker & the movement of the defender. When you then factor in the frame rate of the video it is fairly obvious that they are interpreting the result - which is then susceptible to their own sub-conscious bias / preference.
Thereby it is not fit to be used in the way that it is.

[SurreyClaret]

Never understood why they don't simplify it by using the players heads when drawing the offside line, it's much clearer to see, would probably speed up the process, and would prevent the big toe arguments. I do like the fact they work out the point the ball is kicked or headed independently of the offside line, maybe have two independent people doing one job each so it shouldn't be subjective.

In terms of the subjectivity of VAR for fouls/non fouls, then I think they should go the route of boxing and have more "judges", with them all independently making a decision based on how they see it. I'd have 3 VAR officials plus the Referee making the call themselves, and you need a 3-1 majority to overturn a decision.