VAR

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
tigerscanada said:
You may be right dennis, I haven't looked into it in depth.
When you see the results of "Hawkeye" at Wimbledon & other major tennis tournaments, presuming the accuracy is as it seems on screen, you wonder why the displays on telly for football VAR analysis isn't at the same resolution ?
We did land man on the moon did we not ?
Click to expand...

The tennis and cricket pics are effectively cartoons. The kit more or less guesses where it thinks the ball should have gone.

I may have mentioned before, technology like this is a bag of ****e for football. It's just to give the pundits something to talk bollocks about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: balkan tiger, SW3 Chelsea Tiger and dennisboothstash
tigerscanada said:
You may be right dennis, I haven't looked into it in depth.
When you see the results of "Hawkeye" at Wimbledon & other major tennis tournaments, presuming the accuracy is as it seems on screen, you wonder why the displays on telly for football VAR analysis isn't at the same resolution ?
We did land man on the moon did we not ?
Click to expand...
Apologies for linking to such a **** rag of a paper, but the graphic explains it better than I can

Basically players move so fast that it’s impossible for the frame speed to capture the exact moment the ball is played, and between camera frames a player could move over a foot

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/f...-2-4cm-offside-allowed-13cm-margin-error.html
 
DMD said:
The tennis and cricket pics are effectively cartoons. The kit more or less guesses where it thinks the ball should have gone.

I may have mentioned before, technology like this is a bag of ****e for football. It's just to give the pundits something to talk bollocks about.
Click to expand...
So you're saying it's expensive "cheap technology" with no scientifically verified accuracy ?
Got any references to scientific reviews ? I'd love to check 'em out.
 
tigerscanada said:
So you're saying it's expensive "cheap technology" with no scientifically verified accuracy ?
Got any references to scientific reviews ? I'd love to check 'em out.
Click to expand...

I'm saying precisely what I posted. No more, no less.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dennisboothstash
tigerscanada said:
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence".
Click to expand...

That doesn't really make any sense in the context of whatever 'argument' you think you're having, but given you're demanding scientific evidence, I assume you've not researched it yourself at all, which means your post refers far more to you than me. :emoticon-0105-wink:

If you like them and you're of the opinion that they're effective, that's your prerogative. I just see them as yet another nail in the sport. <ok>
 
DMD said:
That doesn't really make any sense in the context of whatever 'argument' you think you're having, but given you're demanding scientific evidence, I assume you've not researched it yourself at all, which means your post refers far more to you than me. :emoticon-0105-wink:

If you like them and you're of the opinion that they're effective, that's your prerogative. I just see them as yet another nail in the sport. <ok>
Click to expand...
Don't think I'm having an argument - I'm asking for information from someone who appears to have a strong opinion of the inefficiency/inaccuracy of a tool being used in several sports, as well as an implied knowledge of the subject. I stated in another post that I haven't researched the technology in depth. You're the one who's appearing convinced one way. I'm asking questions from ignorance. You seem to be making statements from ignorance.
No argument. A factual observation only .
 
  • Like
Reactions: tigerincanada
tigerscanada said:
Don't think I'm having an argument - I'm asking for information from someone who appears to have a strong opinion of the inefficiency/inaccuracy of a tool being used in several sports, as well as an implied knowledge of the subject. I stated in another post that I haven't researched the technology in depth. You're the one who's appearing convinced one way. I'm asking questions from ignorance. You seem to be making statements from ignorance.
No argument. A factual observation only .
Click to expand...

Maybe you should try looking for information yourself before jumping in with a lot of empty words and demands that others do it for you. You may just find you get a better response if it doesn't come across as you simply trying to be a bit contrary on something you readily admit to knowing nothing about. :emoticon-0105-wink:.

My point is more about them not resolving the issues they're claimed to be installed for, but being a tool for pundits to continue to 'find' controversies to burble on about. If you check, you'll see what I mean about how they work.

If you can't see evidence for that, it would be a fair guess that you don't watch much football, or you're a pundit.
 
DMD said:
Maybe you should try looking for information yourself before jumping in with a lot of empty words and demands that others do it for you. You may just find you get a better response if it doesn't come across as you simply trying to be a bit contrary on something you readily admit to knowing nothing about. :emoticon-0105-wink:.

My point is more about them not resolving the issues they're claimed to be installed for, but being a tool for pundits to continue to 'find' controversies to burble on about. If you check, you'll see what I mean about how they work.

If you can't see evidence for that, it would be a fair guess that you don't watch much football, or you're a pundit.
Click to expand...

"The tennis and cricket pics are effectively cartoons. The kit more or less guesses where it thinks the ball should have gone.

I may have mentioned before, technology like this is a bag of ****e for football. It's just to give the pundits something to talk bollocks about."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You really can't defend this can you, so resort to accusing others of being demanding and having no exposure to the game.

I asked a couple of simple questions. You took umbridge and went on attack.

Sorry state of affairs.

Not a pundit. Watched every PL game this weekend. Listened to City's game ( obviously no VAR involved in an audio feed). Pretty well the same every week.

I was asking about the technology & suggesting how it might be improved to enhance its efficacy. My point. You may have had access to a source.
Apparently not. Such is life.
May you have a happy new year.:emoticon-0148-yes:
 
tigerscanada said:
"The tennis and cricket pics are effectively cartoons. The kit more or less guesses where it thinks the ball should have gone.

I may have mentioned before, technology like this is a bag of ****e for football. It's just to give the pundits something to talk bollocks about."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You really can't defend this can you, so resort to accusing others of being demanding and having no exposure to the game.

I asked a couple of simple questions. You took umbridge and went on attack.

Sorry state of affairs.

Not a pundit. Watched every PL game this weekend. Listened to City's game ( obviously no VAR involved in an audio feed). Pretty well the same every week.

I was asking about the technology & suggesting how it might be improved to enhance its efficacy. My point. You may have had access to a source.
Apparently not. Such is life.
May you have a happy new year.:emoticon-0148-yes:
Click to expand...

And for all your time and words, you're still none the wiser and VAR is still ****. <ok>
 
tigerscanada said:
My only solace then has to be I wasted some of your time which explained nothing.
Click to expand...

Despite it being the subject, you've not even bothered to state if you like technology in football or not, never mind why. All you've said is that you know nothing about it.

There are examples in this thread alone of its accuracy.

Do you like or dislike technology in football?
 
DMD said:
Despite it being the subject, you've not even bothered to state if you like technology in football or not, never mind why. All you've said is that you know nothing about it.

There are examples in this thread alone of its accuracy.

Do you like or dislike technology in football?
Click to expand...
I might not have been clear in my view either?
;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: tigerincanada and DMD
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back