People love to say that VAR isn't accurate because there aren't enough frames to accurately determine the exact time. Simple solution is you just choose the earliest of the possible frames. That's where the benefit of doubt for the attacker comes in.
This is the sort of thing I’m talking about. Obviously it’s not sports or motion related but you can see immediately from an overhead shot who is the furthest forward. (If it’s between the two in the middle, they are exactly in line, the one in the pink shirt is inches further back than both of them) Imagine how hard this would be looking at it from the side from a linesman’s perspective versus this overhead view.
They need to upgrade to a suit of cameras alone the side of the pitch and analyse the footage similar to goal line technology
What about when a player is running and their arm potentially obstructs the sighting of the exact position of their foot? No technology outside of full body motion capture suits will give us the ridiculously precise margins that VAR is making calls upon. The rule needs adjusting (clear and obvious - Firminos armpit was not clearly offside) not the tech
In the picture the two on either end are both obstructing one of their own feet but it's still easy to see that neither of them are further forward than any of the other feet in the picture. Having an aerial view is just a thought of mine to help with the madness.
Why not make it so that only the feet count? They could even have sensors in the boots to facilitate this if they're that anal about it. After all, offside is arbitrary anyway. A striker in the centre of the pitch can be played onside by inches by a defender on the touchline 30 yards away who hasn't a chance of intervening, yet a defender a foot behind him on his shoulder - who could catch him - renders him offside. Like I said earlier, it's just there to prevent blatant goal-hanging, having it scrutinised to fractions of an inch is obsessive.
I'm still on the fence regarding whether I like it or not. I just want decisions to be fair and consistent. I find the inconsistency irritating. We've had goals ruled out on ridiculously minimal margins but the difference is we play to not let VAR decide the game. Yesterday was the first game in which we didn't get an insurance goal. I've always been of the opinion of doing your talking in the way you play so that refs can't take your points away or kill your spirit. Win despite them.
I obviously can't stand it at all, regardless of the implementation, due to taking the emotion out of the game and ruining goal celebrations for me personally. I don't think that will improve for me either as once you take the decision to review every goal then the damage is done. They can still make it a hell of a lot better than what they've done so far though - I'm not sure it's ever going to bring consistency on penalties mind, it's still one person's opinion at the end of the day.
Once technology became involved it was always going to be about fractions of an inch. In my mind the goal line technology which everybody seems to like is too prescriptive. Goal denied because of 6mm !! We're back to the naked eye argument again. Offside is the most contentious issue and always will be, technology or no. With technology now involved they have to tweak it even if only for the offsides that go to VAR the ones the lino doesn't flag for. If it goes to VAR then say maybe it has to be at least half a boot off.
I haven't been to the game for a few years because of my anxiety issues but I know how infuriating it is. We don't have a big screen which our fans are pleased with but now with VAR if there was one at least fans would have some clue.
Yeah I was saying to Jaffa (I think) on another board that you and United should be forced to install screens now we're using them for var really. Seems a bit silly that you can get a replay, or least information on what they're reviewing, at any ground in the league bar the two biggest clubs in the country.
They use the scoreboard to say what VAR is checking. You don't need a video of a man in little room checking his screen to confirm it. if the screen replays exactly which incident VAR is checking thenI the fans have a clue but honestly that sort of makes it worse when all the fans have a different opinion to the outcome of the check. I don't like big screens at games, at concerts (when I used to go) yes because you can see things on the stage that only a percentage of the audience can see in reality.
What happens if it is because there was a bat moth in the van that caused panic that caused the delay over the 30seconds
It's an arbitrary choice in order to simplify decision-making. You could make it his todger if you like, but the feet seem rather more pertinent - in this scenario, at least.
I think us losing the title by a point last season because non-VAR officials said this was offside is wrong please log in to view this image
