BergenMagpie Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 38 minutes ago, Pokerprince2004 said: Just seen Wirtz equaliser against Fulham and it's 100% offside if you look at the line on the grass. Now I've heardthere’s a 5cm tolerance level or benefit of the doubt which I've never heard of before until now thought it was no tolerance. Of course it's Liverpool who benefits 🙄 Absolutely sickening. Dont know why Im still following this blatantly corrupt sport Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisMcQuillan Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 I'd also say that's probably more than 5cm offside as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lush Vlad Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 16 minutes ago, Rich said: Thought the referee was largely good today, which is rare. He booked Gordon for a great tackle and I think he gave us a few favourable ones and all. Ok for the most part. But not sure you can ignore that corner first half. Where I’m sure Miley has already clipped it in and he blows as if it’s a dead ball, to warn Hughes. Who has rugby tackled Thiaw to the ground. Just give the penalty you absolute bottle job. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Icarus Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 20 minutes ago, Rich said: Thought the referee was largely good today, which is rare. Thought he was shit first half and better second. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyt Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 The most baffling thing today was allowing Palace to take their freekick for Gordon's offside goal at pretty much the halfway line Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 Offside is correct but will keep repeating myself, the law is absolutely shite. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
midds Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 Thought the official stopped the footage a couple of frames too late, definitely looked like Bruno had already played the ball and was already in motion. It's a mm obviously and still may have been offside if you pulled it back a few frames too, I'm happy to accept that - it's when you see other teams (those cunts) get away with offsides where he's blatantly got his foot offside and they come out with this 5cm horseshit and allow it anyway. The whole thing needs ripping apart, take humans out of it as much as possible or take technology out of it, the 2 combined just doesn't work and it's not a level playing field, the badge on the front of the shirt still matters if humans are involved and it's a hill I'll die on Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonas Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 Think you've got to go one or the other. If it comes down to human error in the end is there any fucking point in the tech? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JigsawGoesToPieces Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 (edited) Semi-automated offside works out the players position and when the ball was kicked, VAR just confirms its correct https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/czrvvvpldeyo Previously, officials in the VAR room needed to decide on three key things - when the ball was kicked, where and at what angle the defender's body was when the ball was kicked and where and what angle the attacker's body was at the moment of contact. Viewers at home have seen this manual process played out with lines drawn with crosshairs on freeze-frame replays shown on their TV screens. All three of those decisions are now being automatically taken by the technology to remove some elements of human subjectivity, such as which frame to freeze as the ball is kicked. Bespoke cameras have been installed beneath the roof at all 20 Premier League stadiums to monitor a variety of key elements. About 30 cameras - working at 100 frames per second - track the exact movement of the ball as well as 10,000 data points on the bodies of all 22 players. It means it can be automatically determined whether an attacking player's body was beyond the last defender at the exact time the ball was played. VAR officials check the system has correctly determined the three key points it measures before confirming the decision. The on-field officials then inform the players. A 3D animation of the decision produced by the artificial intelligence is then played on television for viewers at home and on big screens in the stadium. Edited January 4 by JigsawGoesToPieces Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
midds Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 I'll take it back then, I honestly thought the VAR still stopped the footage. Still think the ball looked a fair distance from Bruno's foot as they paused it mind So if it's described as "semi automated" then what part isn't decided by all these cameras? That process sounds more "fully automated" to me Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordie_b Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 1 hour ago, Lush Vlad said: He booked Gordon for a great tackle and I think he gave us a few favourable ones and all. Ok for the most part. But not sure you can ignore that corner first half. Where I’m sure Miley has already clipped it in and he blows as if it’s a dead ball, to warn Hughes. Who has rugby tackled Thiaw to the ground. Just give the penalty you absolute bottle job. The corner had 100% been taken when he whistled, it was easily over the 18yd line Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 Don’t get this thing of letting a corner be taken again when fouling is happening. Is there even a rule for that? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyt Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 10 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said: Don’t get this thing of letting a corner be taken again when fouling is happening. Is there even a rule for that? If the ball isn't play then the foul can't be given Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Joel Inton Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 1 hour ago, geordie_b said: The corner had 100% been taken when he whistled, it was easily over the 18yd line It’s not when he whistles, it is when the foul takes place. I’ve no idea if the ball was in play when the foul finished though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earp Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 1 hour ago, geordie_b said: The corner had 100% been taken when he whistled, it was easily over the 18yd line Anyone played it back to confirm? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaizero Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBG Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 The 'disallow a goal for offside, and then give the free kick close to half way line' was absolute chefs kiss. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John P Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 6 hours ago, Pokerprince2004 said: Just seen Wirtz equaliser against Fulham and it's 100% offside if you look at the line on the grass. Now I've heardthere’s a 5cm tolerance level or benefit of the doubt which I've never heard of before until now thought it was no tolerance. Of course it's Liverpool who benefits 🙄 What the fuck is this? His foot on the actual image is beyond the dark stripe of grass, yet on the computer image it isn't. How on earth can that be? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bimpy474 Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 (edited) The only thing you could say in defense is the picture is from the live feed, and the cut of the grass may not be straight. Whereas the camera used for the offside i would think uses technology to line up accurately opposites side of the pitch. Just guessing like, but could be the issue here and why the goal was given. Edited January 5 by Bimpy474 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cf Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 Just now, Bimpy474 said: The only thing you could say in defense is the picture is from the live feed, and the cut of the grass may not be straight. Whereas the camera used for the offside i would think use technology to line up accurately opposites side of the pitch. Just guessing like, but could be the issue here and why the goal was given. Then say that rather than this nonsense about 5cm of advantage that's supposedly given to the attacker that we've never seen before. Just watched MOTD on it and I feel utterly gaslit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bimpy474 Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 Just now, Cf said: Then say that rather than this nonsense about 5cm of advantage that's supposedly given to the attacker that we've never seen before. Just watched MOTD on it and I feel utterly gaslit. Fair point, i could be completely wrong though. And this 5cm nonsense which has sprung up, hows that suddenly a thing ? As you said, it's never seen before. They're just making it up because they got it wrong imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geordie Ahmed Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 8 hours ago, Lush Vlad said: I’m sure Miley had already kicked that? Blowing early and warning Hughes for giving away a penalty. Horrendous reffing. That was pathetic refereeing and he's not the first to do it, this time I think Miley might have kicked the ball (will need to watch it back) but generally they'll stop the corner and have words with the players Why is the refereeing doing that? It's not his job to coach players to stop fouls, he needs to watch and if a foul happens he should give a penalty Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geordie Ahmed Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 9 minutes ago, Bimpy474 said: Fair point, i could be completely wrong though. And this 5cm nonsense which has sprung up, hows that suddenly a thing ? As you said, it's never seen before. They're just making it up because they got it wrong imo. I vaguely remember when they mentioned thicker lines so more goals are allowed I think Bruno Fernandes scored a goal where the thicker line was in his favour from a few seasons back but then never seen it since this Wirtz goal If the 5cm thing exists then surely Bernardo Silva against Mackems should have stood Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Joel Inton Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 13 minutes ago, Bimpy474 said: The only thing you could say in defense is the picture is from the live feed, and the cut of the grass may not be straight. Whereas the camera used for the offside i would think uses technology to line up accurately opposites side of the pitch. Just guessing like, but could be the issue here and why the goal was given. Even if the grass isn’t straight, which I think the groundsman will disagree with - the Fulham player’s foot is quite a distance behind the cut of grass, as you can clearly see a gap between the two, whereas Wirtz’s is clearly ahead of it. The line of grass would need to be out by some distance, which would be visible on the TV for that not to be offside. I’ve not noticed the computer images to be so different to the real image before either. Wirtz’s leg and foot are in different positions and on the computer image his foot isn’t even on the floor and he appears to be floating. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pokerprince2004 Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 Some bloke on twitter said it's been a rule all season and that we benefitted from it with Barnes goal against Man City. Funny how it's only mentioned when Liverpool score a dodgy as fuck goal though Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now