Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The handball and offside rules that have come in along with VAR are grim. It should be used to correct clear and obvious errors, not borderline offside decisions.

 

This is just stupid, where do you draw the line? 5cm, 10cm or 30cm? Then we would be back arguing about the same thing again.

 

No, it is definitely not stupid.  It is by far the most sensible way to use VAR for offside decisions seeing that VAR objectively cannot make accurate judgements due to limitations in frame rates.  There 100% has to be a "referee's call" margin for error applied just like they do in cricket with LBWs and Hawkeye.

 

That frame rate thing has been debunked and it was completely made up by Daily Mail. Games are broadcast at 50 frames per second but the cameras VAR use go up to 300 frames per second IIRC.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would also help if the ref viewed the video evidence.

 

Nah, I don't think that is all too necessary. 

 

But the actual justification for the decision should be explained clearly to the fans in the stadium and fans watching on TV by the referee who is overseeing the implementation of VAR.  It would make things so much clearer to all.

 

It's pretty obvious by now that for some reason the VAR team can't or doesn't want to change the referee's decision. Fouls and red cards are subjective, why isn't the head ref on the field making these decisions with the help of video evidence?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The handball and offside rules that have come in along with VAR are grim. It should be used to correct clear and obvious errors, not borderline offside decisions.

 

This is just stupid, where do you draw the line? 5cm, 10cm or 30cm? Then we would be back arguing about the same thing again.

 

No, it is definitely not stupid.  It is by far the most sensible way to use VAR for offside decisions seeing that VAR objectively cannot make accurate judgements due to limitations in frame rates.  There 100% has to be a "referee's call" margin for error applied just like they do in cricket with LBWs and Hawkeye.

 

That frame rate thing has been debunked and it was completely made up by Daily Mail. Games are broadcast at 50 frames per second but the cameras VAR use go up to 300 frames per second IIRC.

 

I can't find evidence of the debunking.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The handball and offside rules that have come in along with VAR are grim. It should be used to correct clear and obvious errors, not borderline offside decisions.

 

This is just stupid, where do you draw the line? 5cm, 10cm or 30cm? Then we would be back arguing about the same thing again.

 

No, it is definitely not stupid.  It is by far the most sensible way to use VAR for offside decisions seeing that VAR objectively cannot make accurate judgements due to limitations in frame rates.  There 100% has to be a "referee's call" margin for error applied just like they do in cricket with LBWs and Hawkeye.

 

That frame rate thing has been debunked and it was completely made up by Daily Mail. Games are broadcast at 50 frames per second but the cameras VAR use go up to 300 frames per second IIRC.

 

I can't find evidence of the debunking.

 

First reply.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The handball and offside rules that have come in along with VAR are grim. It should be used to correct clear and obvious errors, not borderline offside decisions.

 

This is just stupid, where do you draw the line? 5cm, 10cm or 30cm? Then we would be back arguing about the same thing again.

 

No, it is definitely not stupid.  It is by far the most sensible way to use VAR for offside decisions seeing that VAR objectively cannot make accurate judgements due to limitations in frame rates.  There 100% has to be a "referee's call" margin for error applied just like they do in cricket with LBWs and Hawkeye.

 

That frame rate thing has been debunked and it was completely made up by Daily Mail. Games are broadcast at 50 frames per second but the cameras VAR use go up to 300 frames per second IIRC.

 

I can't find evidence of the debunking.

 

First reply.

 

 

There absolutely needs to be a margin for error on the basis that it's impossible to tell exactly when the ball has left the foot of the player passing the ball, unless they have Ultra HD cameras running at whatever the necessary FPS zoomed in at the feet of every player on the pitch.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Former Östersund chairman Daniel Kindberg sentenced to three years in prison. Looks like the club won’t be punished with relegation though. It should be IMO, as the club’s success is partly/significantly based on the financial crimes that’s led to this sentence.

 

EDIT: Maybe should have posted this in ”Still not worthy of a thread”

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...