|
EvilHawk posted:All goals are reviewed for offside as a matter of course. Maybe it's another rule change but whenever I've seen var they've only overruled when it's clear and obvious, even when checking on a goal for offside
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 13:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 03:38 |
|
|
EvilHawk posted:Which is frustrating because it stopped us attacking last week. But now you're allowed advantage? loving refs. It's close enough to level to not be a clear error that needed looking at. VAR shouldn't be used to decide an armpit is a gnat's pube offside. I'm sure that we'll get a similar decision in our favour at some point this season but it's bad for football. Why even have assistants on the line?
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 13:51
|
|
|
Ace Jameson posted:Only if it bounces to the other team, which it didn’t Nope, he got it 100% wrong. If the ball touches the referee (or another match official) and goes into the goal, team possession changes or a promising attack starts, a dropped ball is awarded
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 13:52
|
|
|
Bogan Krkic posted:It wasn't clear and obvious, which is when var is meant to override
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 13:53
|
|
|
Tsaedje posted:It's close enough to level to not be a clear error that needed looking at. VAR shouldn't be used to decide an armpit is a gnat's pube offside. I'm sure that we'll get a similar decision in our favour at some point this season but it's bad for football. Why even have assistants on the line? Offside and goal/no goal are both clear dividing lines. It's either a goal or not. It's either offside or not. We should absolutely be using the technology to settle these.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 13:53
|
|
|
Shrapnig posted:Nope, he got it 100% wrong. a ref is a goalpost e: oh it changed? weird
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 13:54
|
|
|
The “clear and obvious” stuff doesn’t apply to offside at all because it’s not a subjective call. You’re either offside or you’re not. It’s no different to denying a goal because a millimetre of the ball didn’t cross the line, that’s the rule.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 13:54
|
|
|
Bea Nanner posted:a ref is a goalpost Except he isn’t anymore, it’s a really dumb rule change.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 13:54
|
|
|
Shrapnig posted:Nope, he got it 100% wrong. The attack had already started, he actually slowed it down, but w/e it’s academic now
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 13:55
|
|
|
so what is the limit, to how offside you can be, and for it to be ok even if varred? if it's offside, it's offside you loving window lickers
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 13:56
|
|
|
EvilHawk posted:Offside and goal/no goal are both clear dividing lines. It's either a goal or not. It's either offside or not. We should absolutely be using the technology to settle these. So why have assistant refs then? Deciding which pixel is the point you draw the line from is within the margin of error for that decision being offside or not. In cricket, for example, that would have been umpire's call.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 13:56
|
|
|
Ace Jameson posted:The attack had already started, he actually slowed it down, but w/e it’s academic now I was about to say, "starts" is terrible phrasing. Practically, you could always argue it had already started, assuming possession hasn't changed
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 13:57
|
|
|
Tsaedje posted:So why have assistant refs then? Deciding which pixel is the point you draw the line from is within the margin of error for that decision being offside or not. In cricket, for example, that would have been umpire's call. I'm more than happy to move to total robot refs if it means I don't have to watch Mike Dean any more.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 13:58
|
|
|
Tsaedje posted:So why have assistant refs then? Deciding which pixel is the point you draw the line from is within the margin of error for that decision being offside or not. In cricket, for example, that would have been umpire's call. cause the assistant refs helps with a lot of things, that arent reviewed by var? he can still call obvious offsides that cant be judged by the main ref, and that arent reviewed by var (only goal, pens and red cards are reviewed...)
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 13:59
|
|
|
EvilHawk posted:I'm more than happy to move to total robot refs if it means I don't have to watch Mike Dean any more. That's fair
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 13:59
|
|
|
Quality saves there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 14:00
|
|
|
get this: offside calls are literally clear and obvious cases of yes or no
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 14:00
|
|
|
Tsaedje posted:So why have assistant refs then? Deciding which pixel is the point you draw the line from is within the margin of error for that decision being offside or not. In cricket, for example, that would have been umpire's call. Gonna get VAR'd.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 14:01
|
|
|
gently caress off ederson
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 14:01
|
|
|
Sterling offside again, he’s an affront to football.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 14:01
|
|
|
That one wasn't even close
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 14:02
|
|
|
this is the game now
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 14:02
|
|
|
But that one counts apparently.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 14:02
|
|
|
Sterling too blurry to draw a line on.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 14:02
|
|
|
Good thing VAR doesn't grind things to a halt and suck the joy and anger out of every goal
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 14:03
|
|
|
Oh dang that was closer than it looked, fair play to the assistant.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 14:03
|
|
|
He's offside again
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 14:03
|
|
|
Totally flawless system
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 14:04
|
|
|
Ok he isn't, that's tight as hell again
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 14:04
|
|
|
VAR is cool and good
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 14:04
|
|
|
EvilHawk posted:Offside and goal/no goal are both clear dividing lines. It's either a goal or not. It's either offside or not. We should absolutely be using the technology to settle these. At what precise point does sterling's shoulder become his arm and thus shouldn't count when it comes to determining offside?? It's not an absolutely exact measurement, unlike whether the entirety of the ball crosses the line or not But lol at it all evening out in the end about 20 minutes later
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 14:06
|
|
|
VAR has potential to be useful but the current implementation is bad when the thickness of the line drawn on the screen is 10x thicker than what can be called on or off by it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 14:08
|
|
Butterfly Valley posted:At what precise point does sterling's shoulder become his arm and thus shouldn't count when it comes to determining offside?? Pretty sure it doesn't matter what part the ball touches. If any part of him is offside. It's offside.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 14:10
|
|
|
lol what an awful pen
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 14:10
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:lol what an awful pen It’s ok, he’s gonna get another chance.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 14:10
|
|
|
Yikes
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 14:11
|
|
|
CyberPingu posted:Pretty sure it doesn't matter what part the ball touches. If any part of him is offside. It's offside.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 14:11
|
|
|
Shrapnig posted:It’s ok, he’s gonna get another chance. lmao
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 14:11
|
|
|
loving var
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 14:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 03:38 |
|
|
Lol at all of this.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 14:12
|
|
