OMT: Tottenham vs Everton

[elyid]

What an absolute shambles that 2 days after the incident we have nothing official to say who gave the decision or why.

So do we think Atkinson gave the red, and then VAR had a look behind the scenes to clarify and didn’t see anything ‘clear and obvious’ to overrule? The only fail in process being that we weren’t notified of that by Sky or the stadium screens?

Well, officially all red cards are reviewed in real-time: https://www.premierleague.com/VAR/red-card-decisions-explained

So, what happened is either 1) They didn't follow the protocol that they themselves have published or 2) VAR checked and incorrectly decided it was a red.

----

Either way, it's laughable and imo we're being naive in trying to understand their "reasoning".

There is no reasoning. The bottom line is the referees union are incompetent, arrogant tacos that have no interest in making the game fair or upholding its integrity. They are only interested in making sure no sh*t sticks to them, upholding their egos and staying on the PL gravy train.

 

[Benny_Lad]

Well, officially all red cards are reviewed in real-time: https://www.premierleague.com/VAR/red-card-decisions-explained

So, what happened is either 1) They didn't follow the protocol that they themselves have published or 2) VAR checked and incorrectly decided it was a red*.

----

Either way, it's laughable and imo we're being naive in trying to understand their "reasoning".

There is no reasoning. The bottom line is the referees union are incompetent, arrogant tacos that have no interest in making the game fair or upholding its integrity. They are only interested in making sure no sh*t sticks to them, upholding their egos and staying on the PL gravy train.

*Decided not sufficient evidence to overturn.

That link is interesting. I really dont know why Sky or BT didn't produce a show at the start of the season explaining all things VAR and how it would be implemented in the PL. There is some real granular stuff doing the rounds on Twitter regarding the Firmino offside - I'd bet 99% of fans have no idea as to the intricacies. You could argue it shouldn't be implemented with such fine detail but it is, and therefore could have come with an advisory show imo. Pundits dont help either - some of them aren't up to discussing it imo.

 

[elyid]

*Decided not sufficient evidence to overturn.

True. I guess the system has nothing in place to prevent VAR making wrong decisions even after looking at the replay.

That link is interesting. I really dont know why Sky or BT didn't produce a show at the start of the season explaining all things VAR and how it would be implemented in the PL. There is some real granular stuff doing the rounds on Twitter regarding the Firmino offside - I'd bet 99% of fans have no idea as to the intricacies. You could argue it shouldn't be implemented with such fine detail but it is, and therefore could have come with an advisory show imo. Pundits dont help either - some of them aren't up to discussing it imo.

This is a great point actually, and a huge cause of the confusion.

They kind of attempted to explain it before the season started, but as you say this was done inconsistently and incomplete. Should have put something together with the BBC/Sky/BT and had it for 5 minutes at the start of every MOTD/Live Match for the whole season.

Imo there's 3 main problems with VAR:

1) Some rules of football aren't even clear to begin with, especially handball. Making the PL handball rule more complicated than the rest of the world is so stupid. VAR is impossible to implement if the rules don't have watertight definitions in the first place.

2) Not a clearly defined process of how VAR works or what it's used for and not consistently applied. Also the process should have been agreed by clubs -- i.e. did anyone really want 1/2 inch offsides? No.

3) Being badly implement in any case (i.e. inconsistent, no idea what's happening just there's a delay so must be VAR)

This *could* all be fixed.

 

[Benny_Lad]

True. I guess the system has nothing in place to prevent VAR making wrong decisions even after looking at the replay.



This is a great point actually, and a huge cause of the confusion.

They kind of attempted to explain it before the season started, but as you say this was done inconsistently and incomplete. Should have put something together with the BBC/Sky/BT and had it for 5 minutes at the start of every MOTD/Live Match for the whole season.

Imo there's 3 main problems with VAR:

1) Some rules of football aren't even clear to begin with, especially handball. Making the PL handball rule more complicated than the rest of the world is so stupid. VAR is impossible to implement if the rules don't have watertight definitions in the first place.

2) Not a clearly defined process of how VAR works or what it's used for and not consistently applied. Also the process should have been agreed by clubs -- i.e. did anyone really want 1/2 inch offsides? No.

3) Being badly implement in any case (i.e. inconsistent, no idea what's happening just there's a delay so must be VAR)

This *could* all be fixed.

The issue I have with this is you do need a line, so there will always be a 1/2 inch measure over a line. The problem for me is the establishment of that line....its unexplained and long winded at present. Imo we dont actually need to see the lines being drawn, that's creating unnecessary theatre. All we need is the eventual lines shown and what the decision is.

What would really work is if we went pure science. Place a chip in everyone's sports bra thing. The chip is triggered if you are deemed to have strayed past all but 1 of the chips of the opposing players when the ball is played forward by a team mate. Obviously you will get examples of legs and heads being in advance of the chip but at least we have consistent barometer to go by and is the same for all.

 

[elyid]

The issue I have with this is you do need a line, so there will always be a 1/2 inch measure over a line. The problem for me is the establishment of that line....its unexplained and long winded at present. Imo we dont actually need to see the lines being drawn, that's creating unnecessary theatre. All we need is the eventual lines shown and what the decision is.

What would really work is if we went pure science. Place a chip in everyone's sports bra thing. The chip is triggered if you are deemed to have strayed past all but 1 of the chips of the opposing players when the ball is played forward by a team mate. Obviously you will get examples of legs and heads being in advance of the chip but at least we have consistent barometer to go by and is the same for all.

Yes! Or go one further and use a lazer-based lidar system across the whole pitch...

So actually you are correct & I would be happy for 1/2 inch offsides in that case. I guess my problem is more specifically that I don't trust the technology is accurate enough to do it atm - a man drawing rough lines on a still from a low hz video at a weird angle.

Back to your earlier point: it would have help immensely if they made an explanation video showing why this is a good & accurate way to do it.

 

[mudshark]

The issue I have with this is you do need a line, so there will always be a 1/2 inch measure over a line.

The line also has a width, and that's the important bit. The offside rule is about disallowing unfair advantage. Getting the micrometers out (even if you don't understand the issues around error) is not in the spirit of the game IMO.

 

[FatBloke]

The line also has a width, and that's the important bit. The offside rule is about disallowing unfair advantage. Getting the micrometers out (even if you don't understand the issues around error) is not in the spirit of the game IMO.

Could learn from cricket on that one. If it's a matter of millimetres, go with the lino's call.

Or the FA could even follow their "clear and obvious" schtick and save everyone the 3 minutes of meticulous reviews.

 

[mudshark]

Could learn from cricket on that one. If it's a matter of millimetres, go with the lino's call.

Or the FA could even follow their "clear and obvious schtick" and save everyone the 3 minutes of meticulous reviews.

... that they already know (or should do) are inherently incapable of providing a definitive answer. As a scientist, it's the pretence of certainty that rubs me up the wrong way.

The trouble is, if they were honest, they'd be forced to conclude in the majority of cases that they have to spend time poring over that they've got no more idea than the ref or linesman on the pitch, really, because they don't know exactly when the ball was struck in relation to the image they've selected as "definitive". And that would be the wrong answer, wouldn't it.

They'd be forced to show images where the attacker is clearly in advance of the defender in that image, and still have to admit that they can't tell from that whether he was really offside or not.

 

[Finney Is Back]

That's why you need a good defensive midfielder to take the ball from him early. Ideally the press resistant one.

I'm not sure that will help the fact that Sanchez regularly seems to take 2 and sometimes even 3 touches to get the ball under control.