• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

**** OMT Tottenham Hotspur v Notts Forest ****

milo said:
Fr-Gl6h-a-QAcwf-OG.jpg
Click to expand...
Overlaps are onside, clearly red/blue pixilation mix within their lines, surely thats an overlap, also lines that also seem to have the red line thicker. But as he says, it is what it is. I am being totally ridiculous with my image, but to prove a point at the point where its going to rule out a goal. @LemonadeMoney Says if your going to that point to overrule an on field decision you are probably having to try too hard

I just think if you are going to overrule a goal which is given by the lineman, you have to be be doing so within there being absolute no doubt, I am not sure I have faith in it at all.

Dale suggests he doesn't either with some of his replies but alas what can you do

upload_2023-3-13_14-11-39.png
 
Gazza Dazzla said:
So they’ve drawn the line down from the outside point of Richarlson’s elbow and the defenders armpit? Is that standard operating procedure when drawing the lines? What reasons do they give for drawing lines from different points of the bodies?
Click to expand...

They are claiming its the same spot
 
Gazza Dazzla said:
So they’ve drawn the line down from the outside point of Richarlson’s elbow and the defenders armpit? Is that standard operating procedure when drawing the lines? What reasons do they give for drawing lines from different points of the bodies?
Click to expand...

The line is from the point closest to the goal where you can legitimately score a goal from. For both players it is the upper arm, in this instance

law-12-handball.png
 
Grays_1890 said:
Overlaps are onside, clearly red/blue pixilation mix within their lines, surely thats an overlap, also lines that also seem to have the red line thicker. But as he says, it is what it is. I am being totally ridiculous with my image, but to prove a point at the point where its going to rule out a goal. @LemonadeMoney Says if your going to that point to overrule an on field decision you are probably having to try too hard

I just think if you are going to overrule a goal which is given by the lineman, you have to be be doing so within there being absolute no doubt, I am not sure I have faith in it at all.

Dale suggests he doesn't either with some of his replies but alas what can you do

View attachment 15283
Click to expand...

If it overlaps it is shown a single, green line. When there are two lines, they don't touch, and it is offside.
 
milo said:
If it overlaps it is shown a single, green line. When there are two lines, they don't touch, and it is offside.
Click to expand...
Yeh of course but until there is semi automation there ard going to be errors.

VAR is unfortunately here to stay, much more to be done to improve it and the people using it IMO.



Sent from my SM-A127F using Fapatalk
 
Last edited:
Grays_1890 said:
Quality bit if writing there which again backs up the argument that if you are trying to overturn decisions to the Nth degree, you are having yo try too hard...

Clear and obvious not unsure and blurry

Sent from my SM-A127F using Fapatalk
Click to expand...

Yeah, problem is (fact)

- The tech isn't accurate enough to make the decision (in the way cameras are implemented in the field)
- Consistently the reviewers are picking the wrong starting frame.

What's amazing annoying is the media (and fans) are debating, there is no fudging debate, it's not accurate and the fudging FA know it

- So either you are just a fudging idiot by drawing overlapping lines
- You have some flimflam agenda or can't admit your own errors
 
Raziel said:
Yeah, problem is (fact)

- The tech isn't accurate enough to make the decision (in the way cameras are implemented in the field)
- Consistently the reviewers are picking the wrong starting frame.

What's amazing annoying is the media (and fans) are debating, there is no fudging debate, it's not accurate and the fudging FA know it

- So either you are just a fudging idiot by drawing overlapping lines
- You have some flimflam agenda or can't admit your own errors
Click to expand...
Also people are constantly trotting out the word for word rules when those rules or the standards around those rules are not being met.

You can't say the lines haven't met when they clearly have and cross over and QUOTE the system would flag if it did, because it hasn't. I used a pretty expensive photoshop that I still have access to and unpicked the picture, so it's not being used right or it's hasn't been coded right.

Now that's fine, it's a work in progress, I get it, but if its still that, then you can't be stopping games for so long to get the decisions maybe right. You still have to have a bigger margin for error IMO.

You can't just make it up as you go and leave the games up to questionable decisions after you have spent time reviewing thr questionable decisions...I find that mind boggling

Sent from my SM-A127F using Fapatalk
 
Raziel said:
Yeah, problem is (fact)

- The tech isn't accurate enough to make the decision (in the way cameras are implemented in the field)
- Consistently the reviewers are picking the wrong starting frame.

What's amazing annoying is the media (and fans) are debating, there is no fudging debate, it's not accurate and the fudging FA know it

- So either you are just a fudging idiot by drawing overlapping lines
- You have some flimflam agenda or can't admit your own errors
Click to expand...
A bit of both if you ask me.

I get the rule -- offside is determined according to the parts of your body that are legal to score from. However, back in the day, wasn't it generally taken as a player's torso, that being about as good as a linesman could be expected to see?

Using the arm instantly gives the attacker a disadvantage, as they'd (like Richarlison in the picture) be leaning towards goal while the defenders are holding a line. Possibly as much as 2 feet, depending on body and feet positioning at the time of the freeze frame.

I'd much rather see the rule/guidance being changed to draw the lines using the players' feet. Much less scope for interpretation (unlike shoulders) and they're usually closer to the ground, giving less scope for error when the lines are drawn. Unless Zlatan is involved, obviously.
 
Jesus, we're going to get attackers running with their arms behind their backs, just like the defenders do now when they block in the area. What a joke.
 
Chrissivad said:
I think if your getting to mm's at that distance, they are probably off.

At the moment, a mm could be on or off.
A meter does seem a bit large, but concept could work.
Click to expand...
The simpler way to do it would be to look at the lines they draw to indicate the furthest position of each player's "part of the body that can play the ball" and, if the lines are touching, it's on. If there is even the slightest gap between the lines, it's offside. That way it's cms and not mms. :p At least it makes it more palatable that way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back