VAR

[Lastfootstamper]

They said on the telly at the time that the check was on Moreno's backside.

[tomd2103]

It doesn't work

In today's example, one of the biggest problems is that you can't pinpoint the exact moment when Watkins has actually made contact with the ball.  That is actually quite important when the margins are as tight as they are, as a split second earlier or later then the picture would look different.

[Gareth]

It doesn't work

In today's example, one of the biggest problems is that you can't pinpoint the exact moment when Watkins has actually made contact with the ball.  That is actually quite important when the margins are as tight as they are, as a split second earlier or later then the picture would look different.

It’s why the whole offside VAR is a fraud…with a whole bunch of thick pundits who will tell anyone listening that the offsides are factual….they are not!

[Somniloquism]

Without VAR, it still wasn't a goal anyway. The linesman called it off at the start.

[VillaTim]

It doesn't work

In today's example, one of the biggest problems is that you can't pinpoint the exact moment when Watkins has actually made contact with the ball.  That is actually quite important when the margins are as tight as they are, as a split second earlier or later then the picture would look different.

It’s why the whole offside VAR is a fraud…with a whole bunch of thick pundits who will tell anyone listening that the offsides are factual….they are not!

Would love to have had audio of the 3 minute check

[tomd2103]

It doesn't work

In today's example, one of the biggest problems is that you can't pinpoint the exact moment when Watkins has actually made contact with the ball.  That is actually quite important when the margins are as tight as they are, as a split second earlier or later then the picture would look different.

It’s why the whole offside VAR is a fraud…with a whole bunch of thick pundits who will tell anyone listening that the offsides are factual….they are not!

Yep and when the VAR officials can choose which body part they want to.use to make their judgment, it just adds to the confusion.

[Somniloquism]

Seems a couple of decisions didn't go for Citeh. Thought several on here were telling me decisions were surefire for them if they have similar.

[tomd2103]

Seems a couple of decisions didn't go for Citeh. Thought several on here were telling me decisions were surefire for them if they have similar.

The decisions that "didn't go for them" were speculative at best.

[Somniloquism]

But those are the one they get.

[tomd2103]

But those are the one they get.

They were against one of the other 'big six' though. 

Edit - WTF was that decision at Newcastle about?  One of our players nearly got their shirt ripped off in the opposition box last weekend and got nothing.

[edgysatsuma89]

The offside just isn't that bad of a call. It's questionable at what point of the body they use on Moreno but I've seen that loads of times. It just isn't one I can get worked up about or think there is a conspiracy. I do think there is maybe some bias with some decisions (I mainly think it's incompetence) but not on offsides. They're not banging out unparallel lines and parallel lines for different teams, it just isn't happening.

When you have multiple lines on a pitch, the grass patchwork and white lines, and then the drawn lines, your brain is frankly shit at deciphering it all properly, it's classic optical illusion stuff. The kids love it so I've seen a lot, lines appear wonky when they're dead straight. I also look forward to another ball that looks over the line when it's not but it looks it. The perception conversation is always fun and not exhausting.

[darren woolley]

I really hate VAR.

[waynejames]

Officials can't even spot a foul throw so what chance have we got here eh?

[tomd2103]

The offside just isn't that bad of a call. It's questionable at what point of the body they use on Moreno but I've seen that loads of times. It just isn't one I can get worked up about or think there is a conspiracy. I do think there is maybe some bias with some decisions (I mainly think it's incompetence) but not on offsides. They're not banging out unparallel lines and parallel lines for different teams, it just isn't happening.

When you have multiple lines on a pitch, the grass patchwork and white lines, and then the drawn lines, your brain is frankly shit at deciphering it all properly, it's classic optical illusion stuff. The kids love it so I've seen a lot, lines appear wonky when they're dead straight. I also look forward to another ball that looks over the line when it's not but it looks it. The perception conversation is always fun and not exhausting.

Genuine question though - would you have got worked up
if we'd lost or drawn as a result of that being disallowed?  I agree that it seems far fetched to talk of conspiracies, but I'm not sure the technology they use is 100% reliable. 

Firstly, they can't freeze the frame at the exact moment a ball is played in or flicked on, yet go into minute detail when it comes to the position of the attackers and defenders.  That means they are working on a picture that already isn't exactly accurate. 

Then it's up to the VAR official.to choose from which body part the line is drawn and then be able to use the technology to draw a line to capture that accurately. Again, they are going into minute details with a picture that may not be completely accurate.

I've said it before on here, but I just think it could be simplified so much by just making it about the feet.  Draw a line at the defender's last foot and if any part of the attacker's foot is over that line then it's offside.

[London Villan]

Appearing shirt pulling is a penalty offence this week.