I think they had issues with the monitor for the McGinn 'goal' - pretty sure he was looking at a blank screen, and was going solely off the advice of the VAR officials
I'd imagine the fact the keeper wouldn't have saved it is pretty irrelevant in whether he was offside or not.
VAR should be used to overturn the egregious oversights. Missed an obvious handball on a goal? Overturn. A guy dove to get awarded a penalty? Overturn, and yellow card. Someone was 5 meters offsides on the initial pass? Overturn.What they shouldn't be doing is taking out the ruler and estimating offsides based on the location of an elbow and taking 5 minutes to verify it with a micrometer. If they can't overturn something within one or two replays of something, then leave the play stand as is. It should be used to correct the really blown calls, not used as a cop handing out tickets for people going 51 in a 50 zone.
Quote from: PeterWithesShin on November 09, 2020, 05:49:50 PMI'd imagine the fact the keeper wouldn't have saved it is pretty irrelevant in whether he was offside or not. So why does the ref need to look at the monitor then? Mission control does its measuring and that should be it. Atkinson’s part in all this is just theatre. Look like you are doing something important when actually you’re doing nothing.
Quote from: Brend'Watkins on November 09, 2020, 06:05:42 PMQuote from: PeterWithesShin on November 09, 2020, 05:49:50 PMI'd imagine the fact the keeper wouldn't have saved it is pretty irrelevant in whether he was offside or not. So why does the ref need to look at the monitor then? Mission control does its measuring and that should be it. Atkinson’s part in all this is just theatre. Look like you are doing something important when actually you’re doing nothing.Because that's what they do. He went to see if he was offside and blocking the keeper's view. That the keeper wouldn't have saved it because the shot was hit so well is a total irrelevance in the decision.
Quote from: ExclDawg on November 09, 2020, 05:45:33 PMVAR should be used to overturn the egregious oversights. Missed an obvious handball on a goal? Overturn. A guy dove to get awarded a penalty? Overturn, and yellow card. Someone was 5 meters offsides on the initial pass? Overturn.What they shouldn't be doing is taking out the ruler and estimating offsides based on the location of an elbow and taking 5 minutes to verify it with a micrometer. If they can't overturn something within one or two replays of something, then leave the play stand as is. It should be used to correct the really blown calls, not used as a cop handing out tickets for people going 51 in a 50 zone.But you'd then still need a human being to decide whether or not something is 'clear and obvious', egregious, however you want to describe it, which is in itself a subjective decision, and so needs reviewing by referencing yet another set of rules to decide if the decision falls within the 'allowable error' parameters. And if it's close to the limit of those parameters, out come the lines and rulers and slo-mo replays, and we all climb back on that shitting fucking merry-go-round.