VAR Thread

[RossFC]

 

[Cruyff14]

Shock.

 

[SM]

Wow, I'm amazed to see that.

 

[Zidane98]

The best way to mitigate against these obvious errors is for a VAR panel of 5 to vote if an obvious error has been made. Right now it's up to one guy.

Any majority vote of 3 votes or more on a match incidents triggers on field review by match referee.

 

[RossFC]

 

[RossFC]

 

[RossFC]

 

[RossFC]

 

[moomba]

Im sure PGMOL have always denied having access to commentary.

I was the VAR and it is an unpleasant experience

Life as a video assistant referee creates a pressure-cooker environment that new Telegraph Sport columnist would not wish on former players

www.telegraph.co.uk

The assistant VAR (AVAR) sitting alongside you, who has access to the TV footage, says the broadcaster is focusing on the point of contact.

For me, this is scandalous. TV commentators shouldnt have any role whatsoever in the VAR decision making process. Particularly when the media is so full of commentators that cant put aside club bias.

 

[RossFC]

 

[Frank Bunn]

There needs to be a review of semi-automated offside.

Wirtz is visibly offside and the linesman gave it.



This is how VAR judged it.

 

[Frank Bunn]

It comes after Newcastle won against City with a dodgy offside decision.

 

[jd2010]

The city one is part of the fix to get arsenal over the line this season. That and the Barry non penalty call are on par with todays nightmare call

 

[moomba]

PGMOL seem to pick and choose when the "tolerance" applies and when it doesn't.

There was the Newcastle one, and only a few days ago we had a potential winner against Sunderland ruled out for offside by a toenail.

 

[Cruyff14]

The city one is part of the fix to get arsenal over the line this season. That and the Barry non penalty call are on par with todays nightmare call

It went against City for Newcastle to win. I'm not sure how that helps us.

 

[SM]

It went against City for Newcastle to win. I'm not sure how that helps us.

Denying city points helps you surely?

 

[Frank Bunn]

PGMOL seem to pick and choose when the "tolerance" applies and when it doesn't.

There was the Newcastle one, and only a few days ago we had a potential winner against Sunderland ruled out for offside by a toenail.

The tolerance was meant to be 5cm. The Wirtz and Guimarães examples looked more like 20cm offside.

Maybe it's all working perfectly but a review would give confidence to clubs and fans about the technology and the process.

 

[Zidane98]

The tolerance was meant to be 5cm. The Wirtz and Guimarães examples looked more like 20cm offside.

Maybe it's all working perfectly but a review would give confidence to clubs and fans about the technology and the process.

The TV broadcaster showed a different frame to what semi auto VAR used in this instance.

All explained in here:

Fulham 2-2 Liverpool: Why was Wirtz's goal onside through VAR?

Fulham 2-2 Liverpool: Why was Wirtz's goal onside through VAR?

www.bbc.com

Not quite sure why PL doesn't use chip in ball technology like at major tournaments. Obviously the cost is high but where the PL is right now it surely is insignificant. Chip in ball gives absolute precise location and moment the ball is played. The current semi auto system can map with very high accuracy position of all players in relation to goal line but still relies on a camera frame for kick point of ball being played.

 

[Cruyff14]

Denying city points helps you surely?

I misinterpreted the image. My bad.

 

[SM]

I misinterpreted the image. My bad.

But your first sentence still mentions city dropping points?

 

[Cruyff14]

But your first sentence still mentions city dropping points?

Yes, I don't know what I was saying.