[Football] "Embarrassing, it’s an absolute disgrace"

[AK74]

Could they not use AI to make the decision in the future.

Yes.

R&D tax relief changes

How they work in practice

www.bdo.co.uk

 

[Seagull58]

I emailed PBOBE after the disallowed goal at Palace. I asked why the EPL do not insist where the cameras are positioned pitch side and how many. To cut a long response short, he said that due to the difference in stadiums this can't happen. I didn't bother replying as this is bollocks. All the stadiums have pitch long stands. Cameras could and should be placed along the full length of the pitch at intervals that give the best view of the goal line and also perhaps ones at running along the touchline.

Today cameras are small and should be easy to install either on the roof (Bournemouth for example) or on the second tier of the stand. There's no reason there can't be 200 plus cameras along the stand. This would allow the computer to easily use the best placed camera to use when determining offsides.

I emailed PBOBE after the Spurs fiasco. I got a short response (so probably written by somebody else) saying that theclub keeps all discussions about refereeing decisions confidential. It appears the club is still taking the view that making a fuss in public is not productive.

 

[Seagull58]

No idea, It is reported Liverpool voted it down.

It was reported as a unanimous decision so I expect the clubs discussed it prior to the meeting and agreed a joint position.

 

[Seagull58]

Except for the fact that the image they drew the lines on is clearly after the ball had left Gross's foot?

and was not drawn from his armpit, as it should have been. So, it was drawn on the wrong frame and in the wrong place. Apart from that it was a "perfect process, Daz. Well done lads"

 

[Stumpy Tim]

Sorry but I disagree. Offside shouldn't be subjective, either you're off or you're on. They could change the law to say the lines are only drawn at the feet rather than a part of the body that you can legitimately score with but that would need IFAB to do that. If it becomes subjective as you suggest, one ref would give it another wouldn't and that takes us further away from the consistency that is required.

I don't buy that. They don't say "you're either LBW or you're not" in cricket. They have an Umpire's discretion area, which is why it works. If offside requires a line, it's not C&O... bin off the lines and only rule out C&O errors and football instantly improves

 

[peterward]

I emailed PBOBE after the disallowed goal at Palace. I asked why the EPL do not insist where the cameras are positioned pitch side and how many. To cut a long response short, he said that due to the difference in stadiums this can't happen. I didn't bother replying as this is bollocks. All the stadiums have pitch long stands. Cameras could and should be placed along the full length of the pitch at intervals that give the best view of the goal line and also perhaps ones at running along the touchline.

Today cameras are small and should be easy to install either on the roof (Bournemouth for example) or on the second tier of the stand. There's no reason there can't be 200 plus cameras along the stand. This would allow the computer to easily use the best placed camera to use when determining offsides.

Could easily stick camera on outside of goalposts.

90 degree camera embedded in outside of goalpost and maybe 1 in corner flag, should better cover whether ball is in/out of play than present system.

 

[drew]

I don't buy that. They don't say "you're either LBW or you're not" in cricket. They have an Umpire's discretion area, which is why it works. If offside requires a line, it's not C&O... bin off the lines and only rule out C&O errors and football instantly improves

That's because it's only a projection by the umpire or Hawkeye as to whether the ball will go on to hit the stumps. If they stop the film at the moment the ball is still in contact with the player passing, it's not subjective whether someone is on or off. Granted they need to stop it at the right time and put the lines in the right spot but that is not beyond the technical ability that should be available.

 

[drew]

and was not drawn from his armpit, as it should have been. So, it was drawn on the wrong frame and in the wrong place. Apart from that it was a "perfect process, Daz. Well done lads"

Surely the edge of your shoulder is further than your armpit? That is, if the ball hits the outside of your shoulder then that's another arms width further than your armpit.

 

[Durlston]

VAR is the reason I've started not to bet on any top flight continental football now - it got my blood pressure dangerously high if controversy was and still is involved and I'm bewildered by Lewis Dunk's 'equaliser' being ruled out because the officials get away hiding behind their TV studio monitors time and time and time again. And so often an apology is simply not good enough.

I would love to see Premier League clubs take a stand against VAR and refuse to play (wishful thinking I know) with it banished from the game. If the contract for use of VAR is signed for another couple of years then the clubs could pay it off - although I have no idea how much that would cost but it would be bloody well worth it and start to celebrate goals at the time without that little doubt at the back of your mind clicking into action that it could be chalked off.

Enough is enough.

 

[Stumpy Tim]

That's because it's only a projection by the umpire or Hawkeye as to whether the ball will go on to hit the stumps. If they stop the film at the moment the ball is still in contact with the player passing, it's not subjective whether someone is on or off. Granted they need to stop it at the right time and put the lines in the right spot but that is not beyond the technical ability that should be available.

But it clearly is beyond the technical ability. Would Everton have complained if that goal was given yesterday? I'm 99% sure not

 

[Bodian]

But it clearly is beyond the technical ability. Would Everton have complained if that goal was given yesterday? I'm 99% sure not

They didn't appeal for offside at the time I don't think - and were themselves all ready to kick-off before the ref stopped them.

 

[Jim in the West]

VAR is the reason I've started not to bet on any top flight continental football now - it got my blood pressure dangerously high if controversy was and still is involved and I'm bewildered by Lewis Dunk's 'equaliser' being ruled out because the officials get away hiding behind their TV studio monitors time and time and time again. And so often an apology is simply not good enough.

I would love to see Premier League clubs take a stand against VAR and refuse to play (wishful thinking I know) with it banished from the game. If the contract for use of VAR is signed for another couple of years then the clubs could pay it off - although I have no idea how much that would cost but it would be bloody well worth it and start to celebrate goals at the time without that little doubt at the back of your mind clicking into action that it could be chalked off.

Enough is enough.

110% this. The officials on VAR are a disgrace. But most importantly VAR has taken away the joy and immediacy of celebrating a goal. And surely that’s the primary reason we go to matches. The EPL and PGMOL show zero regard for the paying spectator, who generally has no idea what’s going on.
Get rid of the damn thing, at least until AI can make it virtually infallible.

Arsenal’s club statement gives other teams the opportunity to up the ante….I hope they do.

 

[dazzer6666]

That's because it's only a projection by the umpire or Hawkeye as to whether the ball will go on to hit the stumps. If they stop the film at the moment the ball is still in contact with the player passing, it's not subjective whether someone is on or off. Granted they need to stop it at the right time and put the lines in the right spot but that is not beyond the technical ability that should be available.

It’s not even that simple though and is still a bit subjective - exactly when does the frame get taken ? I’ve read the ball is in contact with the boot for an average of about 0.3 of a second, enough time for a sprinting striker to cover a couple of yards or so - so they’re applying an impossible degree of precision to a slightly vague ‘strike point’ when they determine where the striker was (they can’t pinpoint the precise time the ball leaves the passer’s boot). Simple solution - offside needs to be clearly offside. Change the rule so there has to be a clear gap between the attacker and defender, or at least make the lines significantly thicker when the6 are drawn to allow a margin in the striker‘s favour.

 

[drew]

It’s not even that simple though and is still a bit subjective - exactly when does the frame get taken ? I’ve read the ball is in contact with the boot for an average of about 0.3 of a second, enough time for a sprinting striker to cover a couple of yards or so - so they’re applying an impossible degree of precision to a slightly vague ‘strike point’ when they determine where the striker was (they can’t pinpoint the precise time the ball leaves the passer’s boot). Simple solution - offside needs to be clearly offside. Change the rule so there has to be a clear gap between the attacker and defender, or at least make the lines significantly thicker when the6 are drawn to allow a margin in the striker‘s favour.

I don't think clear daylight is fair as that is a massive advantage to the attacker. My view would be that it should be the feet that determine offside.

 

[Acker79]

“Embarrassing, it’s an absolute disgrace, that’s what it is: a disgrace,” Arteta said. “There’s so much at stake, we’ve put in so many hours to compete at the highest level and you cannot imagine the amount of messages we’ve had saying this cannot continue. It’s embarrassing.

It’s not acceptable, there’s too much at stake. I don’t want to be in the hands of these people. I don’t know how to feel. I’m wasting my time, we are wasting our time. It’s difficult enough to compete against Newcastle – they are a really good team, but we have to talk about how the hell this goal stood. It’s an absolute disgrace it was allowed. For more than one reason it should not be a goal. “I have been in this country more than 20 years and [the officiating] is nowhere near the level of the best league in the world. I feel sick to be part of this. I feel sick. It’s not a goal, it’s not a goal.”

So, Arteta seems to be on the fence...

It would make sense if this was his reaction to some other incident, but it feels like the goal not being disallowed doesn't justify this reaction.
The ball going out - we've seen a number of examples over the years of balls looking like they've gone out from a similar angle to the one most are sharing, only for an overhead look to show it is in. It's entirely reasonable for VAR to say they can't say with enough confidence it went out.
The offside - It's impossible to tell when the ball was played, so VAR can't determine offside.
The 'foul' - is a subjective decision with plenty of people not feeling it was a foul, enough for it not to be a clear error by the ref.

It is reasonable, logical, and a sound decision.

With regard to the red card, was it really that much worse that the one on Gross in the Fulham game which we're told was just yellow card worthy?

His comments aren't about the general standard of refereeing and VAR. He isn't doing it in sympathy with Wolves, us, United, etc. His comments are about distraction from the poor performance and result of his team, and their not keeping up at the top of the table, and his general inability to lose well.


To note, I am not saying there aren't issues with VAR, or that his comments can't apply to some other VAR incidents. But they are too hyperbolic to apply to the Arsenal game, and he isn't sharing them for the good of football.

 

[Dave the OAP]

Could easily stick camera on outside of goalposts.

90 degree camera embedded in outside of goalpost and maybe 1 in corner flag, should better cover whether ball is in/out of play than present system.

Or extend the goal line technologies to the corner flag to corner flag and that is pinged on the referees watch immediately to say if it’s off or on

To be honest this started with Mitoma’s pull back that beat and knocked out Germany in the WC.

We all know it was out but they read it that a shadow from the ball was brushing the live when the floodlight was behind the ball.

 

[Littlemo]

I don't think clear daylight is fair as that is a massive advantage to the attacker. My view would be that it should be the feet that determine offside.

Is it really though? Daylight will at most be a body length apart and I think that would just be the difference between good play and bad tbh.

It’s not unfair in itself for the attacker to be ahead of the opposition, if they get there by decent movement and good play. It’s only if they were hanging about there as they used to do before it was brought in.

 

[Acker79]

I don't think clear daylight is fair as that is a massive advantage to the attacker. My view would be that it should be the feet that determine offside.

My issues is what happens during night games?

I kid.

My issue is how do you define "clear daylight" - For some that means no overlapping of any part of two players' bodies, for others it can be the gap between torsos while limbs overlap. If our hips are level, but I'm leaning forward, there's be daylight between the back of my head and front of yours/your upper body. Clear to whom?

You are deliberately bringing in (more?) subjectivity to a decision that on paper should be factual.

 

[Billy in Bristol]

Yes.

R&D tax relief changes

How they work in practice

www.bdo.co.uk

This will just lead to Skynet, robot overlords and then Terminators roaming the Earth...but if it means Dunky's goal counts then I say its a price worth paying...

 

[AK74]

This will just lead to Skynet, robot overlords and then Terminators roaming the Earth...but if it means Dunky's goal counts then I say its a price worth paying...

That's the spirit.