[Albion] 2-2

[Bold Seagull]

VAR is shot at 50 frames per second. The operator has to flow back and forwards to the frame he thinks the ball left the passer - it is their estimate. They then estimate where the lines are drawn.

We have a system being operated that pretends it is accurate when it isn't. For me that goal should have stood because the linesman didn't give it and there is not enough for it to have been a mistake by the linesman.

Previous decisions against us were actual errors. This was VAR operating correctly but without acceptance of it's inaccuracies.

 

[pb21]

Anyone still looking at the picture and wondering how this was off ? We got very lucky.

Based on the image alone, offside was the correct decision.

 

[dwayne]

Based on the image alone, offside was the correct decision.

Is it his arm? I don't see how it's possible to tell if his arm overstretches his foot. And his foot looks level.

 

[SeagullsoverLondon]

VAR is shot at 50 frames per second. The operator has to flow back and forwards to the frame he thinks the ball left the passer - it is their estimate. They then estimate where the lines are drawn.

We have a system being operated that pretends it is accurate when it isn't. For me that goal should have stood because the linesman didn't give it and there is not enough for it to have been a mistake by the linesman.

Previous decisions against us were actual errors. This was VAR operating correctly but without acceptance of it's inaccuracies.

I agree with almost everything you say. It's really annoying when people say at least VAR is objective on offsides. It really isn't. However, I think every club can claim tight offside decisions which have gone for or against them during the season. We got lucky yesterday, but have also lost goals to tight decisions, or not had goals chalked off.
I would like to go back to linesman's call, and only overturned if there is an obvious error, é.g. clear daylight between attacker and defender, or last man clearly playing player on.