[Football] Large majority of UK fans oppose continued use of VAR......

[dsr-burnley]

And of course Undav's goal at Villa wouldn't have counted as it was given offside by the lino.

But would it have been given offside if the lino had been using the old rule of level, as judged by the human eye, is onside?

I don't actually know what the linesman does when it's too close to call. When we get these "lines drawn on the pitch" offsides, which very often don't lead to a goal so they don't get officially reviewed, clearly the linesman can only guess whether at the moment the ball was kicked, one man's eyelash was ahead of the other's toenail. So does he guess on the old basis - ie. too close to call = level = onside? Or does he guess on a 50-50 toss of a coin basis?

 

[HastingsSeagull]

Seemed like it protected the big clubs, even more than refs. Would think every non-greedy-six club’s fan would be absolutely fed up with VAR already.

 

[drew]

But would it have been given offside if the lino had been using the old rule of level, as judged by the human eye, is onside?

I don't actually know what the linesman does when it's too close to call. When we get these "lines drawn on the pitch" offsides, which very often don't lead to a goal so they don't get officially reviewed, clearly the linesman can only guess whether at the moment the ball was kicked, one man's eyelash was ahead of the other's toenail. So does he guess on the old basis - ie. too close to call = level = onside? Or does he guess on a 50-50 toss of a coin basis?

Sorry but your comments are getting sillier and sillier! The linesman gave offside because he thought he saw offside. If he wasn't sure he'd have let VAR sort it out. Fact is he gave offside because a Brighton player was in an offside position when the ball was played forward but it wasn't Undav. Without VAR it would have sill been ruled out.

 

[dsr-burnley]

Sorry but your comments are getting sillier and sillier! The linesman gave offside because he thought he saw offside. If he wasn't sure he'd have let VAR sort it out. Fact is he gave offside because a Brighton player was in an offside position when the ball was played forward but it wasn't Undav. Without VAR it would have sill been ruled out.

Unfortunately you don't understand how linesmen do their job which is possibly the reason you don't understand what I am saying.

Linesmen never keep their flag down and allow VAR to sort it out. That is not and never has been how it works. Linesmen give offside if their best estimate is offside, and they give onside if their best estimate is onside. What may be confusing you is that if the decision is too close to call, they allow play to go on until the ball is in a non-critical position, and then signal their decision. ; but they have always made a decision one way or another before VAR comes in and makes its own decision, ignoring the linesman's view.

Under the old rules, if a linesman's best guess was that attacker Fred's knee was a small distance ahead of defender Joe's shoulder, he would say Fred was onside because they were level. Now, he would say offside (after allowing play to go on for a bit just in case) because he has to try and give the same decision as VAR would give.

 

[rogersix]

Unfortunately you don't understand how linesmen do their job which is possibly the reason you don't understand what I am saying.

Linesmen never keep their flag down and allow VAR to sort it out. That is not and never has been how it works. Linesmen give offside if their best estimate is offside, and they give onside if their best estimate is onside. What may be confusing you is that if the decision is too close to call, they allow play to go on until the ball is in a non-critical position, and then signal their decision. ; but they have always made a decision one way or another before VAR comes in and makes its own decision, ignoring the linesman's view.

Under the old rules, if a linesman's best guess was that attacker Fred's knee was a small distance ahead of defender Joe's shoulder, he would say Fred was onside because they were level. Now, he would say offside (after allowing play to go on for a bit just in case) because he has to try and give the same decision as VAR would give.

are you this compelling on the burnley board?

 

[dsr-burnley]

are you this compelling on the burnley board?

The Burnley board is moderated to stop gratuitous personal insults, so I wouldn't know.

 

[rogersix]

The Burnley board is moderated to stop gratuitous personal insults, so I wouldn't know.

they chucked you off your own board, i did wonder why you were here

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

The Burnley board is moderated to stop gratuitous personal insults, so I wouldn't know.

What about justifiable personal insults?

 

[dsr-burnley]

What about justifiable personal insults?

Nope. People whose sole purpose in posting is to be rude, get a ban. (Politics is banned as well because it was causing too much friction.)

 

[dsr-burnley]

they chucked you off your own board, i did wonder why you were here

Wrong. There are a lot of football supporters of other teams that I am happy to talk to. Not everyone is parochial and narrow minded.

 

[drew]

Unfortunately you don't understand how linesmen do their job which is possibly the reason you don't understand what I am saying.

Linesmen never keep their flag down and allow VAR to sort it out. That is not and never has been how it works. Linesmen give offside if their best estimate is offside, and they give onside if their best estimate is onside. What may be confusing you is that if the decision is too close to call, they allow play to go on until the ball is in a non-critical position, and then signal their decision. ; but they have always made a decision one way or another before VAR comes in and makes its own decision, ignoring the linesman's view.

Under the old rules, if a linesman's best guess was that attacker Fred's knee was a small distance ahead of defender Joe's shoulder, he would say Fred was onside because they were level. Now, he would say offside (after allowing play to go on for a bit just in case) because he has to try and give the same decision as VAR would give.

No, I do understand how they do they're job. If a linesman previously felt any part of the attacker was offside then they would flag. They might have been right or they might have been wrong but if they felt part of the player was offside they stand by that. You're now arguing that linesmen made 'best guesses'. I suspect most of them would be insulted by that. Fact is your original comment suggested the law should be changed back to being onside when you're level but this is and always has been the rule. Just admit you were wrong!!!!

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

You don't think so? The average TV camera shoots at 26 frames per second. The average footballer sprints at faster than 1 foot per 1/26 seconds, and his back foot moves even faster so if the defender is running out to catch a forward offside then his back foot will move more like 2 feet in that time.

If you look at all the marginal offside decisions, the ones that they have to draw lines for and take minutes over, they are all goals that should have been given pre-VAR because the players were level. That's the point of VAR - to disallow half the goals that would have been given on the grounds that the players were level - ie. too close to call.

If someone had tried to sell VAR on the basis that it will disallow quite a lot of goals that would have been legal, that it will slow down goal celebrations because it takes so long to work out, and it will make linesmen delay flagging because they know their job is impossible - would it have had any takers? They need to go back to the old definition of level and judge offsides in VAR by eye. They can still correct the mistakes but if they can't tell whether it was a mistake by eye, then it wasn't a mistake.

Premier League games use cameras filming at 50 frames per second. So although it’s still not perfect the margin of error is half what you claim (assuming your math is correct)

 

[dsr-burnley]

No, I do understand how they do they're job. If a linesman previously felt any part of the attacker was offside then they would flag. They might have been right or they might have been wrong but if they felt part of the player was offside they stand by that. You're now arguing that linesmen made 'best guesses'. I suspect most of them would be insulted by that. Fact is your original comment suggested the law should be changed back to being onside when you're level but this is and always has been the rule. Just admit you were wrong!!!!

They were sepcifically told as part of the guidance to referees (in Lancashire, at least) that they were not looking for toenails or kneecaps. The wording was, as close as I remember it, "If a player looks to be level, then he is level".

I doubt any linesman would be insulted by being told that a decision that takes over a minute with the help of computers drawing lines on screen, is too hard for hm to consistently get right on one full speed viewing. He has to guess because he can't possibly know. The entire reason for delayed flagging is because the linesman can't be expected to get it right consistently when it's that close.

The letter of the law has not changed, its application has changed.

 

[nwgull]

They were sepcifically told as part of the guidance to referees (in Lancashire, at least) that they were not looking for toenails or kneecaps. The wording was, as close as I remember it, "If a player looks to be level, then he is level".

I doubt any linesman would be insulted by being told that a decision that takes over a minute with the help of computers drawing lines on screen, is too hard for hm to consistently get right on one full speed viewing. He has to guess because he can't possibly know. The entire reason for delayed flagging is because the linesman can't be expected to get it right consistently when it's that close.

The letter of the law has not changed, its application has changed.

No one cares what you think, racist.

 

[rogersix]

Wrong. There are a lot of football supporters of other teams that I am happy to talk to. Not everyone is parochial and narrow minded.

not everyone voted for bungle and brexit, time for big boy trousers now