July 21, 2017, 01:37:11 PM

Author Topic: Video Ref  (Read 598 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

April 30, 2017, 08:09:47 AM
Read 598 times
Online

Jamokachi


Had my first experience of VAR (video assistant ref?) last night during the Sydney v Perth A-League semi final, and it was all a bit... well, surreal.

First of all our central defender Buijs went on a barnstorming run, played a one two and scored from a rebound off the Perth keeper, only for the linesman to call offside against the player in a central position who he had assumed the ball was being played to. 2 play backs later, players and managers going nuts with each other, fans not having a clue what was going on (some didn't even realise the technology was in use) and the goal was given. This probably took 3 to 4 minutes of complete confusion to be confirmed.

Then, to rub salt in Perth's wounds a delivery from the left is headed in by Holosko, only for the same linesman to call it offside. Now obviously because all the fans know the technology is available it's being shouted for. The ref obliges and sure enough it's a goal. This decision is a bit more straightforward and is completed within good time though.

Both decision were correct, and the goals would have been incorrectly chalked off had the linesman's decision stood, but there's much to learn before this is rolled out as a smooth process. The main issue I found was that nobody really knew the technology was going to be used. Players, managers and fans were all as confused as each other.

http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/article/2017/04/29/sydney-sweep-past-perth-controversial-semi-final-video-ref-used-twice

April 30, 2017, 05:25:01 PM
Reply #1
Offline

Major Clanger


This sounds exactly as awful as everybody with a bit of sense has predicted.

I'd rather we get the odd incorrect offside decision than having to wait 3 minutes for a correct one.
The Shadow Over Inasmuch - The Adventures of Bicoid, Hunchback and Kruppel

April 30, 2017, 07:26:13 PM
Reply #2
Offline

blueToffee

NSNO Subscriber
This sounds exactly as awful as everybody with a bit of sense has predicted.

I'd rather we get the odd incorrect offside decision than having to wait 3 minutes for a correct one.

Think that's incredibly harsh based on one game. It sounds like by the second goal they'd already got more used to it. The international between Spain and France had no such issues.

It's not about the odd incorrect offside decision. It (for me) is about taking power away from the clubs that enjoy referee bias more often than those that don't. You only have to look as long ago as what 20-30 mins since the last incident of this nature. Man United get a penalty that wasn't a penalty against a bottom half team. How many times have we seen such things? It's been a constant in my time growing up with football. It's a simple fact that it's the least path of resistance for a referee to give a marginal decision in favour of the big team than not, and they do it in abundance. It's probably not a conscious choice, but if they give a decision that allows a top 4/6 team to score when it shouldn't have been...what happens? Nothing bar playing back of a few replays at HT, maybe a question at the end of the game? However, if they make a decision that goes against the big team, they give a penalty or an offside goal to the smaller team and they go on to win...and then what? They have endless discussions, phone ins lambasting them, pundits calling them out in columns, pressure to drop them for the next PL game, etc, etc.

If Man United win today 1-0 from that bad call, it will just be a footnote in the match report. Maybe pundits say it was a "soft" penalty, or that "there was contact" as if touching another player was reason enough. They get the 3 pts and everyone moves on.

It's one of the biggest imbalances in the game, and personally I'm so done with it. For that reason alone, it's worth it to see if they can have a fairly seamless 4th official. It's worth a long enough experiment.

They could've made the right decision there before Rooney even walked up to take it.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2017, 08:55:29 AM by blueToffee »


April 30, 2017, 07:31:30 PM
Reply #3
Offline

Major Clanger


Bollocks, if there is indeed a bias, that would've been given as a penalty even on video evidence.

By the way, contact is still not required for it to be a penalty. Most of football's rules are about intent and judgement, and as such not measurable.

Offside is one of the few that are measurable, and we've seen how using video evidence for something as obvious as that can completely ruin a game.

If they can make a decision in real time (like with goal-line technology), great, let's have it. If not, fuck it off.
« Last Edit: April 30, 2017, 07:34:39 PM by Major Clanger »
The Shadow Over Inasmuch - The Adventures of Bicoid, Hunchback and Kruppel

April 30, 2017, 07:49:59 PM
Reply #4
Offline

blueToffee

NSNO Subscriber
Bollocks, if there is indeed a bias, that would've been given as a penalty even on video evidence.

By the way, contact is still not required for it to be a penalty. Most of football's rules are about intent and judgement, and as such not measurable.

Offside is one of the few that are measurable, and we've seen how using video evidence for something as obvious as that can completely ruin a game.

If they can make a decision in real time (like with goal-line technology), great, let's have it. If not, fuck it off.

I don't think that's the case, I think in the split second they lean toward bias but if there is clearer perspective from the video they'd have a harder time justifying it. The bias come in part from the doubt.

Until they actually try it though for a season, what you or I say on the matter is conjecture. However, with the incident above and the incidents in the France vs Spain game it should be noted they got all the borderline reviews correct which were initially given incorrectly (I believe in the France game, both calls were given in favour of the home team France).

I just want a reasonable experiment. If it ends up being a disaster, decisions aren't improved then fine we stay as is. I think the France game alone showed the potential though and I think as technology matures the speed of reviews will only get faster and faster. They could probably have some AI assisted ref 100 years from now that could spit out a decision in a similar time to the goal line tech of today.

April 30, 2017, 11:07:38 PM
Reply #5
Offline

Brownie20

NSNO Subscriber
Give it a proper trial and its use will become smooth. BT practically use a TMO with the ex ref in the stand watching the monitor. It wouldn't take that long to determine whether a goal is offside or not, or a handball has taken place in the build up to a goal. We are talking about the most lucrative sport in the world and one of the few major ones where we are not using video tech. Think of John Terry's offside equaliser last year - imagine if that cost us a CL place or a title/trophy or relegated us. We are talking huge repercussions. It will come and it will enhance the game
[lightbox=image_url|title|group|float][/lightbox]  :cheers:


May 01, 2017, 06:52:01 AM
Reply #6
Offline

blargins

NSNO Subscriber
I'm against video refs. Part of the game is human error plus it gives talking points.
Give a man a fish, he eats for a day. Teach a man how to fish, the government will tell him to register his business license, pay income tax, pay payroll, pay for fishing permit.

May 01, 2017, 06:57:52 AM
Reply #7
Offline

Brownie20

NSNO Subscriber
I'm against video refs. Part of the game is human error plus it gives talking points.

I was the same with rugby, but it's helped in so many ways. There will still be error on things like tackles, handball etc - but offside goals need to be sorted
[lightbox=image_url|title|group|float][/lightbox]  :cheers:

May 01, 2017, 11:02:59 AM
Reply #8
Online

Jamokachi


The fact the decisions were corrected mean I'm ok with it obviously. Much like rugby there will be a smooth transition over time, and it will be for the game's benefit.

May 01, 2017, 01:47:35 PM
Reply #9
Online

Goaljira

NSNO Subscriber
I'm against video refs. Part of the game is human error plus it gives talking points.

I'd rather talk about winning than some dubious decision.  I want the best team on the day to win, not the team that the officials fucked up the least for.
I'm Mary Poppins, y'all!

May 01, 2017, 07:58:29 PM
Reply #10
Offline

Confucius

NSNO Subscriber
Bollocks, if there is indeed a bias, that would've been given as a penalty even on video evidence.

By the way, contact is still not required for it to be a penalty. Most of football's rules are about intent and judgement, and as such not measurable.

Offside is one of the few that are measurable, and we've seen how using video evidence for something as obvious as that can completely ruin a game.

If they can make a decision in real time (like with goal-line technology), great, let's have it. If not, fuck it off.

So weird someone in computers can have such an archaic view point. Get with the times mate. There is too much money in football to be getting decisions wrong.

And it's not the 1900's.
Farhad Moshiri, Alisher Usmanov, Muhamed Besic, Idrissa Gana Gueye, Ademola Lookman, Barack Hussein Obama, Confucius... Everton Muslims growing stronger...

May 08, 2017, 12:33:35 AM
Reply #11
Offline

Ell Capitan

NSNO Subscriber
Celebrating a goal will never feel as good if you regularly have to wait 30+ seconds to have it confirmed. The immediacy thing is important as it can ruin the experience for the fan. But the powers that be won't care.

May 08, 2017, 12:47:07 AM
Reply #12
Offline

blueToffee

NSNO Subscriber
Celebrating a goal will never feel as good if you regularly have to wait 30+ seconds to have it confirmed. The immediacy thing is important as it can ruin the experience for the fan. But the powers that be won't care.

Surely, you'd celebrate when it goes in...then again if for some reason they need to confirm it..?

May 08, 2017, 12:49:38 AM
Reply #13
Offline

blueToffee

NSNO Subscriber
I'd rather talk about winning than some dubious decision.  I want the best team on the day to win, not the team that the officials fucked up the least for.

Yeah, I'd also say if the game is so lacking in talking points that we need bad officiating to make it interesting it doesn't say much about the game of football.

May 08, 2017, 01:28:11 AM
Reply #14
Offline

Brownie20

NSNO Subscriber
Celebrating a goal will never feel as good if you regularly have to wait 30+ seconds to have it confirmed. The immediacy thing is important as it can ruin the experience for the fan. But the powers that be won't care.

But it doesn't ruin it for the fan. I've seen great tries disallowed by TMO and while it is frustrating it isn't worse than seeing a goal incorrectly allowed/disallowed
[lightbox=image_url|title|group|float][/lightbox]  :cheers: