I would say that the frame rate and speed of play make it too difficult to judge...

... or guarantee an accurate result.

In athletics, for example, if timing cameras can’t separate (due to technology not being able to go far enough) two runners in a race, it’s a dead heat. That’s not possible in football as it’s a binary decision. Therefore I think on balance I’d prefer a human decision with the risk that entails. To avoid charges of bias or corruption if also like to have a post match analysis by third party, reviewing standards of decisions.

Posted By: APB on January 8th 2020 at 09:51:13

Message Thread

Colin just said the worst VAR error he’s seen is Pukki’s goal against Spurs (n/m) (NCFC) - Augustus Pablo, Jan 8, 08:53:07
- IMHO the Man Utd penalty was much worse. (NCFC) - usacanary, Jan 8, 13:41:28
- The long standing ref's principal... no surprises! (NCFC) - Worthing Yellow, Jan 8, 09:22:17
- There have been a few VAR errors but Pukki wasn’t (NCFC) - SCC 28, Jan 8, 09:01:49
  - Course it was ridiculous decision even spurs fans agree (n/m) (NCFC) - loz, Jan 8, 09:03:09
    - A ridiculous decision yep (NCFC) - SCC 28, Jan 8, 09:11:50
      - It was wrong. Worrying though that the premier league are backing the current form of use (n/m) (NCFC) - Jim, Jan 8, 09:12:34
        
        It wasn’t wrong - the technology didn’t malfunction (NCFC) - SCC 28, Jan 8, 09:18:22
        
        it was wrong (NCFC) - grays, Jan 8, 09:22:21
        
        But he wasn’t judged level by the technology (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Jan 8, 09:28:10
        
        The inherent error in the measurement was far greater than the (NCFC) - dennis moore, Jan 8, 16:21:48
        
        my point is (NCFC) - grays, Jan 8, 09:32:56
        
        Maybe nothing tight enough yet (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Jan 8, 09:39:53
        
        If the Pukki one wasn;t (even thoiugh it was actually wrong) then there will never be. (n/m) (NCFC) - Jim, Jan 8, 09:51:51
        
        Nonsense (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Jan 8, 09:56:55
        
        It was wrong. He was not offside. No way. (n/m) (NCFC) - Jim, Jan 8, 09:20:59
        
        Right so no part of his body was offside? (NCFC) - SCC 28, Jan 8, 09:26:47
        
        I don;t believe the technolgy was accurate enough to prove it was offside, I don't (NCFC) - Jim, Jan 8, 09:29:22
        
        The first point is fair regarding proof (NCFC) - SCC 28, Jan 8, 09:43:18
        
        As discussed before when you have a margin of error as they do you cannot be (NCFC) - Jim, Jan 8, 09:47:22
        
        do we end up with two offside rules then? (NCFC) - CWC, Jan 8, 09:52:17
        
        God knows. I can see that being equally confusing. My preference would be to (NCFC) - Jim, Jan 8, 09:57:58
        
        how can you go back to a rule that never existed? (NCFC) - Ralf Scrampton, Jan 8, 10:13:41
        
        Didn't realise that was another bit of "guidance" our refs made up! Its talked about so (NCFC) - Jim, Jan 8, 10:28:39
        
        VMT (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Jan 8, 10:16:51
        
        Maybe his aura was offside (n/m) (NCFC) - Augustus Pablo, Jan 8, 09:28:44
        
        what if he had a lob on? (n/m) (NCFC) - Ralf Scrampton, Jan 8, 09:36:23
        
        It'd only take a semi tbf. (n/m) (NCFC) - protheroe fitzgibbon, Jan 8, 09:37:56
        
        clearly wrong. But SCC is this boards biggest fan of VAR. (NCFC) - shoddy, Jan 8, 09:15:29
        
        I’m not a fan of VAR’s use in forensic offsides (NCFC) - SCC 28, Jan 8, 09:22:57
        
        I would say that the frame rate and speed of play make it too difficult to judge... (NCFC) - APB, Jan 8, 09:51:13
        
        One line placed at the legal ball-playing part of the defender closest to goal... (NCFC) - Declan, Jan 8, 10:19:37
        
        That sounds a very good suggestion (n/m) (NCFC) - Jim, Jan 8, 10:29:21
        
        A dead heat would be onside though (NCFC) - SCC 28, Jan 8, 09:55:53
        
        Yes. (n/m) (NCFC) - APB, Jan 8, 09:59:52
        
        If? I’d. (n/m) (NCFC) - APB, Jan 8, 09:51:42
        
        I would like to know who owns this technology they are using and appears to have been (NCFC) - Jim, Jan 8, 09:27:13
        
        Well I don’t see why corruption should be involved (NCFC) - SCC 28, Jan 8, 09:31:53
        
        I was thinking more of lobbying rather than corruption. I.e. how this got suddenly rolled (NCFC) - Jim, Jan 8, 09:51:17
        
        Ball over line only has one moving part, like tennis (NCFC) - duke of york, Jan 8, 09:42:03
        
        vmt (NCFC) - CWC, Jan 8, 09:50:22
        
        Agreed but still not clear and obvious error (NCFC) - SCC 28, Jan 8, 09:48:12
        
        If the technology is accurate enough then it is clear (NCFC) - mr carra, Jan 8, 10:40:14
        
        Yes can see a time when these offsides are just as instant (NCFC) - SCC 28, Jan 8, 10:46:08
        
        HawkEye (NCFC) - duke of york, Jan 8, 09:29:18

Reply to Message

In order to add a post to the WotB Message Board you must be a registered WotB user.

If you are not yet registered then please visit the registration page. You should ensure that their browser is setup to accept cookies.