VAR in Scottish Football

[AJF]

23 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

Your attempt at mockery loses it’s value when you exclude my second paragraph where I literally concede that the grass lines may not be straight.

Edited March 18, 2023 by AJF

[Insert Amusing Pseudonym]

Giving scottish referees two chances to make a c**t of something rather than one was always only going to end one way.

Some of the worst decisions you'll ever see today

[gannonball]

8 hours ago, No_Problemo said:

When the SFA talk about the progression of their referees, and this is backed up by referees themselves - then amazingly I do believe it. It clearly isn’t the only reason it was brought in, but it is one of them. 

The refs had little appetite for it until they realised they were going to miss out on their UEFA jollies by not having domestically then all of a sudden they were shouting for it and it was implemented rather hastily. They have more pull than most would think imo.

I'm still for it myself but as each match I go to it seems to deter me that little bit more.

Edited March 19, 2023 by gannonball

[IrishBhoy]

10 hours ago, AJF said:

 

They are fair points to be honest and I hadn’t really considered the “wonky grass lines” angle. I’d have thought any cuts of the grass would start from the goal-line so just assumed they’d be uniform all the way up the pitch if they start off square.

Still though, the variance in distance between the near side and far side either mean the grass is cut terribly or the VAR lines are placed terribly.

I thought the same as you on first viewing, and I still think it’s incredibly tight no matter what arbitrary lines are drawn by the VAR team, probably using Microsoft Paint on Windows XP, but no matter what team scores a goal from an offside decision as tight as that I wouldn’t like to see it ruled out when the available camera angles don’t make it obvious. 

[IrishBhoy]

10 hours ago, The Master said:

Two parallel lines will always appear to converge in a still image. The effect is amplified the tighter the angle you view it from. 

I understand that parallel lines will always converge to a point the further they travel, but should that really be the case over a distance of 70 odd yards? A train track disappearing into the distance over the space of a mile or so, sure. But a noticeable difference from one side of a football pitch to the other? Nah. Surely the amount of convergence would be negligible, especially when viewing the lines from the angle shown in the screenshot from Fir Park.
 

I’m not saying that the cut of the grass should be taken as any kind of authority when deciding offside decisions, but to my eye the line drawn by the VAR officials from the back of Goldson along to Johnston looked a little bit iffy. As I said I think it was extremely tight, and the Primary School graphics drawn by the officials had Johnston just onside, which I think was the correct decision when there’s literally a few millimetres in it either way. The cameras used by VAR don’t have a frame rate that even allows them to accurately determine the exact moment the ball is played forward, which makes the prolonged offside decisions and drawing of lines to rule out a goal where the attackers knee is a quarter of an inch infront of the second last defender a bit of a joke. Far more leeway should be given to the attacking team in order to compensate for the undeniable fact that the VAR officials are working with technology that isn’t up to the job of calling such tight and important decisions that can change depending on which frame they decide use. 

[54_and_counting]

9 minutes ago, IrishBhoy said:

I understand that parallel lines will always converge to a point the further they travel, but should that really be the case over a distance of 70 odd yards? A train track disappearing into the distance over the space of a mile or so, sure. But a noticeable difference from one side of a football pitch to the other? Nah. Surely the amount of convergence would be negligible, especially when viewing the lines from the angle shown in the screenshot from Fir Park.
 

I’m not saying that the cut of the grass should be taken as any kind of authority when deciding offside decisions, but to my eye the line drawn by the VAR officials from the back of Goldson along to Johnston looked a little bit iffy. As I said I think it was extremely tight, and the Primary School graphics drawn by the officials had Johnston just onside, which I think was the correct decision when there’s literally a few millimetres in it either way. The cameras used by VAR don’t have a frame rate that even allows them to accurately determine the exact moment the ball is played forward, which makes the prolonged offside decisions and drawing of lines to rule out a goal where the attackers knee is a quarter of an inch infront of the second last defender a bit of a joke. Far more leeway should be given to the attacking team in order to compensate for the undeniable fact that the VAR officials are working with technology that isn’t up to the job of calling such tight and important decisions that can change depending on which frame they decide use. 

Disagree that the leeway should go to the attacker, defenders nowadays have it so much more against them with the handball rule and how easy it is for an attacker to get a penalty (especially the attackers that initiate contact with the defender first) if a defender plays the offside trap and catch a striked by millimetres, then they have done their job and shouldn't be punished because we give "leeway" to the attacker

[gannonball]

1 minute ago, 54_and_counting said:

Disagree that the leeway should go to the attacker, defenders nowadays have it so much more against them with the handball rule and how easy it is for an attacker to get a penalty (especially the attackers that initiate contact with the defender first) if a defender plays the offside trap and catch a striked by millimetres, then they have done their job and shouldn't be punished because we give "leeway" to the attacker

Personally I think the handball rule should be adjusted (again) then rather than have the offside rule take up the slack. I would rather goals be encouraged more from open play rather than the constant penalties you see in VAR games these days.

[Dons_1988]

1 hour ago, gannonball said:

I'm still for it myself 

[AJF]

58 minutes ago, IrishBhoy said:

I thought the same as you on first viewing, and I still think it’s incredibly tight no matter what arbitrary lines are drawn by the VAR team, probably using Microsoft Paint on Windows XP, but no matter what team scores a goal from an offside decision as tight as that I wouldn’t like to see it ruled out when the available camera angles don’t make it obvious. 

Agreed.

[IrishBhoy]

1 minute ago, 54_and_counting said:

Disagree that the leeway should go to the attacker, defenders nowadays have it so much more against them with the handball rule and how easy it is for an attacker to get a penalty (especially the attackers that initiate contact with the defender first) if a defender plays the offside trap and catch a striked by millimetres, then they have done their job and shouldn't be punished because we give "leeway" to the attacker

I can understand that point but the aim of the game in football is scoring goals, not deploying an offside trap to leave an attacker quarter of an inch offside. Nobody is going to be speaking about legendary offside traps in years to come, but with the current laws and the way VAR is being used in Scotland, there’s a good chance that legendary goals could be ruled out for offside because the VAR official used the wrong frame to determine when the ball was played forward.

In the Champions League the ball has a sensor that can give accurate data to the VAR officials and allows them to pinpoint the exact frame to use as the ball is played forward. That technology doesn’t exist in Scotland, and if you have a defender rushing out at speed combined with an attacker going forward, finding the exact moment the ball is played is extremely important, when one frame could have the attacker level and the next frame could have the attacker a yard offside. Drawing lines and ruling goals out because that certain still image shows a player a few millimetres offside is laughable when you aren’t going to be accurate in finding out when the ball was played forward. 

[54_and_counting]

6 minutes ago, IrishBhoy said:

I can understand that point but the aim of the game in football is scoring goals, not deploying an offside trap to leave an attacker quarter of an inch offside. Nobody is going to be speaking about legendary offside traps in years to come, but with the current laws and the way VAR is being used in Scotland, there’s a good chance that legendary goals could be ruled out for offside because the VAR official used the wrong frame to determine when the ball was played forward.

In the Champions League the ball has a sensor that can give accurate data to the VAR officials and allows them to pinpoint the exact frame to use as the ball is played forward. That technology doesn’t exist in Scotland, and if you have a defender rushing out at speed combined with an attacker going forward, finding the exact moment the ball is played is extremely important, when one frame could have the attacker level and the next frame could have the attacker a yard offside. Drawing lines and ruling goals out because that certain still image shows a player a few millimetres offside is laughable when you aren’t going to be accurate in finding out when the ball was played forward. 

And the aim of the defenders is to stop the goals and catching opposing players offside is one of they ways, a millimeter or a yard makes no difference, the rules state if your offside your offside

They simply shouldnt be penalised because we want to see more goals, 

Defenders have had every advantage removed over the years, prime example is the celtic game yesterday, twice defenders penalised for pulling strikers in the box, how often do you see an attacker penalised for man handling a defender out the way to get to the ball in the box (i know both penalties are fouls, im more insinuating that strikers get away with more) 

[54_and_counting]

22 minutes ago, gannonball said:

Personally I think the handball rule should be adjusted (again) then rather than have the offside rule take up the slack. I would rather goals be encouraged more from open play rather than the constant penalties you see in VAR games these days.

The handball rule will never be correct because the refs simply will never be able to judge if its accidental or not (apart from pure blatant ones) so the rule needs to be altered to a defender gaining an advantage which then is a disadvantage because players can simply thump the ball at a defender knowing theres a good chance of a penalty 

[IrishBhoy]

12 minutes ago, 54_and_counting said:

And the aim of the defenders is to stop the goals and catching opposing players offside is one of they ways, a millimeter or a yard makes no difference, the rules state if your offside your offside

They simply shouldnt be penalised because we want to see more goals, 

Defenders have had every advantage removed over the years, prime example is the celtic game yesterday, twice defenders penalised for pulling strikers in the box, how often do you see an attacker penalised for man handling a defender out the way to get to the ball in the box (i know both penalties are fouls, im more insinuating that strikers get away with more) 

I do see your point but what I’m saying is that goals are being ruled out by VAR when there is a good chance that the attacking player isn’t actually offside, due to the inadequacies in the technology used in Scotland. I’m all for a good offside trap if we can clearly ascertain that the player is offside, but I’m not wanting to see legitimate goals ruled out because the official in charge of choosing the specific frame that the lines are drawn on hasn’t taken any particular effort to accurately pinpoint the moment that the ball is initially played forward. We would be as well going back to letting the assistant referees have the final say over offsides if the VAR is going to use pictures with a frame rate that literally cannot run the rule over tight offside decisions with any kind of accuracy. As much as you laud the skill of a defences offside trap, there is as much to be said for an attackers well timed run. 

I agree with some of what you say, but disagree that defenders dont still have some advantages over the attackers. It happens often where you will see a foul given in favour of the defending team for an absolute nothing incident at a corner or a free kick, and rarely is it penalised when an attacker is getting held back from the ball or his shirt pulled in the box in the same scenario. Defenders under pressure running towards their own goal with the ball only need to feel the slightest bit of contact from an opponent in order for them to go down and 99 times out of 100 the referee buys it and a soft foul is given in their favour. There is loads of stuff like that where fouls that happen at the corner flag are given every time but the exact same incident in the box would be waved away every time. 

[gannonball]

49 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

Admittedly only just these days and more so the concept but UEFA/FIFA/IFAB made an arse of implementing it  and the SFA are doing a 'hold my beer' following on from that 

32 minutes ago, 54_and_counting said:

The handball rule will never be correct because the refs simply will never be able to judge if its accidental or not (apart from pure blatant ones) so the rule needs to be altered to a defender gaining an advantage which then is a disadvantage because players can simply thump the ball at a defender knowing theres a good chance of a penalty 

Yeah agree I think there should more of a discussion of indirect free kicks allowed for certain types of  hand balls in the box as the punishment is too much currently for relatively innocuous ones.

[DA Baracus]

Just look at the discussions on this thread. VAR is fucking pish and anyone who wanted it needs to pipe down. Anyone who still thinks it's a good idea should also pipe down.

[RandomGuy.]

1 minute ago, DA Baracus said:

Just look at the discussions on this thread. VAR is fucking pish and anyone who wanted it needs to pipe down. Anyone who still thinks it's a good idea should also pipe down.

This.

VAR and the handball rule both ruined our game v Killie yesterday, and robbed them of 1 goal and (at least) 1 penalty.

Like literally was it the benefit to it?

[gannonball]

2 minutes ago, DA Baracus said:

Just look at the discussions on this thread. VAR is fucking pish and anyone who wanted it needs to pipe down. Anyone who still thinks it's a good idea should also pipe down.

Despite being a member of this forum for about 16 years I'm not quite sure your quite getting the concept of it tbh

[DA Baracus]

1 minute ago, gannonball said:

Despite being a member of this forum for about 16 years I'm not quite sure your quite getting the concept of it tbh

I understand this is the VAR thread. My point was the discussions around it show just how shite it us. There are barely any posts after games saying that VAR was good and that it has been a worthwhile addition etc.

[Bairnardo]

1 minute ago, DA Baracus said:

Just look at the discussions on this thread. VAR is fucking pish and anyone who wanted it needs to pipe down. Anyone who still thinks it's a good idea should also pipe down.

Most proponents of VAR now seem to just vaguely motion towards "but there's loads of money at stake....."

Not only is that not particularly true, nor made any more robust by VAR, but its irrelevant to the one test that SHOULD be applied to the implementation (or not) of something like VAR... Has it improved football as a product. The answer SURELY has to be no to that doesn't it?

For VAR to have improved the product, it would have to have either removed all doubt, which is basically impossible and sort of renders it pointless anyway, or it would have to have significantly improved the standard of decision making whilst having no detriment to the match. And thats definitely not the case. So VAR makes watching the match slightly worse than before, and doesnt REALLY remove the controversy of shit referees. 

Failed experiment. Bin. 

[tree house tam]

VAR is brilliant and it works. Once they speed up decisions it'll be seamless.