VAR in Scottish Football

[54_and_counting]

53 minutes ago, Merkland Red said:

Has this replaced "what school did you go to?"

Aye cause half them didnt fucking go to any school

[craigkillie]

Hopefully as a compromise Sky get rid of Walker and the SFA get rid of VAR. Win-win.

[10menwent2mow]

Yet another complete clusterfuck tonight. Get it to f**k. Then get it to f**k some more. Then f**k it off. 

[Busta Nut]

hmmm I thought it was a red. 

VAR can still go though.

 

[Merkie84]

The offside last nigh highlights my biggest gripe with VAR . Using a still photo to tell weather one person is further ahead of another, and saying “ well his leg/ arm / foot etc is ahead so the striker is offside. 
 

I hope I can explain this and why this is wrong , but here goes…
 

Running is dynamic , not static,  but the ruling is based on a still photo and is largely down to luck which phase of the stride each player is in, not which one is further ahead or not . 
 

For example , if a player is in the phase of his stride , where his forward leg is at its largest extension, his foot or arm may be in front of the defender and called offside. 
 

However , if the photo is taken when his lead leg and arm are parallel with his torso, he will be called onside, regardless of where the torsos of each player is. 
 

So it is possible for a player photographed  in the first scenario, with his feet or arm to be ahead of a player in the second scenario to still be behind him, and therefore onside. 
 

Alternatively, a player with his arms and legs behind the defender but his torso ahead , is offside. 
 

Athletics separates the fastest men and women in the world, sometimes by thousands of seconds by taking measurements from the torso, not arms and feet as it would be only luck as to which phase of the stride an athlete crosses the line ( or worse, which one happens to have the longest legs). 

The photo attached shows what I am talking about clearer than I can explain. The athlete in lane 2’s foot is ahead of the athlete in lane 5. However, the athlete in lane 5 is a good meter ahead of the athlete in lane 2 . If that was the finish line, lane 5 finishes ahead of lane 2. 

If that same photo was used for an offside decision, and lane 2 is the striker, and lane 5 the defender, he gets flagged offside by VAR. This is clearly incorrect, but at the moment that is how VAR is being used to determine close offsides. 

 

Edited April 15, 2023 by Merkie84
Extra information

[Busta Nut]

I think there is a flaw to yer method there, but I agree measuring that someone's nipple is 2 cm offside is a farce. I'f it's not a massively noticeable difference or so just leave it.

[AJF]

14 minutes ago, Merkie84 said:

The offside last nigh highlights my biggest gripe with VAR . Using a still photo to tell weather one person is further ahead of another, and saying “ well his leg/ arm / foot etc is ahead so the striker is offside. 
 

I hope I can explain this and why this is wrong , but here goes…
 

Running is dynamic , not static,  but the ruling is based on a still photo and is largely down to luck which phase of the stride each player is in, not which one is further ahead or not . 
 

For example , if a player is in the phase of his stride , where his forward leg is at its largest extension, his foot or arm may be in front of the defender and called offside. 
 

However , if the photo is taken when his lead leg and arm are parallel with his torso, he will be called onside, regardless of where the torsos of each player is. 
 

So it is possible for a player photographed  in the first scenario, with his feet or arm to be ahead of a player in the second scenario to still be behind him, and therefore onside. 
 

Alternatively, a player with his arms and legs behind the defender but his torso ahead , is offside. 
 

Athletics separates the fastest men and women in the world, sometimes by thousands of seconds by taking measurements from the torso, not arms and feet as it would be only luck as to which phase of the stride an athlete crosses the line ( or worse, which one happens to have the longest legs). 

The photo attached shows what I am talking about clearer than I can explain. The athlete in lane 2’s foot is ahead of the athlete in lane 5. However, the athlete in lane 5 is a good meter ahead of the athlete in lane 2 . If that was the finish line, lane 5 finishes ahead of lane 2. 

If that same photo was used for an offside decision, and lane 2 is the striker, and lane 5 the defender, he gets flagged offside by VAR. This is clearly incorrect, but at the moment that is how VAR is being used to determine close offsides. 

 

The main difference between sprinting and offsides in football is that athletes are running to cross a fixed point, the finish line, so it is easier to measure. In football, the timing of the “photo” is reliant on when the pass is made. Due to the limitations of the frames per second, there will be a variance that will never be eliminated (unless we miraculously start using cameras capable of 50,000 fps or something crazy like that).

[craigkillie]

22 minutes ago, Merkie84 said:

The offside last nigh highlights my biggest gripe with VAR . Using a still photo to tell weather one person is further ahead of another, and saying “ well his leg/ arm / foot etc is ahead so the striker is offside. 
 

I hope I can explain this and why this is wrong , but here goes…

Running is dynamic , not static,  but the ruling is based on a still photo and is largely down to luck which phase of the stride each player is in, not which one is further ahead or not .

For example , if a player is in the phase of his stride , where his forward leg is at its largest extension, his foot or arm may be in front of the defender and called offside.

However , if the photo is taken when his lead leg and arm are parallel with his torso, he will be called onside, regardless of where the torsos of each player is.

So it is possible for a player photographed  in the first scenario, with his feet or arm to be ahead of a player in the second scenario to still be behind him, and therefore onside.

Alternatively, a player with his arms and legs behind the defender but his torso ahead , is offside.

Athletics separates the fastest men and women in the world, sometimes by thousands of seconds by taking measurements from the torso, not arms and feet as it would be only luck as to which phase of the stride an athlete crosses the line ( or worse, which one happens to have the longest legs). 

The photo attached shows what I am talking about clearer than I can explain. The athlete in lane 2’s foot is ahead of the athlete in lane 5. However, the athlete in lane 5 is a good meter ahead of the athlete in lane 2 . If that was the finish line, lane 5 finishes ahead of lane 2. 

If that same photo was used for an offside decision, and lane 2 is the striker, and lane 5 the defender, he gets flagged offside by VAR. This is clearly incorrect, but at the moment that is how VAR is being used to determine close offsides.

 

The phase of the stride isn't important though, the offside law has always been about which player is furthest forward when the ball is played. That was the case before VAR and is still the case now. There is more nuance to offside decisions than always being a case of two players trying to outsprint each other for a ball, so it wouldn't make sense to introduce any sort of ruling about stride patterns.

There is a valid question about whether the correct still photo has been chosen, and that certainly is a worthwhile discussion based on VAR offside decisions..

However, if any "uncertainty window" was introduced in VAR decisions, I would expect the ruling to stay with the on-field decision, which last night was given as offside.

[Loonytoons]

Is VAR not meant to check if0 anything was wrong when a goal is scored?

Launching the ball into the box from a throw in resulting in a goal should surely be scrutinised.

How did they miss this?

[RandomGuy.]

5 hours ago, Loonytoons said:

Is VAR not meant to check if0 anything was wrong when a goal is scored?

Launching the ball into the box from a throw in resulting in a goal should surely be scrutinised.

How did they miss this?

Are you the same moron who's been bleating all over twitter about it too?

Answer was given by a Saints fan there so here it is again 

 

[Loonytoons]

55 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

Are you the same moron who's been bleating all over twitter about it too?

Answer was given by a Saints fan there so here it is again 

 

Jeez.  Someone piss in your cornflakes this morning, and no I don't do Twitter.

Just looked like a clear foul throw to me, thanks for clarifying. 

[Ginaro]

11 hours ago, Loonytoons said:

Is VAR not meant to check if0 anything was wrong when a goal is scored?

Launching the ball into the box from a throw in resulting in a goal should surely be scrutinised.

How did they miss this?

In addition to it not being a foul throw, VAR doesn't get involved in restarts / or things that happened before play restarts.

[Loonytoons]

2 hours ago, Ginaro said:

In addition to it not being a foul throw, VAR doesn't get involved in restarts / or things that happened before play restarts.

Not saying you're wrong but I can't find anything about that at all.

Seems strange if someone lamps another player when the ball is dead and the ref misses it that VAR wouldn't be used.

[kingjoey]

4 hours ago, Loonytoons said:

Not saying you're wrong but I can't find anything about that at all.

Seems strange if someone lamps another player when the ball is dead and the ref misses it that VAR wouldn't be used.

That would be checked under potential red card. 

[craigkillie]

7 hours ago, Ginaro said:

In addition to it not being a foul throw, VAR doesn't get involved in restarts / or things that happened before play restarts.

This isn't true, because it intervenes when goalkeepers are in front of the line at penalties.

[Loonytoons]

1 hour ago, kingjoey said:

That would be checked under potential red card. 

So VAR does get involved when the play has stopped then?

[kingjoey]

19 minutes ago, Loonytoons said:

So VAR does get involved when the play has stopped then?

For a potential red card, yes.

[Savage Henry]

Going by this weekend, any use of the hand whatsoever will be deemed deliberate and therefore a penalty.  No idea why the Haning red card wasn’t overturned.   VAR is a joke and needs chucked as soon as is possible.  

[Ginaro]

Howard Webb on Sky Sports showing clips with VAR audio (there's some more on that twitter thread).

Would be good to hear more of this to show people the communication that goes on in the refereeing team (the DOGSO and delaying shouts), especially with the refs describing their on-field decisions and how that relates to the VAR getting involved. 

 

[Ginaro]

More VAR audio, from the women's FA cup final