Jump to content

FA Cup 2022/23


Eednud

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, parsforlife said:

Irrelevant to the offside rule.

Liverpool's 2nd is an awful rule correctly applied.  The goal shouldn't stand if the laws were sorted but the ref must award it.

The 'winner'  clearly the angle provided is poor but it does look correct decision from that,  the liverpool players clear the line quickly and corner takers very rarely match that, sticking with the assistant seems fair.

I'm talking about the 'winner'!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Raven said:

Yeah, itv said, but they also have a presenter bragging about not knowing the offside rule. I can't see how Var can be expected to operate without a camera covering that, tbh.

While it shouldn't happen, it's understandable why they don't. 

All the relevant cameras are on the near side (relative to the corner being taken), which means their vertical field of view takes in more of the far side. 

The opposite happened in Italy earlier this season where a goal was incorrectly chalked-off for offside because none of the camera angles used by VAR showed the last defender who was playing the attacker onside:

Fcc-CPDXoAE6Yn1?format=jpg&name=large 

They either need another goal-line camera on the far side, or more "tactical" cameras that take in the full width of the pitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, parsforlife said:

the liverpool players clear the line quickly and corner takers very rarely match that

Faultless logic for disallowing a goal there!

You are Crawford Allan, Head of SFA Refereeing Operations, and I claim my £50 reward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, The Master said:

While it shouldn't happen, it's understandable why they don't. 

All the relevant cameras are on the near side (relative to the corner being taken), which means their vertical field of view takes in more of the far side. 

The opposite happened in Italy earlier this season where a goal was incorrectly chalked-off for offside because none of the camera angles used by VAR showed the last defender who was playing the attacker onside:

Fcc-CPDXoAE6Yn1?format=jpg&name=large 

They either need another goal-line camera on the far side, or more "tactical" cameras that take in the full width of the pitch.

That example is amazing,... we're going to try to judge offside without knowing where the players are! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, virginton said:

Faultless logic for disallowing a goal there!

You are Crawford Allan, Head of SFA Refereeing Operations, and I claim my £50 reward.

The goal was disallowed because the assistant believed the corner taker was in an offside position when the ball was headed that he went on to receive with no other play happening in between.   VAR then checked the footage they had and couldn't disagree.    The decision would have been the same with no VAR.

I've made a couple of assumptions based on the footage,  giving my opinion as a fan, that's all, its not what happened with VAR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, parsforlife said:

The goal was disallowed because the assistant believed the corner taker was in an offside position when the ball was headed that he went on to receive with no other play happening in between.   VAR then checked the footage they had and couldn't disagree.    The decision would have been the same with no VAR.

I've made a couple of assumptions based on the footage,  giving my opinion as a fan, that's all, its not what happened with VAR.

A decision to disallow a goal can never be justified by such ridiculous assumptions though. You'd be as well saying 'well that team is known for being shite defensively, so they probably had a tit playing everyone onside' instead. Teams at the bottom of the league would be on the receiving of this pre-conceived bias on a weekly basis. 

VAR failing to have credible footage simply confirms that it is just as useless as the clownshoe officials that it is de facto covering for within the current setup. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, virginton said:

A decision to disallow a goal can never be justified by such ridiculous assumptions though. You'd be as well saying 'well that team is known for being shite defensively, so they probably had a tit playing everyone onside' instead. Teams at the bottom of the league would be on the receiving of this pre-conceived bias on a weekly basis. 

VAR failing to have credible footage simply confirms that it is just as useless as the clownshoe officials that it is de facto covering for within the current setup. 

The goal being disallowed had nothing to do with my assumption.   

VAR can rightly be criticised alot, but it not doing anything and the on field decision standing seems a weird thing to blame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, parsforlife said:

The goal being disallowed had nothing to do with my assumption.   

You were justifying the decision to disallow the goal, based on a nonsense assumption.

Quote

VAR can rightly be criticised alot, but it not doing anything and the on field decision standing seems a weird thing to blame.

The entire fucking point of VAR is to act as a corrective for decisions where an official could be expected to have made a reasonable error. In just such a situation this evening, VAR and all the gubbins officials responsible for it were posted missing because of, err, lack of a good camera angle to overturn a crap decision. 

This further confirms that VAR is not a system worth implementing. It neither improves the experience of watching football, nor does it actually prevent errors by casting an objective overview of events. It's just an extra layer of gubbins, arbitrary decision-making on top of the existing layer that nobody liked in the first place. 

If offside can in the near future be determined with a high degree of accuracy by technology alone - like goal line technology - then that should be welcomed. This nick of an effort should be reversed and binned at every level of the game.

Edited by vikingTON
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is there outrage at Liverpool's second goal? The Wolves player goes to head it, makes an arse of it, and the ball ends up with Salah. It's not offside because someone touched it in between the pass happening/offside player touching it. Am I missing something?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Miguel Sanchez said:

Why is there outrage at Liverpool's second goal? The Wolves player goes to head it, makes an arse of it, and the ball ends up with Salah. It's not offside because someone touched it in between the pass happening/offside player touching it. Am I missing something?

The only reason why the Wolves defender played the ball was because an offside Salah was sprinting behind him to score if he didn't intercept it. The idea that Salah was not active and therefore not offside in that first 'phase of play' is therefore complete and utter bollocks. 

That is more of a rules-based nonsense than an officiating error, but that goal still gets disallowed on a regular basis right now.

Edited by vikingTON
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Salvo Montalbano said:

I thought they ditched replays in the FA Cup or was that just a Covid thing?

That was just a one/two season thing due to covid scheduling I believe. Commentators were saying there is going to be a vote regarding scrapping them completely.

I’m for getting rid replays are shite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Scotty Tunbridge said:

That was just a one/two season thing due to covid scheduling I believe. Commentators were saying there is going to be a vote regarding scrapping them completely.

I’m for getting rid replays are shite.

Get away, midweek replays are brilliant...some of the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...