Curvature

Priv said:
No

It’s been the rule for years, it’s the same for a goal there has to be daylight between the line and ball to be but has it really been applied have you ever seen the ball over the line but the curvature still on the line and a goal disallowed I haven’t!
Click to expand...
 
dennis wise 98 cup final. ball was almost over the line bit like this one. crosses in chelsea get the 2nd goal to secure the win. we were doing quite well to. i thought it was out live. seen the replys and part of the ball was on the line. majority was over it.
 
Nano said:
The studio are talking about not being shown definitive evidence of the ball being in but the whole point is that they don't have any definitive evidence the ball has gone out so the default is that the ball is still in play. There is no conspiracy, just a lack of understanding from the studio.
Click to expand...
The reason for this is that there isn’t any visual photographic evidence anymore as fifa now uses what the computer think happens via the chip in the ball and other sensors rather than what really happened that can be seen visually

Basically regardless of what actually happened with the naked eye if the computer says it’s in it’s in.

Same with off sides.

It’s all very odd.

This is why the uk broadcasters are so confused as we use Hawkeye for our var in the UK it’s about the visual cues and the camera showing a physical break of the pane.

Goal star uses a digital image of an imaginary field to calculate the results. Plus it means you have to use an Adidas ball.
 
It's all well and good having all this technology, but in the real game where you are relying on humans interpreting the laws without the benefit of VAR that would have been given out and very fee would have complained.
 
dooderooni said:
It's all well and good having all this technology, but in the real game where you are relying on humans interpreting the laws without the benefit of VAR that would have been given out and very fee would have complained.
Click to expand...
This is nothing to do with interpretation, it’s not subjective, the rules are clear on whether its out and the ball is not out.

Yes before VAR it would of been onfield decision which was out though that decision was wrong/
 
Priv said:
This is nothing to do with interpretation, it’s not subjective, the rules are clear on whether its out and the ball is not out.

Yes before VAR it would of been onfield decision which was out though that decision was wrong/
Click to expand...
You are missing the point though.
VAR is creating a 2 tier game. One, "high value" game where technology is relied on to ensure a "fair" result and a second, less valuable game where officiating is left to the humans.
The laws may be the same, but the way they are administered are very, very different.
 
dooderooni said:
VAR is creating a 2 tier game. One, "high value" game where technology is relied on to ensure a "fair" result and a second, less valuable game where officiating is left to the humans.
The laws may be the same, but the way they are administered are very, very different.
Click to expand...

Since multiple angle TV replays became a thing on TV we have had to endure people bemoaning poor reffing and calling for the officiating to be made better so it doesn't cost teams in big games... and now people are moaning about that? 🤷‍♂️

It's great technology and stops all this waiting around for VAR. Just what the footballing doctors ordered (y)
 
Nano said:
The studio are talking about not being shown definitive evidence of the ball being in but the whole point is that they don't have any definitive evidence the ball has gone out so the default is that the ball is still in play. There is no conspiracy, just a lack of understanding from the studio.
Click to expand...
And that lack of understanding (or anything to blame FIFA for) is spreading to their audience.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top