Wengers Offside Rule

[BorrisiaTeeth]

Regardless of it being the current rules or these potential new ones, I think the ‘clear and obvious’ VAR review is a simple one to fix.

You show the VAR referee one replay, at normal speed, from the best angle you have. If it’s clear and obvious they overrule the on field decision. If they are not sure (I.e. it’s not an obvious **** up) then the on field decision stands.

Takes 10 seconds.

 

[The_Big_Woodowski]

The problem with that is that we are told they are now correct by Howard Webb and other, but there are so many I disagree with.

I.e the two footed lunge by the spuds player in the Chelsea game on Sterling. The only reason he didn’t make contact is Sterling got him self out of the way to avoid injury.

In the same game the kick out by the Argentinian spuds player. It was silly and petulant but none the less no different to Beckham and Aliadier (vs Liverpool) and we are told both of the are correct. Not sending off suggests your allowed to hit people if it’s only a little bit.

How long ago were those matches?

The stats I was talking about cover matches starting from some time ago. So there is probably more agreement of which decisions were right and wrong. If I remember rightly the answer was many more VAR overturn decisions were right rather than wrong.

This is another example of arguing about specific examples compared with a more overall view.

So again I feel we should agree to differ. As we will not convince each other.
[/QUOTE]

Was trying to think of simple examples we all would remember. I guess what I was trying to say that with many decisions they class as correct , many of them are still disputed and not universally agreed upon.

Lies, dam lies and statistics

 

[The_Big_Woodowski]

Wonder if the NM penalty award will go down as the correct decision

 

[Frozen Horse]

Sky and the broadcasters would still show it all to show examples of VAR/officials getting it wrong, fans would still be up in arms when it happens etc etc and there'd still be 'calls' for more use of technology.

While what you say is true, broadcasters are always going to zoom in on moments of controversy.

If every goal line, handball and offside decision was miraculously solved tomorrow, focus would switch to another aspect of the game where there wasn't certainly yet. Maybe that crucial "was it a throw in?" decision? Punditry and discussion start where certainty ends.

The agenda should not be driven by television coverage: they will always find something to debate and criticise: that is their job

 

[Nano]

It's a terrible rule change for a few reasons. The first is it doesn't solve the current "problem" of marginal calls. It just moves where the line is drawn. There will always be marginal calls however you measure it. Technology can solve the speed by using what they used at the world cup

There is a simpler solution and that's use the trackers that they all wear and just determine the position based on their trackers.

The biggest issue with this change though is it is assuming the benefit goes to the attacker so there will be more goals but that's an isolated variable. If defenders are losing out significantly because of the benefit to the attackers then they will change how they defend. That means deeper defenses, less space and fewer goals. A return to Pulisball dinosaur football which surely nobody wants.

 

[changingman]

For AI learning to work it needs to be trained. The domain of all rules on the whole of the pitch is so complex I feel it is going to take a long time to happen.

For specific smaller domains it is much more likely. For example, goals and offside.

Yeah definitely. Goals and offsides should be straightforward. Fouls less so but imo the issue there is guidance for referees. The laws themselves are actually quite vague when it comes to fouls which allows for wide interpretation.

The t+shirt line handball ruling for this season is a positive example, just need that level of detail and applicability across more categories of fouls etc.