Spurs V Chelsea VAR Audio released

[East Bear]

Of the ones I’ve heard, they seem panicked and talk over each other. Needs some calm procedure to the whole thing.

 

[themoffster’s ghost]

VAR is meant to catch a “clear and obvious” error.
An offside by a pixel isn’t clear or obvious.

VAR is being used wrongly IMO

 

[BlancaBear]

As for the red card there where exactly is Romero’s foot supposed to go after winning the ball?

Probably not studs first into his ankle.

 

[BlancaBear]

VAR is meant to catch a “clear and obvious” error.
An offside by a pixel isn’t clear or obvious.

VAR is being used wrongly IMO

The "clear and obvious" term needs binned tbh as it's not what VAR is being used for.

 

[tambourineman]

Yip. Subjective and open to abuse. Plus measuring it to the split second of when the ball was struck. This is why I think there needs to be a margin of error built in for offsides. No way they're as accurate as they like to pretend they are. Quite honestly, if they need to decide if someone is a millimetre onside or a millimetre offside, they can give it whatever way they choose and it's impossible to prove otherwise.

I agree with what you say but exactly the same reasoning can be applied to a linesman's decision on offside. Subjective and open to abuse, and when really tight they can give it whatever way they choose.

 

[GreigC]

VAR is meant to catch a “clear and obvious” error.
An offside by a pixel isn’t clear or obvious.

VAR is being used wrongly IMO

Clear and obvious doesn’t apply to binary matters of fact like offside

 

[Kentbear]

How long did that farce take, all the fans at the ground bored shitless waiting for these geeks.

 

[Valley Bluenose]

VAR is meant to catch a “clear and obvious” error.
An offside by a pixel isn’t clear or obvious.

VAR is being used wrongly IMO

Done to death on a thread after the weekend. Offside is not a part of the ‘clear and obvious error’ protocol. If it was, every offside would be reviewed. They aren’t, as I’m sure you are aware. Just as a corner being given when it should have been a goal kick doesn’t get reviewed, for example.

The VAR reviews you see for offside will always follow an event such as a goal or the award of a penalty. It’s looked at as part of the review of those potentially game changing incidents.

As for the Spurs v Chelsea incident, the Linesman gave offside.

 

[O.K. Bear]

Correct decision for me but the ref is right on front of the penalty incident and let that go. Why did he choose to ignore an obvious bad challenge?

 

[Badger]

The thing that strikes me with the footage. They spend ages on the off side decision then go back to review the penalty decisions and advise an onfield review, making the offside irrelevant.

If they had reviewed the penalty decision first they could have saved a lot of time. Why would you work back from the final action.

Would it not make sense for them to start with the APP and then work forward from there. Seems daft spending time reviewing a decision that doesn't matter due to a foul/ offside in the build up.

 

[london_bluenose]

The thing that strikes me with the footage. They spend ages on the off side decision then go back to review the penalty decisions and advise an onfield review, making the offside irrelevant.

If they had reviewed the penalty decision first they could have saved a lot of time. Why would you work back from the final action.

Would it not make sense for them to start with the APP and then work forward from there. Seems daft spending time reviewing a decision that doesn't matter due to a foul/ offside in the build up.

As already said in the thread. They had to check the offside first as it would have been a goal to Chelsea if Jackson was onside. The offside has to be the first thing they check for that reason.

 

[Rotto]

If that was Ibrox you would have time to go for a raw hotdog, take a piss, snort some coke go back to your seat and still no decision made.

 

[Bigbluebear]

It absolutely does matter when the difference also means a red card.

The fact that people on here are debating the crosshairs, even with the chance to watch many times, shows it is not clear.

They could have still given a red card even if rhe goal was allowed, no?

 

[Bigbluebear]

The "clear and obvious" term needs binned tbh as it's not what VAR is being used for.

And was never a term used in relation to offside decisions

 

[london_bluenose]

They could have still given a red card even if rhe goal was allowed, no?

Yes for certain offences like serious foul play and violent conduct the red card would still be issued. So Romero would have walked regardless.

 

[Bigbluebear]

Correct decision for me but the ref is right on front of the penalty incident and let that go. Why did he choose to ignore an obvious bad challenge?

I doubt he ignored it. He probably didn't see the incident clearly.

 

[Badger]

VAR is meant to catch a “clear and obvious” error.
An offside by a pixel isn’t clear or obvious.

VAR is being used wrongly IMO

Offside doesn't fall in to that, same as if the ball is a mm over the line.

The issue in respect of VAR is how it is defined but, no matter how its defined, it will always come down to minute margins.

 

[Badger]

As already said in the thread. They had to check the offside first as it would have been a goal to Chelsea if Jackson was onside. The offside has to be the first thing they check for that reason.

Haha, I feel stupid. That makes perfect sense, fair play to them on that front then.

 

[Big D]

I agree with what you say but exactly the same reasoning can be applied to a linesman's decision on offside. Subjective and open to abuse, and when really tight they can give it whatever way they choose.

Yes, but personally I'd prefer that than all this rigmarole. I'm more than happy to use VAR for offsides when it's clear and obvious IE someone is half a yard on / offside, but the way they're using it, they're still making judgement calls. That wasn't the deal. Clear and obvious was the deal. I know we're apparently going to see fully automated offside calls coming in. I'm sure it still won't be perfect, but I guess it removes the human element from the equation, so it should at least be consistent.

 

[Rangerista]

The Game is fu.cked!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1783851498528448666

What a palaver!

 

[Big D]

Offside doesn't fall in to that, same as if the ball is a mm over the line.

The issue in respect of VAR is how it is defined but, no matter how its defined, it will always come down to minute margins.

It's not the same though. The goal line review system is automated. Offside is manual and the decision is made based on officials deciding where players are at the exact moment the ball is kicked, then deciding exactly where to draw the vertical lines, before the horizontal lines make the offside decision. I agree it's the same in principle, in that the ball is either over the line or it isn't and the player is either onside or he isn't, but in practice, it's very different.

 

[Gladstone]

Nothing wrong with that IMO. That kind of challenge should get a red card.

A Scottish ref would give the player a pat on the back and commend him on a good tackle, nominate him for the Hammer Thrower of the Year Award.

They need a hawkeye technology that does the offsides automatically like tennis.

If someone wears a loose fitting shirt and the shirt flaps out at the back then they could draw the line on that and that could make it onside/offside. Makes a case for footballers wearing skin tight shirts so they can't cause and incorrect offside decision from their loose shirt flapping.

 

[tambourineman]

Yes, but personally I'd prefer that than all this rigmarole. I'm more than happy to use VAR for offsides when it's clear and obvious IE someone is half a yard on / offside, but the way they're using it, they're still making judgement calls. That wasn't the deal. Clear and obvious was the deal. I know we're apparently going to see fully automated offside calls coming in. I'm sure it still won't be perfect, but I guess it removes the human element from the equation, so it should at least be consistent.

I agree with you. I saw footage which seemed to show Wan Bissakas foot was underneath the offside line when it was zoomed in. In the Coventry goal obviously. However does not seem clear and obvious.

 

[Cambuslangger]

Makes me even more convinced about how they fcuked us over regarding the Sima offside at the Piggery.

I would love to hear that audio….i bet it’s a shambles….we canny give the huns a pen….give us anything….anything!

 

[Big D]

I agree with you. I saw footage which seemed to show Wan Bissakas foot was underneath the offside line when it was zoomed in. In the Coventry goal obviously. However does not seem clear and obvious.

That's exactly what I mean. I'd much rather leave a decision like that to the linesman on the park. By all means take a look at it in the VAR room, but when they see it's not clear and obvious either way, leave it with the onfield decision. Cricket does that. There's a margin of error and if the review falls within that margin, then it's umpire's call and they stick with the onfield decision. Been working fine for years.

 

[Gazza1872]

Took a Hell of a long time to go through that and a huge faff, not to mention starting with the latest decision point and working in reverse seemed a bit mental. If they knew they were going to check penalty calls earlier in the timeline than the offside, doesn't it make sense to start with them when they make the later decisions irrelevant?

Ultimately probably the right call in terms of the penalty/red card given the high foot onto the ankle on the follow through. Although, plenty would call it harsh, but that's the modern game really.

If he was onside the decision would've been a goal with no need for further checks I reckon.

 

[Bear all]

I would love to hear that audio….i bet it’s a shambles….we canny give the huns a pen….give us anything….anything!

You can imagine them drawing the line,the thing is you don’t see it from when the ball was played.

 

[TBagg]

Yeah, will make a huge difference if they can get the automated offside tech rolled out everywhere.

Working well in the CL games , ignorance is bliss, we don’t want to see doctored lines and refs looking at a dodgy camera angles on a pitch side monitor in full sun

 

[Elmo-Putney]

VAR is meant to catch a “clear and obvious” error.
An offside by a pixel isn’t clear or obvious.

VAR is being used wrongly IMO

Agree with all of that but it was a penalty and a red card imo.

The ref missed both.

 

[TBagg]

Can you imagine the Clancy version at the Offside league cup final,, Kevin the goal scorer is offside when the free kick was taken along with at least two other Celtic players, Kevin? Kevin? earth calling Kevin

 

[Badger]

...

 

[RotterdamBear]

To make it quicker they don’t need the screen just let Var decide

Also takes the heat of the actual ref

 

[JC85]

Makes me even more convinced about how they fcuked us over regarding the Sima offside at the Piggery.

Collum had serious questions to answer there and we fucked it for ourselves.

 

[Valley Bluenose]

That's exactly what I mean. I'd much rather leave a decision like that to the linesman on the park. By all means take a look at it in the VAR room, but when they see it's not clear and obvious either way, leave it with the onfield decision. Cricket does that. There's a margin of error and if the review falls within that margin, then it's umpire's call and they stick with the onfield decision. Been working fine for years.

So how would you handle the Spurs/Chelsea incident?

The Linesman gave offside, so its no goal by your suggestion and that decision should stand. Do they then go back and look at the penalty/red card incident - which was before the shot on goal? Of course they do. It would have played out in exactly the same way with, perhaps, a little less time spent looking at the offside. Semi-automated will take care of that next season anyway.

 

[Big D]

So how would you handle the Spurs/Chelsea incident?

The Linesman gave offside, so its no goal by your suggestion and that decision should stand. Do they then go back and look at the penalty/red card incident - which was before the shot on goal? Of course they do. It would have played out in exactly the same way with, perhaps, a little less time spent looking at the offside. Semi-automated will take care of that next season anyway.

I'm talking offsides in general and for the vast majority of those it's a straight onside / offside call with no other considerations. When other factors come into play, then yes, obviously the whole situation needs to be assessed.

 

[Valley Bluenose]

I'm talking offsides in general and for the vast majority of those it's a straight onside / offside call with no other considerations. When other factors come into play, then yes, obviously the whole situation needs to be assessed.

VAR only gets involved in offside decisions if it leads to a goal or penalty, for example. Given these are crucial moments in the game it's only right that they are scrutinised in detail to ensure it's the correct decision. The primary flaw at the moment is time taken establishing and drawing lines. That should be negated, in the EPL at least, with semi-automated tech next season.

We've been over this, I'm sure, in the offside thread by @Unicorse which, if nothing else, served to reveal how little so many posters knew about offside and VAR (as evidenced by the repeated 'clear and obvious error' bollocks) and the incredible number who couldn't see that moving the line simply moved the point of debate.

 

[Big D]

VAR only gets involved in offside decisions if it leads to a goal or penalty, for example. Given these are crucial moments in the game it's only right that they are scrutinised in detail to ensure it's the correct decision. The primary flaw at the moment is time taken establishing and drawing lines. That should be negated, in the EPL at least, with semi-automated tech next season.

We've been over this, I'm sure, in the offside thread by @Unicorse which, if nothing else, served to reveal how little so many posters knew about offside and VAR (as evidenced by the repeated 'clear and obvious error' bollocks) and the incredible number who couldn't see that moving the line simply moved the point of debate.

I know exactly when and why VAR gets involved in offsides, but dispute the current system always ensures the correct decision. And I accept that moving the line moves the point of debate, but nothing is going to remove debate. Still plenty of debate about penalties, fouls in the lead up to goals etc. Anyway, it's just a personal opinion. If you're happy with it as is, good for you. I think it needs reviewed.

 

[Valley Bluenose]

I know exactly when and why VAR gets involved in offsides, but dispute the current system always ensures the correct decision. And I accept that moving the line moves the point of debate, but nothing is going to remove debate. Still plenty of debate about penalties, fouls in the lead up to goals etc. Anyway, it's just a personal opinion. If you're happy with it as is, good for you. I think it needs reviewed.

I agree you will never remove debate. We might get closer to that when tech takes over completely but its unlikely for no other reason than folk see what they want to see in many cases.

As far as I'm concerned, significantly more offsides in the build-up to game-changing incidents are correctly called by the involvement of the VAR than was the case hitherto. More correct decisions has to be better for all concerned. I'm not sure there is an argument against that.

 

[Unicorse]

VAR only gets involved in offside decisions if it leads to a goal or penalty, for example. Given these are crucial moments in the game it's only right that they are scrutinised in detail to ensure it's the correct decision. The primary flaw at the moment is time taken establishing and drawing lines. That should be negated, in the EPL at least, with semi-automated tech next season.

We've been over this, I'm sure, in the offside thread by @Unicorse which, if nothing else, served to reveal how little so many posters knew about offside and VAR (as evidenced by the repeated 'clear and obvious error' bollocks) and the incredible number who couldn't see that moving the line simply moved the point of debate.

"To stop the offside VAR confusion it should be when there is clear daylight between the attacker and striker"

This will not stop the VAR scrutiny / issues

 

[niallmitch]

How long did that farce take, all the fans at the ground bored shitless waiting for these geeks.

I was watching the game, there was about 8 minutes extra per half