Coventry VAR

[BillyStubbsTears]

Just a rant to blow off steam while I start to build the emotion for tomorrow night.

The VAR decision that cancelled Coventry's goal yesterday is the worst one I've ever seen. It perfectly reflects the fundamental problem with VAR that I've ranted about before.

The way the offside law is written is predicated on the assumption that there is a fixed and identifiable  moment in time at which the "pass" is made that results in an offside situation.

The law has recently been updated to say that the moment the pass is made is defined as the instant that the contact ends between the passer and the ball.

Now. Watch yesterday's decision.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWJyBspkZsM&t=330s

1) Look at how quickly the Man U defender is tracking back, relative to the static  Coventry player. In fractions of a second, their relative positions change massively. Literally several inches in the blink of an eye.

2) Go to 5m46s and see where the ITV technicians stopped the action. IT's perfectly possible to argue that the ball is still in contact with the Coventry player's foot at that moment. From the original footage, I'd argue you couldn't say it wasn't still in contact even in the next frame.

3) Now go to 5m56s. Look at the frame that the VAR officials have chosen to base their decision on. And look at how wafer thin the decision is. Looks to me like it's pretty certain that they've f**ked up on which frame to stop the action on. And by doing so, they have placed the defender further away from goal than he actually was when the contact ended.

It's inevitable that f**k ups like this will happen when you think you have eliminated human error from a system, but you actually haven't.

[Petche]

I'd hate us to be involved in a game where VAR is used. It should be in operation for goal line technology and only that, it's ruining the game.

[drfchound]

First of all, I’m not a Man Utd fan.
However, the Coventry player does look marginally offside to me and I feel that the decision to disallow the goal was correct.
I have seen far worse VAR decisions, for example, the one where Bamford’s hand was deemed to be offside when he was pointing to where he wanted the ball played.

[ravenrover]

I always thought it had to be part of your body you could score with, in footballing terms obviously :-]]

[Campsall rover]

I'd hate us to be involved in a game where VAR is used. It should be in operation for goal line technology and only that, it's ruining the game.

Get rid. It’s destroying the game.

Thank heavens we don’t have it in the EFL.

Can you imagine any of that 3rd goal we scored yesterday being given off side after the stadium had erupted in a state if ecstasy. ( yes I know he wasn’t ) but you get my point
That’s what football is all about. You can’t wreck the moment on the basis of a debatable 1 cm being the defining decision on whether a goal stands.

I have always said we just need goal line technology. The rest is just opinions even with the use of technology. It’s nonsense. It will never improve the game, the excitement, the moment has gone on a decision like yesterdays.

Coventry were cheated out of an FA Cup final imo.
No one can categorically say he was off side. As BST said which frame do you use.
Whatever happened to giving the benefit of the doubt to the attacking player.

Do we want goals or do we not? 

[Prez]

I’m in favour of VAR, but wasn’t it brought in if it was only a “clear and obvious error”?? How was that clear and obvious? Where is there any benefit to the attacker?  Unbelievably cruel on Coventry that is.

[JonWallsend]

The clear and obvious error doesn't apply to the offsides. That is supposedly  black and white. However, it is only black and white based on a subjective decision as to when a pass was actually  last in contact with a foot.
I never wanted it because of  the potential  to kill those moments of unadulterated joy such as the 3rd goal on Saturday), Tierney at Stoke etc.

[Prez]

The clear and obvious error doesn't apply to the offsides. That is supposedly  black and white. However, it is only black and white based on a subjective decision as to when a pass was actually  last in contact with a foot.
I never wanted it because of  the potential  to kill those moments of unadulterated joy such as the 3rd goal on Saturday), Tierney at Stoke etc.

My apologies I wasn’t aware of that with the offside rule. But yes it’s still subjective and if in doubt  the benefit should go to the attacker.

[roverstillidie91]

Match fixing at its finest?

Watch this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FiN2lqBDzPk&t=154s

[roverstillidie91]

I’m in favour of VAR, but wasn’t it brought in if it was only a “clear and obvious error”?? How was that clear and obvious? Where is there any benefit to the attacker?  Unbelievably cruel on Coventry that is.

If it had been man united it would have been biggen

[JonWallsend]

The clear and obvious error doesn't apply to the offsides. That is supposedly  black and white. However, it is only black and white based on a subjective decision as to when a pass was actually  last in contact with a foot.
I never wanted it because of  the potential  to kill those moments of unadulterated joy such as the 3rd goal on Saturday), Tierney at Stoke etc.

My apologies I wasn’t aware of that with the offside rule. But yes it’s still subjective and if in doubt  the benefit should go to the attacker.

Absolutely

[MachoMadness]

What happened to the rule where there had to be clear daylight in between players for an offside to be given? Surely reintroducing that rule makes sense and is a far better idea than the current nitpicking approach. As has been pointed out, the technology isn't capable of making these pixel-perfect decisions. Use it for clear and obvious errors only, when you're having to go frame-by-frame to figure it out, play on. Why is that so hard?

The decision yesterday was given offside not because of a clever offside trap, or because the Cov player didn't time his run right, or for any football-related reasons at all. It was purely because his boots are a size bigger than the United defender's. Using VAR like that is completely against the spirit of the game IMO.

The technology isn't the problem, it's the incompetent way it's being used that's the problem.

[jmt23]

just listening to Talksport and apparently they are not even using the right camera lens to be able to see these issues. Having just come back from a Manchester site, I can tell you the Man U fans I spoke too are not happy about winning. They are really almost apologetic about it.

[GazLaz]

Cov did get a penalty from a shocking decision. Agree regarding offsides though. How long is the ball on contact with the foot when making a pass and how do they judge when it has left the foot? Impossible to be exact.

[DRFC_AjA]

Original post is 100% correct. You simply cannot say with 100% certainty it was offside. And VAR being used to analyse decisions to the second, zoom in, freeze frame, is not what it should be used for

Almost spat my John's out at the Chelsea non handball  Blatant handball and VAR didn't even give them a corner

[DonnyBazR0ver]

What happened to the rule where there had to be clear daylight in between players for an offside to be given? Surely reintroducing that rule makes sense and is a far better idea than the current nitpicking approach. As has been pointed out, the technology isn't capable of making these pixel-perfect decisions. Use it for clear and obvious errors only, when you're having to go frame-by-frame to figure it out, play on. Why is that so hard?

The decision yesterday was given offside not because of a clever offside trap, or because the Cov player didn't time his run right, or for any football-related reasons at all. It was purely because his boots are a size bigger than the United defender's. Using VAR like that is completely against the spirit of the game IMO.

The technology isn't the problem, it's the incompetent way it's being used that's the problem.

u

What happened to the rule where there had to be clear daylight in between players for an offside to be given? Surely reintroducing that rule makes sense and is a far better idea than the current nitpicking approach. As has been pointed out, the technology isn't capable of making these pixel-perfect decisions. Use it for clear and obvious errors only, when you're having to go frame-by-frame to figure it out, play on. Why is that so hard?

The decision yesterday was given offside not because of a clever offside trap, or because the Cov player didn't time his run right, or for any football-related reasons at all. It was purely because his boots are a size bigger than the United defender's. Using VAR like that is completely against the spirit of the game IMO.

The technology isn't the problem, it's the incompetent way it's being used that's the problem.

Where ever you draw a line, there will be conflict. The clear daylight interpretation would still be subject to the same fine margins. You may get daylight between the torsos but legs could be overlapping particularly if players are going in the opposition directions  and leaning in the direction of travel. In those cases if you see an attacker a good couple of feet ahead of the defender, most would tend to say it's offside.

In my opinion, in these situations a still frame, with one line across the pitch as a guide, if the refs naked eye can't distinguish whether it's offside, then it should be deemed level and the advantage given to the attacker.

There have been soo many minutely close decisions made that really goes against the spirit of the game.

[Donnywolf]

Just wonder whether Offsides could be scrapped

Good idea ?

Bad idea?

Wouldn't work / ruin the game ?

Let's have a heated debate !

[ncRover]

Winds me up when pundits complain about VAR like they didn’t create the environment that led to its creation through incessant analysis and debate over refereeing decisions.

[ravenrover]

A video has been posted on X from a side angle, the player who crosses does look well onside

[Colin C No.3]

VAR got it badly wrong yesterday too Everton vs Forest.

Or should I say VAR turned ‘a blind eye’.

It’s not a ‘computer’ it’s a bloke watching a screen & making a ‘human’ decision!

What’s the point!

[wilts rover]

If you think the Coventry VAR decision was a bad one - what about the Man City one where Chelsea are denied a clear penalty because VAR didn't think this was handball:

https://www.goal.com/en/lists/new-angle-shows-chelsea-wrongly-denied-penalty-by-var-jack-grealish-handball-fa-cup-semi-final/bltb6caf18fcd397be5

[scawsby steve]

There are 2 reasons why VAR has come about; Maradona and Thierry Henry.

When huge World Cup games are decided by atrocious refereeing decisions, this was always going to happen at some time.

[BillyStubbsTears]

The fallacy of VAR for offsides is that it's based on the assumption that an absolutely correct, geometrically precise decision can be reached, when in practice this is not possible.

Yesterday was the perfect example, where they are measuring the positions of the players down to a few millimetres, but on what was almost certainly the wrong frame of the video footage, and they would have had a different decision had they looked at a different frame.

The point is that there is inevitable uncertainty in the decision process, but the decision process is claimed to be precise. And that wrong claim is used to adjudicate  on the most hairline of distances.

To my mind, there's no question that in a case like yesterday, the on field decision should stand.

[jmt23]

I think we have now got to a point where only perfection is accepted, and that is ridiculous to me.
It should always be clear and obvious, or nothing. Clear or obvious should be able to be seen in a single replay and within 10 seconds.
What they are currently doing is replaying multiple times, if it needs that, it is not clear or obvious.
The game needs to grow a pair and say this is the rule, like or not.

[GazLaz]

I thought they had a tolerance for this built in though. I’m sure they do. It has to be more than X inches offside to account for the margin of error. 

[drfchound]

I always thought it had to be part of your body you could score with, in footballing terms obviously :-]]

I think it is now Raven, I think a change of rule was brought about because of the Bamford decision.

[StocktonRover]

Have a look at this angle

https://x.com/_tomwillis_/status/1782311679864246348?s=46&t=MilymPOdWUg8eCPKI2d2Sg

[GazLaz]

Have a look at this angle

https://x.com/_tomwillis_/status/1782311679864246348?s=46&t=MilymPOdWUg8eCPKI2d2Sg

What is that supposed to show?

[StocktonRover]

Open your eyes and decide for yourself

[RoversInSpain]

OMG, he’s miles on, I thought it was the angle of the camera making him look inside, but look at the grass cut line.
If that vid hasn’t been messed with then this is some scandal