Premier League 20/21

[shark]

Lurganblue I think Holt's point still stands.

Fans don't want to believe that 1mm offside is actually offside. Human error isn't the key consideration, it's people feeling robbed when it happens by the minimum of distances. Hence people describe VAR as luck. It not. It just makes it feel like that.

——

I hate VAR by the way.

What is the intent of the law in question?
It is clear what the intent is when we say that all of the ball must have crossed the line. It's there for good reason.

Why was offside brought in? Basically to stop goal hanging. To cut out the attacking team gaining an unfair advantage. Being "offside" by a couple of millimetres was never the intention. But that's where we are now.

[thewobbler]

Completely agree Shark, I posted similar a few weeks ago.

The rules of soccer were devised to ensure a free flowing spectacle. Not this.

——



VAR would have some craic adjudicating whether Clifford's 5th step was before, during or after his jersey was tugged, and whether the subsequent wide should stay a wide, or become a free in, or a free out.

[Angelo]

The offside rule is a bit of a joke and it seems to change every couple of years what is offside and what isn't.

When they had the daylight rule they had it right.

[J70]

Oliver Holt pointed out on Twitter that people have no issue with a goal not been given because 5mm if the ball has not crossed the line so how can they have issue with you been 5mm offside. Interesting view

Oliver Holt is a good one for talking sh*te right enough.  The ball crosses the goal line, that is simple enough.  Measuring the exact moment the ball leaves a players foot, then applying wee lines to the sleeves of a player from a camera recording leaves quite a scope for human error.

Exactly. There is only one variable to be looked at with goal line technology: the relative positions of the ball and the line.

Not the case with offside, as you point out, with the movements and body positions of multiple players having to be synchronized with the exact moment the ball is struck by the passing player.

Dumb comparison.

[thewobbler]

Is it that complicated though j70?

They'll be able to pinpoint the time that a ball left a boot to a thousandth of a second. Then it's a case of looking at the area of contention at that exact frame (then drawing lots of lines on top).

What am I missing ?

[J70]

Is it that complicated though j70?

They'll be able to pinpoint the time that a ball left a boot to a thousandth of a second. Then it's a case of looking at the area of contention at that exact frame (then drawing lots of lines on top).

What am I missing ?

According to the diagram someone posted on the previous page about the Dutch League, there is a possibility of up to 20 cm error in terms of player positions where the contact with the ball happens between frames.

I'm sure they look at the before and after frames in those cases, but that is still human subjectivity ruling out goals based on literal millimetres and the position of the folds of someone's sleeve.

As an aside, if we're looking a millisecond by millisecond frames, how do they determine when exactly a boot ceases to contact a ball? Is it based on clear space between them?

[Never beat the deeler]

Is it that complicated though j70?

They'll be able to pinpoint the time that a ball left a boot to a thousandth of a second. Then it's a case of looking at the area of contention at that exact frame (then drawing lots of lines on top).

What am I missing ?

According to the diagram someone posted on the previous page about the Dutch League, there is a possibility of up to 20 cm error in terms of player positions where the contact with the ball happens between frames.

I'm sure they look at the before and after frames in those cases, but that is still human subjectivity ruling out goals based on literal millimetres and the position of the folds of someone's sleeve.

As an aside, if we're looking a millisecond by millisecond frames, how do they determine when exactly a boot ceases to contact a ball? Is it based on clear space between them?

According to the diagram in question, the calculation is based on 50 frames per second, which is confirmed by the premier league website. Working back from the 50fps, or 0.02seconds in between frames, someone running at 36km/hr would move 20cm in between frames.

Would like to slightly tweak the stance the Dutch league are taking and amend the rule that anything within that margin of technology error reverts to the on-field call. This would be similar to VAR rules in that it is not a clear and obvious error

https://www.premierleague.com/news/1488423

The broadcast cameras operate with 50 frames per second, so the point of contact with the ball is one of those frames inside the 50 per second.

Interesting aside though - it is possible to further pinpoint the time of pass being played using high frame rate technology, and I presume this is just a matter of time, but it would be need to be rolled out at a huge scale so not sure how difficult / costly that would be

https://pro.sony/en_FI/technology/high-frame-rate

[Main Street]

I like the Dutch league version of 20cm.Then you could have any close decision that the assistant isn't sure of done up like hawkeye, up on the large screen inside 10 seconds, a drum roll or two while the 20 cm line is outlined, followed by a Níl or Tá.

[ONeill]

Lampard is doing a brilliant job. Fair play to him.

[Maroon Manc]

Lampard is doing a brilliant job. Fair play to him.

I see lots of this but is he? 3 points more than a United side who've a game in hand who apparently have a manger who hasn't got a clue who's constantly mocked in the media whilst Lampard who inherited a very good squad and has since spent a fortune this summer.

I don't think Ole is upto to it but will be delighted to be proved wrong but their clearly not treated the same way by the media. Chelsea are on a decent run of form with 3 wins out of the last 4 league games but have played the bottom 2 teams in the league in that period.

I have no idea how Lampard will work out at Chelsea but with the squad he's got they've have to be finishing top 3.

[GetOverTheBar]

Wasn't that long ago in this thread men were saying Lampard was for the sack. Have only conceded 2 goals in 10 games or something now?

Gave Sevilla a right hammering the other night there too. Saying that it was both B Teams.

[nrico2006]

Never mind Lampard, Arteta is the new media darling.  Up until this week it was constant drivel about him 'building something special' etc, yet look at their results.

[GetOverTheBar]

Arteta has the FA Cup in the bag though. I think if he didn't win that he'd be getting hammered a bit more. I was actually surprised to see how poorly they've been doing though. Sunday will tell a tale.

[shark]

Wasn't that long ago in this thread men were saying Lampard was for the sack. Have only conceded 2 goals in 10 games or something now?

Gave Sevilla a right hammering the other night there too. Saying that it was both B Teams.

Dumping Kepa from the team has made the defensive difference it seems. He was a complete liability.

[sid waddell]

Lampard is doing a brilliant job. Fair play to him.

I see lots of this but is he? 3 points more than a United side who've a game in hand who apparently have a manger who hasn't got a clue who's constantly mocked in the media whilst Lampard who inherited a very good squad and has since spent a fortune this summer.

I don't think Ole is upto to it but will be delighted to be proved wrong but their clearly not treated the same way by the media. Chelsea are on a decent run of form with 3 wins out of the last 4 league games but have played the bottom 2 teams in the league in that period.

I have no idea how Lampard will work out at Chelsea but with the squad he's got they've have to be finishing top 3.

I defy anybody to tell me that beating Burnley, Sheffield United and Newcastle in successive games, with an already very expensive squad boosted by £222 million worth of summer signings, isn't a truly outstanding managerial performance

It's Bob Paisleyesque