Athletic Magazine on why the lines we see for the offside decisions on VAR are not what the decision is based on. Images not included, but you've seen them already most likely.
Why the VAR images you’re seeing are not what’s really happening
By Jordan Campbell Nov 10, 2019
It’s the image you will have been retweeting, debating, analysing and, if you’re a fan of Sheffield United, probably hating all weekend.
David McGoldrick’s ‘goal’ against Spurs was ruled out for offside, but what happens when the definitive replay — supposed to prove beyond doubt that VAR had got it right — actually shows the opposite? There’s not a lot fans can do apart from argue the facts available to them.
The red line (above) that appeared on the frozen image is intended to denote John Lundstram’s foot, the most advanced part of his body, while the blue line represents the left knee of Eric Dier, the deepest defender. These two coloured lines are therefore supposed to show that Lundstram was judged to be marginally offside; however, Dier’s head was literally sticking through the red line, suggesting that the VAR officials had got it wrong by pinpointing his knee rather than his head as the relevant body part.
This was not the case, though. It was down to the camera angle used giving a false perspective. The camera in the image above is not in line with Dier and Lundstram, so the view is not accurate. If looked at straight on, it would have been clear that Lundstram was ahead of Dier. (Whether we think this is all too marginal to be changing Premier League football matches is a different part of the ongoing conversation.)
As the image below shows, Dier’s knee was in fact in front of his head.
VAR’s introduction to the Premier League has been problematic and some of its interpretations have been muddled due to a lack of knowledge of its remit and process. The merits of spending three minutes and 47 seconds micro-analysing the foot placement of a player making not even the initial cross leading to a goal is clearly worth debating, but this article is not an attempt to defend the pedantic nature of the decision. It is intended to explain why the confusing image appeared on your TV as it did.
In the image broadcast to the world, it looks like red line goes through Dier, but it’s worth reiterating that the VAR officials are using an HD screen and the line they use is one pixel thick. When they click ‘confirm’ — once they have settled on exactly where both points should be aligned for the attacker and the defender — the thicker blue and red lines appear for the world to see. They’re thicker because it’s easier for viewers to see, but they don’t give the 3D view of the incident, which is naturally clearer.
Camera operators are dispatched to every stadium to ‘map’ the dimensions of the pitch from a multitude of angles, thus generating a model for each pitch, which is then loaded into the VAR monitor on match day. The Premier League decided that all broadcast cameras in the stadium will be available to VAR officials, meaning that the crosshair technology — the grid-like graph which is maneuvered to show the offside line and the furthest forward point of the attacker and defender — is capable of guaranteeing the precise location even if there is no parallel camera angle available.
That is due to the dotted line drawn down from the body, for example the one used on Dier’s knee, being at a right angle and the technology taking into account the angle of the camera. If the crosshairs move on one camera, they automatically recalculate on all others.
All of this intricate repositioning is available to watch as it unfolds, and it is the crux of the confusion. While the Premier League are comfortable that they eventually made the right decision, their commitment to VAR being transparent and attractive to TV is instead creating a rod for their own back.
They are one of a select few competitions using VAR that chooses to show broadcasters the process of how they come to decisions, and they are the only major league to show a definitive replay after a decision has been overturned. The problem with ‘selling’ the decision inevitably comes when the image seems to contradict its verdict, just as it did with Dier.
It is understood that the Premier League have no plans to change the use of the red and blue lines. Perhaps being able to listen to the officials at the VAR Hub in Stockley Park would help fans understand the reasoning behind a decision, but they are limited by IFAB protocol which states that video cannot be shown on the big screen before a decision is made and no audio can be played either.
Whether this will be VAR’s one and only season in English football remains to be seen. It is a leap the Premier League are committed to, but whether these are teething issues rather than fundamental flaws is something that only time, and the organisation’s ability to adapt, can tell
