GWT: PL Matchbox 20

[YNWA14]

No it absolutely is not. The camera technology being used doesn't have a frame rate high enough to determine when the ball was played and the position of the players to the precision that they are using it (millimeters). There needs to be a margin of error built in to the rules to account for this.

Why does there need to be? It’s using the most accurate frame it can. That level of precision is still a huge step up from human judgment which is still using it to the best of its capabilities at the moment and the way it should be used. I much rather that than relying on the linesmen/ref and just saying ‘well, close enough’. And maybe that’s where we differ. I prefer the rules being enforced as accurately as available.

 

[YNWA14]

like i said Ab13

Like I said you’re so cool. You’re making me lol right now

 

[Blender]

Why does there need to be? It’s using the most accurate frame it can. That level of precision is still a huge step up from human judgment which is still using it to the best of its capabilities at the moment and the way it should be used. I much rather that than relying on the linesmen/ref and just saying ‘well, close enough’. And maybe that’s where we differ. I prefer the rules being enforced as accurately as available.

The rules aren't being enforced as accurately as available because they are overusing a technology to arbitrarily determine offside when it's too close to call, so when it's too close to call based on the technology available, the decisions aren't correct because they are made on faulty information. Saying "I don't know" is an intellectually honest position, and putting a margin of error into the rules that reflects the limits of the technology fits that. Coming to a conclusion based on incomplete or incorrect information just because you want the satisfaction of a decision isn't intellectually honest.

You are still arguing against a strawman you put up, literally no one in this thread has argued that we should remove VAR and go back to just having the linesman make the call.

 

[Blender]

Can someone on Wolves please keep one of these long shots down?

 

[Natey]

Neto has been f***ed hard this game. Lots his first ever PL goal. And then Jota and Saiss both ignored him for tap-ins.

 

[Natey]

Can someone on Wolves please keep one of these long shots down?

Saiss is only a PL player because he can play about 100 different positions. Decent at everything, great at nothing.

 

[hatterson]

I prefer the rules being enforced as accurately as available.

The point is that the enforcement they're applying isn't technologically available.

The armpit vs arm yesterday, Son (I think it was) earlier in the year, there was a Sterling run called back, and situations like today are cases where the proof VAR can provide is not definitive. It's enforced well until a point of a few inches. Inside that it's arbitrary based on the limits of the technology.

If VAR cannot provide absolute definitive proof that something was offside, it shouldn't be overturning the goal.

 

[YNWA14]

The rules aren't being enforced as accurately as available because they are overusing a technology to arbitrarily determine offside when it's too close to call, so when it's too close to call based on the technology available, the decisions aren't correct because they are made on faulty information. Saying "I don't know" is an intellectually honest position, and putting a margin of error into the rules that reflects the limits of the technology fits that. Coming to a conclusion based on incomplete or incorrect information just because you want the satisfaction of a decision isn't intellectually honest.

You are still arguing against a strawman you put up, literally no one in this thread has argued that we should remove VAR and go back to just having the linesman make the call.

It’s not a strawman it’s literally what would be the case if you aren’t using VAR to determine it. Who else makes the call if not VAR?

You’re always coming to a conclusion based on incomplete or incorrect information so I don’t think it’s more dishonest to use the most accurate information possible to make that decision rather than even more inaccurate information.

 

[Chimaera]

Wolves should at least be level

 

[hatterson]

Wolves should probably try hitting the target with one of these shots.

I'm not an expert, but it seems like that's a key to scoring.

 

[Prntscrn]

Trent and Wijnaldum looks like they need a rest the next game

 

[YNWA14]

The point is that the enforcement they're applying isn't technologically available.

The armpit vs arm yesterday, Son (I think it was) earlier in the year, there was a Sterling run called back, and situations like today are cases where the proof VAR can provide is not definitive. It's enforced well until a point of a few inches. Inside that it's arbitrary based on the limits of the technology.

If VAR cannot provide absolute definitive proof that something was offside, it shouldn't be overturning the goal.

Why though? Because then what you have is a ref or linesman making that call instead who has an even worse level of accuracy. That’s kind of the point. The reason I don’t mind it is because it is the highest level of accuracy available at this time and it’s better than human judgment in terms of the actual positions. Could that be off? Potentially, but it has a much higher chance of being right than human judgment.

 

[YNWA14]

Wolves should probably try hitting the target with one of these shots.

I'm not an expert, but it seems like that's a key to scoring.

Yeh, mostly half chances anyway but they should be at least hitting the net and testing the keeper. Though this is probably the time of year where players are the most tired.

Liverpool got away with 3 points there and while they were dominant for long stretches Wolves did well and easily could have gotten something out of that game.

 

[Blender]

It’s not a strawman it’s literally what would be the case if you aren’t using VAR to determine it. Who else makes the call if not VAR?

You’re always coming to a conclusion based on incomplete or incorrect information so I don’t think it’s more dishonest to use the most accurate information possible to make that decision rather than even more inaccurate information.

Again, no one has said not to use VAR. You've been corrected on this repeatedly and you are still arguing against a position no one has taken. Use VAR within the limits of the technology.

Yes, coming to a conclusion based on flawed information is not an honest or correct position. It's a form of argument from ignorance, and that's how they are applying VAR right now. They can't make a proper determination, so they are doing so arbitrarily just to say that they made a decision.

 

[Halladay]

City is losing but offsides maybe? Hit on the counter.

 

[Chimaera]

They’re gonna run Pep out of town

 

[hatterson]

That looked close to offside, want to see the replay.

 

[hatterson]

Yep, that's offside.

And in this case VAR can provide clear proof so there's no issues using it.

 

[Blender]

I missed the replay, but that was another close one.

 

[Live in the Now]

It wasn’t that close. I swear these officials are blind.

 

[hatterson]

Why though? Because then what you have is a ref or linesman making that call instead who has an even worse level of accuracy. That’s kind of the point. The reason I don’t mind it is because it is the highest level of accuracy available at this time and it’s better than human judgment in terms of the actual positions. Could that be off? Potentially, but it has a much higher chance of being right than human judgment.

I posted this a month ago in reference to VAR overturning a penalty clearance due to encroachment

They don’t need to get rid of VAR, they need to stop having morons run it. Virtually every other major league has implemented VAR very well. They need to stop caring so much about the letter of the law and care far more about the spirit of the game.

The outcome of the penalty was a save and a clearance. The fact that Aarons technically violated the rules to do it is ultimately irrelevant to the spirit of the result given that someone on Norwich was gonna do it anyway.

VAR is at it’s worst when it’s overturning plays where no players are complaining about the result.

The last line is the most relevant. Literally no one on the pitch, in the stadium, in the announcers booth, or anywhere was worried about that potentially being offside.

Interestingly enough, you actually liked that post.

 

[Blender]

Sheffield have to be happy with this so far. Solid in defending their box and threatening on the counter.

 

[YEM]

Again, no one has said not to use VAR.

I'd rather have no VAR than this VAR

 

[hatterson]

Sheffield have to be happy with this so far. Solid in defending their box and threatening on the counter.

A foot offside on a go ahead goal, and another break where Mousset was basically away alone but just put it wide.

 

[Blender]

A foot offside on a go ahead goal, and another break where Mousset was basically away alone but just put it wide.

That City backline is always vulnerable to a counter, so they need to keep playing these long balls.