VAR - Off the wall idea

[RalphCoatesComb]

We have replaced a subjective opinion, based on what a Referee saw (or didn't see) with the subjective opinion of another Referee, based on what he/ she has seen on a series of TV sets.

Eliminate subjectivity.

It is not beyond the capability of technicians to create a computer program to analyse footage and, based on programable variables, decide whether someone was off-side or not; whether the ball was handled, or not; whether a foul was committed (not whether there was contact, but whether it was a foul... not sure on the difference, ask Sean Dyche). And, the result would be instant.

We must all agree that goal-line technology has been worthwhile, even if we don't always like it. It is objective and can be proved to be so.

Unless something is done, the VAR infant is in danger of being thrown out with the bathwater.

Thoughts??

[Tricky Trevor]

It would help if the arbiters of VAR had the slightest interest in making it a success.
Sitting in a room in Burton with their burgers and beer is not the way to go.
Showing the incident on screen, as in cricket and both rugby codes, would also be an improvement. The ref can also watch the screen and not bother with a pitchside monitor. He can then communicate and discuss with the VAR official. Only then will we get the correct outcome.

[ClaretTony]

The potential to remove subjective decisions has been discussed considerably in the media over the last few days following the complete mess over the weekend. I always believed using it for subjective decisions was a serious mistake.

As for sitting in a room at Burton, I think Stockley Park is some considerable distance away from Burton.

[turfytopper]

The potential to remove subjective decisions has been di...

As for sitting in a room at Burton, I think Stockley Park is some considerable distance away from Burton.

Yep Stockley park is an industrial park near Heathrow. I think St George's is nearer Burton.

[Steve1956]

It would help if the arbiters of VAR had the slightest interest in making it a success.
Sitting in a room in Burton with their burgers and beer is not the way to go.
Showing the incident on screen, as in cricket and both rugby codes, would also be an improvement. The ref can also watch the screen and not bother with a pitchside monitor. He can then communicate and discuss with the VAR official. Only then will we get the correct outcome.

This ^

[Tricky Trevor]

The potential to remove subjective decisions has been discussed considerably in the media over the last few days following the complete mess over the weekend. I always believed using it for subjective decisions was a serious mistake.

As for sitting in a room at Burton, I think Stockley Park is some considerable distance away from Burton.

Apologies. I heard on comms they were in Burton.

[ClaretTony]

Apologies. I heard on comms they were in Burton.

No. VAR HQ is at Stockley Park in Hillingdon.

[Ashingtonclaret46]

How does the Championship, League One, League Two etc., etc function with only three onfield officials plus the other one who tries to answer questions
throughout the match and keep the peace?
Surely they can't handle a game properly without VAR --can they?

[Spijed]

It would help if the arbiters of VAR had the slightest interest in making it a success.
Sitting in a room in Burton with their burgers and beer is not the way to go.
Showing the incident on screen, as in cricket and both rugby codes, would also be an improvement. The ref can also watch the screen and not bother with a pitchside monitor. He can then communicate and discuss with the VAR official. Only then will we get the correct outcome.

How can you get the correct outcome if a ref in one match thinks it's a penalty but in another game the ref thinks differently even if the tackle/foul is exactly the same on later inspection?

[chipbutty]

Get VAR operated by CGI?

[RalphCoatesComb]

I like the idea of VAR and support it but, last weekend showed the inconsistencies of having the human, subjective element.

The authorities MUST do something about it before it turns fans against football.

[Tricky Trevor]

How can you get the correct outcome if a ref in one match thinks it's a penalty but in another game the ref thinks differently even if the tackle/foul is exactly the same on later inspection?

Education. They tinker with interpretation every season but they never put out a pre-season video for the fans to learn what to expect. They say they have meetings with managers but why keep the paying public in the dark. Grey areas, far too many in football.

[RalphCoatesComb]

Grey areas, far too many in football.

That's where the "computer decides" idea is so perfect. Takes no account of man citeh's Billions, or the size of Harry Kane's feet. The criteria are set and everyone signs up to them. This nonsense about his toe being off-side can be catered for. Some years ago, attacking sides were given the benefit of the doubt (allegedly) with marginal off-side decision. That could be dealt with. The computer is given a margin of a given distance (3 inches works for most )

Take away the inconsistencies, take away the grey.

[Imploding Turtle]

We have replaced a subjective opinion, based on what a Referee saw (or didn't see) with the subjective opinion of another Referee, based on what he/ she has seen on a series of TV sets.

Eliminate subjectivity.

It is not beyond the capability of technicians to create a computer program to analyse footage and, based on programable variables, decide whether someone was off-side or not; whether the ball was handled, or not; whether a foul was committed (not whether there was contact, but whether it was a foul... not sure on the difference, ask Sean Dyche). And, the result would be instant.

We must all agree that goal-line technology has been worthwhile, even if we don't always like it. It is objective and can be proved to be so.

Unless something is done, the VAR infant is in danger of being thrown out with the bathwater.

Thoughts??

lol. no.

There's nothing wrong with replacing one subjective opinion with another if the new opinion is more accurate. VAR achieves that. It doesn't need to be replaced, it needs to be reformed.

[RalphCoatesComb]

There's nothing wrong with replacing one subjective opinion with another if the new opinion is more accurate. VAR achieves that. It doesn't need to be replaced, it needs to be reformed.

Exactly. Reform it completely. Take away human misinterpretation.

The stakes are too high (financially) for VAR to go tits-up.

Unfortunately, the pundits make things worse. "He was caught. He had a right to do down" Bullsh!t ! That's the first thing that needs stamping out!

[RammyClaret61]

The authorities MUST do something about it before it turns fans against football.

I’ve been in Australia now for 9 years. Decided I’d get my football fix with the A-League. The quality wasn’t great, but over the first 4 years it was improving. I got my first season ticket for Melbourne Victory and enjoyed the season. The following season VAR came in. Omg it was terrible. I ditched the season ticket, the football was now almost unwatchable. I stayed at home and watched on tv. But even this became less and less as VAR didn’t improve. Now I only see the A-League on the sports news. Crowds are dropping, viewing figures are down. 4 years of VAR and it’s killing the game. IMO.

[Imploding Turtle]

Exactly. Reform it completely. Take away human misinterpretation.

The stakes are too high (financially) for VAR to go tits-up.

Unfortunately, the pundits make things worse. "He was caught. He had a right to do down" Bullsh!t ! That's the first thing that needs stamping out!

Do you know why it works in tennis? Each camera works independently (there's about a dozen) is hooked up to a computer and is tracking and predicting the trajectory of the ball and return the result inside 10 seconds. It'll take a lot more cameras in football for Hawkeye to track the ball but tracking the ball can definitely be done. But doing so won't achieve anything worthwhile achieving for the cost. Why? Because tracking people is much, much harder than tracking a ball. Hawkeye, when tracking a ball, tracks it frame-by-frame by identifying it based on the colour, shape and size of it, and triangulation is done by taking each frame from the dozen or so cameras to turn a collection of 2d images into a 3d map of the balls trajectory.

To track a person like that would probably be impossible, certainly quickly enough to return a result in a practical amount of time for the result to be useful. Remember, it's about 10 seconds for a ball - one ball - so imagine how much time it'd take to track 22 humans all at once along with all the different sizes, shapes and colours they make and come in.

Hawkeye can't even get their system working to call foot-faults. The idea that Hawkeye can take human subjectivity out of football refereeing anytime soon for things like offside is a pipe dream.

[aggi]

We have replaced a subjective opinion, based on what a Referee saw (or didn't see) with the subjective opinion of another Referee, based on what he/ she has seen on a series of TV sets.

Eliminate subjectivity.

It is not beyond the capability of technicians to create a computer program to analyse footage and, based on programable variables, decide whether someone was off-side or not; whether the ball was handled, or not; whether a foul was committed (not whether there was contact, but whether it was a foul... not sure on the difference, ask Sean Dyche). And, the result would be instant.

We must all agree that goal-line technology has been worthwhile, even if we don't always like it. It is objective and can be proved to be so.

Unless something is done, the VAR infant is in danger of being thrown out with the bathwater.

Thoughts??

Putting aside the technical issues of whether this is possible using technology in this way isn't necessarily going to remove bias.

You'd start by showing the computer loads of examples of penalties in the past. What it will learn from that is that if Raheem Sterling collapses to the ground it's probably a penalty. If Ashley Barnes does it probably isn't.

There have been a lot of problems with attempting to do the same kind of thing in areas such as recruitment. What the result has been is that the system reinforces existing bias as that's the behaviour it's been taught.

[dsr]

That's where the "computer decides" idea is so perfect. Takes no account of man citeh's Billions, or the size of Harry Kane's feet. The criteria are set and everyone signs up to them. This nonsense about his toe being off-side can be catered for. Some years ago, attacking sides were given the benefit of the doubt (allegedly) with marginal off-side decision. That could be dealt with. The computer is given a margin of a given distance (3 inches works for most )

Take away the inconsistencies, take away the grey.

3 inches isn't enough for offsides. A running footballer covers 3 inches in a hundredth of a second, and the TV cameras don't do 100 frames per second, so any assessment of 3 inches offside is bogus. It's like trying to measure food ingredients on bathroom scales - OK if you're bulk baking and using 20 pounds of flour, but hopeless for 8 ounces.

[boyyanno]

Talk about asking for the impossible. There are always going to be subjective decisions in football and until the rules are 100 percent black and white I don't see that changing with or without VAR.

How can you eliminate subjectivity from, for example, handball/ball to hand?

[RalphCoatesComb]

What it will learn from that is that if Raheem Sterling collapses to the ground it's probably a penalty. If Ashley Barnes does it probably isn't.

Sterling is better at diving than Barnes.

[Clarets4me]

Here's a thought ....

Give the Referee back control, one official with VAR to suggest to the Referee that he might want to look again at an incident. Also, Referee can ask to look at a goal/penalty/foul play incident. He goes to the side of the pitch, watches the monitor and acts accordingly ... Replays on big screens if facilities are there ..

Referee regains his authority, and gets to make the decision based on the best information available ...

[FactualFrank]

Talk about asking for the impossible. There are always going to be subjective decisions in football and until the rules are 100 percent black and white I don't see that changing with or without VAR.

How can you eliminate subjectivity from, for example, handball/ball to hand?

This is it. If there's 5 referees on the field, some decisions will still be subjective. If there's a few people working for VAR that'll be subjective. As for technology, it'll be possible, but the algorithm will be very in-depth and it'll only be as good as the person programming it.

[RalphCoatesComb]

Referee regains his authority, and gets to make the decision based on the best information available ...

Good idea but is fatty-boy Moss going to overturn himself? He'd be lucky to make it the the monitor before the half-time whistle was due

[RalphCoatesComb]

As for technology, it'll be possible, but the algorithm will be very in-depth and it'll only be as good as the person programming it.

Correct. If they can land a man on the moon with a ZX-Spectrum, anything is possible. Have you not been watching "The Capture"?

[Carport]

I expect the use of AI including machine learning to be common place in football within the next decade given the rate of technological advance. So yes I can see VAR become more and more objective as computerised image analysis is utilised; eventually becoming performant in near real time and even replacing referees entirely within perhaps fifty years. For now, a quick fix solution might be to introduce a timer for VAR decisions. The VAR referee has sixty seconds to decide whether the infield ref has missed something clear and obvious. If the VAR ref can’t make such a decision within sixty seconds because the circumstances are too complex or finally balanced to be able to judge within that time frame then it follows that the original decision cannot be a clear and obvious error. On field decision stands. Doesn’t delay play too long. Could display ticking clock for crowd to see to add to the tension. I expect Wood’s goal vs Leicester would have stood as the decision came well after one minute.

[Ashingtonclaret46]

"...... I expect Wood’s goal vs Leicester would have stood as the decision came well after one minute."

Without VAR being in use, Wood's goal v Leicester would have stood because the onfield officials gave a goal.
Quite a novel idea for the onfield officials to make a decision, they have only been doing it for well over one hundred years without interference ---just how has the game survived?

[tim_noone]

"...... I expect Wood’s goal vs Leicester would have stood as the decision came well after one minute."

Without VAR being in use, Wood's goal v Leicester would have stood because the onfield officials gave a goal.
Quite a novel idea for the onfield officials to make a decision, they have only been doing it for well over one hundred years without interference ---just how has the game survived?

But did the Ball cross the line? Wembley 1966

[NottsClaret]

A.I. algorithms to decide if someone tripped up or not? We've already lost the plot with VAR.

It's just a sport, a way for people to keep fit and compete. And at the top level, a form of entertainment. That's it though.. nobody dies or gets locked up if we get an offside wrong. We're losing way more than we're gaining, even if we have 20 refs, a dozen VARs and an AI robot doing 20,000 calculations a second.

Imagine John Francis winner at York in 2022, instead of 1992. He bundles the ball in, and a few thousand clarets applaud then nervously look to a screen to see if they can celebrate properly or take the ridicule of York fans because it hit someone's hand or there was a foul a minute earlier.

100%, VAR is just for joyless geeks.

[Ashingtonclaret46]

But did the Ball cross the line? Wembley 1966

Easy answer, tim, according to the officials it crossed the line and nothing that can be done, digitally or otherwise, will change the result.
The use of goal line technology is a good thing because it is black and white, however, the use of VAR....................................

"......100%, VAR is just for joyless geeks."

Unfortunately, notts, it is exactly what the modern fan and pundit want in the game so that everything will be 100% correct ----which is what they are achieving -----isn't it?