VAR Once again

[cricketfieldclarets]

rules out a perfect Icardi goal in The Milan derby.

[Steve1956]

Painful to watch CFC,I much prefer it when the on field ref fooks it up!

[cricketfieldclarets]

Apparently he may have been 1mm offside. Which is still offside... Great just what we want. No strikers taking gambles etc.

This will have the reverse effect on goals as what the passback rule had.

[Saxoman]

I think VAR is a part of France.

[chekhov]

When was this?

[chekhov]

Oh I see. It's happening now!

[cricketfieldclarets]

Live now. Two disallowed goals, one howling miss from Icardi and the rest a typical old school Serie A 0-0er!

[Saxoman]

Live now. Two disallowed goals, one howling miss from Icardi and the rest a typical old school Serie A 0-0er!

I long for the days of baresi walking round for 90 mins, passing the ball side to side, never having to break into a sprint..

[Steve1956]

Is that Borini playing for A.C. In this game

[cricketfieldclarets]

Live now. Two disallowed goals, one howling miss from Icardi and the rest a typical old school Serie A 0-0er!

And he misses another at the death

Hat trick last time. A hat trick of sorts to forget tonight!

[dsr]

Apparently he may have been 1mm offside. Which is still offside... Great just what we want. No strikers taking gambles etc.

This will have the reverse effect on goals as what the passback rule had.

And here are some numbers.

1. The fastest Premier League sprint was Sane this season, 35.480 km/hour.
2. This, when divided down, is 9.855 m/s. or 388 inches per second.
3. Ordinary TV has, I believe, 26 frames per second; HD has 64 frames per second. So in ordinary TV, a running player is travelling at up to 15 inches per frame. On HD TV, 6 inches per frame. But remember too that one of his feet is moving a lot faster than the other, so say 24 inches per frame / 10 inches per frame. And the defender may be going the other way.

So when a freeze frame shows a man an offside by a foot or less, then it can't be trusted. Half a frame earlier or later - which may very well be a more accurate image based on the millisecond the ball was kicked - he could have been onside.

In short, we do not have the technology to judge offside to the inch.

[tim_noone]

And here are some numbers.

1. The fastest Premier League sprint was Sane this season, 35.480 km/hour.
2. This, when divided down, is 9.855 m/s. or 388 inches per second.
3. Ordinary TV has, I believe, 26 frames per second; HD has 64 frames per second. So in ordinary TV, a running player is travelling at up to 15 inches per frame. On HD TV, 6 inches per frame. But remember too that one of his feet is moving a lot faster than the other, so say 24 inches per frame / 10 inches per frame. And the defender may be going the other way.

So when a freeze frame shows a man an offside by a foot or less, then it can't be trusted. Half a frame earlier or later - which may very well be a more accurate image based on the millisecond the ball was kicked - he could have been onside.

In short, we do not have the technology to judge offside to the inch.

Couple of dodgy offsides? For city tonight.

[Imploding Turtle]

rules out a perfect Icardi goal in The Milan derby.

It was offside. Are offside goals "perfect" goals now?

[cricketfieldclarets]

It was offside. Are offside goals "perfect" goals now?

It wasn't.

[PLTMGMBJ]

Couple of dodgy offsides? For city tonight.

Certainly Scousers first goal was offside. Also City's goal disallowed was onside but City were poor last night.

[Imploding Turtle]

It wasn't.

Says who/what?

[cricketfieldclarets]

Says who/what?

[Imploding Turtle]

Looks offside to me

But pretending for a moment it isn't. Wasn't your complaint a few days ago that VAR removes controversy? Seems to me you're undercutting your own argument right now.

[cricketfieldclarets]

Its not offside.

And no. My point was VAR eliminates (or is intended to eliminate) controversy. It doesnt do that and it adds more time while killimg any atmosphere or excitement. But you knew that.

[dsr]

Looks offside to me

It's what I said earlier. Llook at the ball. That picture isn't taken at the moment the ball was kicked. It's probably at least a fiftieth of a second late. You need to go back to the frame that doesn't exist a fiftieth of a second earlier if you want to accurately judge whether he was offside.

Or alternatively, trust your own eyes. He was level.

[cricketfieldclarets]

It's what I said earlier. Llook at the ball. That picture isn't taken at the moment the ball was kicked. It's probably at least a fiftieth of a second late. You need to go back to the frame that doesn't exist a fiftieth of a second earlier if you want to accurately judge whether he was offside.

Or alternatively, trust your own eyes. He was level.

Exactly.

Or even better. Give the attacker the advantage if in doubt. As was the case here. Hence no flag or whistle.

Its ruining the game. And only people who dont understand the game or dont really like it that much can think VAR is a good thing.

If thats offside we may as well pack in now.

[Imploding Turtle]

It's what I said earlier. Llook at the ball. That picture isn't taken at the moment the ball was kicked. It's probably at least a fiftieth of a second late. You need to go back to the frame that doesn't exist a fiftieth of a second earlier if you want to accurately judge whether he was offside.

Or alternatively, trust your own eyes. He was level.

His foot might be level, but his head and right shoulder is ahead of his foot. and the only player who could be playing him onside would be doing so with his foot. so if his foot is level with the defenders' foot, then his head and shoulder is offside.

Maybe the rule should be changed to only a players' feet can be offside instead of just any body part that can play the ball. But as the rule is written currently then he was offside and VAR got it right.

[dsr]

His foot might be level, but his head and right shoulder is ahead of his foot. and the only player who could be playing him onside would be doing so with his foot. so if his foot is level with the defenders' foot, then his head and shoulder is offside.

Maybe the rule should be changed to only a players' feet can be offside instead of just any body part that can play the ball. But as the rule is written currently then he was offside and VAR got it right.

You're missing the point. That picture was not taken at the moment the ball was kicked. Was his shoulder offside at the moment the ball was kicked? We don't know. It's too close to call.

It might be worth clarifying whether "the moment the ball is kicked" means the moment the boot first touches the ball, or the moment the ball loses contact with the boot. The act of kicking takes about a hundredth of a second, I believe, which gives both forward and defender time to move two or three inches. If offside is to be measured to the inch, then it matters.

[BFCmaj]

[quote="cricketfieldclarets"][/quote]
According to that image, it’s not even a round football they’re playing with. Looks more like some sort of marshmallow.

[UpTheBeehole]

Inter's own player said this:

In conclusion Gagliardini was asked about Icardi’s goal which was ruled offside after VAR was consulted to which he replied: “It was a correct decision, now we have to score a goal after the break.”

In the 38th minute Icardi scored a goal which was disallowed as the Inter captain was fractionally offside and thus prevented from scoring for the third consecutive derby in the Serie A after having scored a hattrick earlier this season and last season in the 2-2 draw.

[cricketfieldclarets]

His foot might be level, but his head and right shoulder is ahead of his foot. and the only player who could be playing him onside would be doing so with his foot. so if his foot is level with the defenders' foot, then his head and shoulder is offside.

Maybe the rule should be changed to only a players' feet can be offside instead of just any body part that can play the ball. But as the rule is written currently then he was offside and VAR got it right.

[cricketfieldclarets]

Inter's own player said this:

Clearly just being diplomatic at half time and focusing on going to get another goal!

[UpTheBeehole]

Icardi was goalhanging in an offside position and made no attempt to get onside. The defence dropped, but not far enough that he was played onside.

If it was Andre Gray doing that he'd have got pelters for being lazy.