Coventry fans pride

[......and Smith must score. 1,349]

Let’s all hope and pray that they get an absolute hammering against Citeh

[ricardo 7,395]

Just now, Hairy Canary said:

Utterly farcical to have that wonderful moment for their fans ripped away by some sort of computer analysis measuring out a few millimetres. 
Football is about emotion in the moment not measurements afterwards. If it’s not humanly possible to see that as offside without a computer than its onside as far as I’m concerned 

The fact remains that it was offside. Disappointing for Coventry and neutrals but such is life.

[GodlyOtsemobor 2,335]

Ian wright 

" Why did football do that to them " 

Erm, football didn't mate. 

[The Real Buh 3,446]

Just now, ......and Smith must score. said:

Let’s all hope and pray that they get an absolute hammering against Citeh

The whole country will surely be hoping for a a massive man city win. I hope it’s one hundred nil.

[ricardo 7,395]

1 minute ago, ......and Smith must score. said:

Let’s all hope and pray that they get an absolute hammering against Citeh

Nailed on imo. City are different class.

[Capt. Pants 4,266]

And also the farce that Onana was booked twice yet doesn't get sent off and doesn't even miss the final.

[ricardo 7,395]

Just now, GodlyOtsemobor said:

Ian wright 

" Why did football do that to them " 

Erm, football didn't mate. 

Lots of emotional nonsense from the pundits.

[Hairy Canary 705]

1 minute ago, ricardo said:

The fact remains that it was offside. Disappointing for Coventry and neutrals but such is life.

Very unusual for me to disagree with you ricardo but it’s millimetres. Apparently when a ball is played at pace one frame of a video can move the ball as much as 2 centremetres so who decides when the ball is played? When the player touches the ball to pass it or when it’s left his boot? On the still frame being shown it’s already left his boot, no idea if that’s right or wrong. 
whatever, it remains a farce. 

[GodlyOtsemobor 2,335]

I will say again. Onside/offside, whatever your opinion may be....

If that's a united goal, the checks over in seconds and the goal stands. 

[The Real Buh 3,446]

4 minutes ago, GodlyOtsemobor said:

I will say again. Onside/offside, whatever your opinion may be....

If that's a united goal, the checks over in seconds and the goal stands. 

100% the other way round it’s getting given.

[ridgeman 132]

22 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said:

And also the farce that Onana was booked twice yet doesn't get sent off and doesn't even miss the final.

He should have been booked twice in match time just weak refereeing again.

[Capt. Pants 4,266]

I'd take a play-off final victory over the nation's favourite Ipswich on the exact same basis though 😉

[ricardo 7,395]

21 minutes ago, Hairy Canary said:

Very unusual for me to disagree with you ricardo but it’s millimetres. Apparently when a ball is played at pace one frame of a video can move the ball as much as 2 centremetres so who decides when the ball is played? When the player touches the ball to pass it or when it’s left his boot? On the still frame being shown it’s already left his boot, no idea if that’s right or wrong. 
whatever, it remains a farce. 

We had this argument over the Pukki goal but he was offside. I have no idea how they select the frame of reference but I doubt that someone is sifting through to make a predetermined decision. 

Ive just watched Forest get 3 penalty claims dismissed. I know its all subjective but they all looked fairly straightforward to me. 

Referring decisions will always be subjective, there's no way round it.

[Nuff Said 5,153]

56 minutes ago, The Real Buh said:

I mean. Steve McLarens on the united bench. They should lose. There’s not a single reason they should win.

Blimey. And we thought our squad was thin.

[Nuff Said 5,153]

49 minutes ago, Samwam27 said:

I feel that if its that.close in a decison that even VAR couldnt tell if it was millimetres, and from that distance and angle it cant, then it shouldnt be given

Doesn’t it say “clear and obvious” in the rule? If it’s borderline then by definition it’s not clear and obvious.

[The Real Buh 3,446]

2 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

Blimey. And we thought our squad was thin.

I just find it astonishing that they have unironically employed Steve McLaren. That is a total mindf@&k when you think about. He’s employed by them! 

[hogesar 9,711]

58 minutes ago, alex_ncfc said:

Surely offside was never created to be this forensic? Analysis by drawing lines that suit the desired outcome, clearly enabling all sorts of corruption. 

It is ruining the sport. Man Utd score that goal and it is given, and we all know it. 

Agreed and the whole point of it is to not give the attacker a huge unfair advantage. In this case the Cov player had ZERO advantage, he'd got in behind due to lazy United defending and they get away with it.

P.S Ten Hag might be the worst manager in the prem.

[The Great Mass Debater 1,090]

Clearly offside  😞

 

[The Great Mass Debater 1,090]

15 hours ago, hogesar said:

VAR is the worst thing to happen to football.

Having campaigned for it's introduction for 20 years I feel ashamed. It's like having voted Tory

[daly 506]

Shame for Coventry team and supporters, Wembley comes once in a lifetime for them 

[Google Bot 3,298]

VAR has redefined the offside rule, it's purpose was to prevent players seeking an unfair advantage, of which this isn't.  It's also redefined the handball rule.

The end point will be AI officiating, and thus more dumbing down of people skills.  All coming to a workplace near you!

[BroadstairsR 2,189]

This argument goes on and on. Technology should assist in making the game fairer by correcting some vital split second decisions that the ref. might have got wrong. The way VAR has been implemented is the real grouse, imo.

The "toenail" offside ruling is absurd. 

The time consumed is ridiculous as, unlike in cricket, it detracts from the spectator's enjoyment rather than adds to it.

Why can't they get this perpetual cause of controversy right? A bad refereeing decision could go on for a few days, all these arguments about VAR go on forever.

Edited April 22 by BroadstairsR

[shefcanary 2,435]

I'm all for a change in the offside rule, VAR were only applying it according to the current rules. The deciding factor should be clear daylight between the players. Players are all different body shapes and shoe sizes. What real advantage is gained by half a shoe size or a centimetre's extra on the chest?

[There now will follow an explanation from someone explaining exactly why such differences provide an advantage 🤷‍♂️]

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,791]

1 hour ago, daly said:

Shame for Coventry team and supporters, Wembley comes once in a lifetime for them 

I think Coventry fans have been at Wembley more than most in recent seasons ...

[essex canary 504]

It is quite simple really. The referee should review any controversial offside decisions with a camera, without lines and with the clear daylight principle.

[GenerationA47 758]

3 hours ago, The Great Mass Debater said:

Having campaigned for it's introduction for 20 years I feel ashamed. It's like having voted Tory

It’s nothing like it. There was a principled and rational case for wanting VAR.

In all seriousness I think there still is. It’s just we never considered the extent to which

 1. VAR doesn’t eliminate the close (controversial & borderline) calls, it just reduces the number by pushing further into the margins.. mm rather then cm, etc. Purely speaking from hindsight, this shouldn’t have been too surprising (eg for those with an appreciation of real-world approximations of Xeno’s paradox!). It does mean the feeling of fallibility and insufficiency doesn’t go away

2.  It does nothing to address the sense (nor the evidence) of unconscious and conscious bias in official judgements especially institutional/ cultural bias. VAR should in theory reduce the effects of personal bias but if it does, it’s unlikely to be visible. (Not least because as fans we’re such a bunch of ‘cry wolf’ addicts, any examples or effects of real referee bias gets lost in the noise.)

3. It increases complexity, adds on time (& frustration), and puts focus on the process.. whilst managing to keep it opaque to most fans in the ground. If anything, these features only highlight the increased closeness of the calls it’s making - and the perceived injustice when that comes up

4. To my knowledge, there’s no overall  impression, or series of memorable examples or significant/iconic triumphs, showcasing VAR brilliance and so on. These might serve as focus points for general approval and justification. It’s mostly a series of dull, unremarkable and mostly uncontroversial decisions as with in-game referee decisions.

5. The Premier League would find such a crap way to implement it, with the least satisfactory procedure (& use of its benefits) of any league as far as I know

Edited April 22 by GenerationA47
Added point 5. & wolf-crying

[Canarywary 110]

Saying we should keep VAR but go back to the daylight rule won't change anything, because unless the camera is directly in line with the attacker/defender in question, how could VAR possibly judge whether there's daylight? We'd end up in exactly the same situation, i.e. using a microscope to look for millimeters of error.

Using VAR for offside is fundamentally damaging to football because it leads to so many goals being disallowed. When you can no longer fully celebrate your team scoring a goal, then football has lost it's soul. Keep it for red cards, penalties, diving etc if we HAVE to, but offside, no thanks.

[essex canary 504]

1 minute ago, Canarywary said:

Saying we should keep VAR but go back to the daylight rule won't change anything, because unless the camera is directly in line with the attacker/defender in question, how could VAR possibly judge whether there's daylight? We'd end up in exactly the same situation, i.e. using a microscope to look for millimeters of error.

Using VAR for offside is fundamentally damaging to football because it leads to so many goals being disallowed. When you can no longer fully celebrate your team scoring a goal, then football has lost it's soul. Keep it for red cards, penalties, diving etc if we HAVE to, but offside, no thanks.

The original concept of offside was 'seeking to gain an advantage by being in an offside position'.

We should go back to that, accept that at least to some extent it is a subjective assessment on the referee's part. A 100% objectivity approach is not possible or appropriate.

[Graham Paddons Beard 2,435]

18 hours ago, ricardo said:

We had this argument over the Pukki goal but he was offside. I have no idea how they select the frame of reference but I doubt that someone is sifting through to make a predetermined decision. 

Ive just watched Forest get 3 penalty claims dismissed. I know its all subjective but they all looked fairly straightforward to me. 

Referring decisions will always be subjective, there's no way round it.

Issue is the technology for offside not the subjectivity. Clear and obvious is not part of the offside decision making. 

It is either offside or not offside. 

A few years back a question was raised about how you create infinite amounts of lines on a football pitch , by using the same liner technology  used in cricket and tennis. Hawk eye responded by saying "the pitches are calibrated by Hawk-Eye, creating a 3D model of each of them, which is then maintained during the matches. Hawk-Eye's offside line matches the camber of the whole pitch to ensure as accurate a decision as possible

Even Dr Hawkins of Hawkeye isn't convinced it is 100% accurate. 

So where technology is used in the knowledge it isn't 100% accurate , why use it? Why not use it as support or backup? In that way the Coventry goal is allowed. It is too close to say the lino got it wrong. Instead Football relies on technology that isn't fit for purpose. 

It is accepted as not accurate so the Premier league is looking to adopt semi-automated offside technology, same as used in the Euro's and the champions League. 

The technology doesn't exist for a long pass for the precise moment the ball is played. The still published for Pukki's goal still defies logic. We don't know when the ball was played, and Pukki's body shape looks unnatural. 

 

We will never forget. 

 

Edited April 22 by Graham Paddons Beard

[Foxy2600 305]

4 hours ago, The Great Mass Debater said:

Clearly offside  😞

 

The Lino didn’t give it because Level is Onside.

What is the point of VAR overturning an on field decision? Not fit for purpose, as we said two seasons ago about the Pukki decision. Nothings changed. Also VAR shouldn’t be available if it’s not universal across the whole competition - EPL are welcome to it!