FA Cup - 2023/24

[bazza]

2 hours ago, K-Hod said:

Compare and contrast, the spirit Coventry have shown in a vital match, with the spirit we showed today in another vital match.

They have an owner who cares.

[RevidgeBlue]

2 hours ago, wilsdenrover said:

If VAR is going to look at offside it should require clear daylight between the attacker and the defender.

Those sorts of incidents are not clear and obvious errors by the linesman.

Exactly.

They're meant to be cutting out "clear and obvious" errors not re-refereeing the game.

It's ruining the game chalking off goals because someone has a toe nail or an armpit offside. Who actually thinks that's a good idea? Ditto going back through the action desperately trying to find the most minor of infringements as an excuse to rule out a goal.

Conversely however, when a penalty SHOULD be given by the on field referee but isn't, they rarely intervene for the reason that they claim it wasn't a clear and obvious error. It all seems to be geared up to chalk goals off whichever way round it is.

[RoverDom]

Offsides - VAR should get one freeze frame and if you can't tell within 10 seconds then go with the onfield decision. 

Other decisions, if there needs to ve a review, the ref should go to the monitor for it straight away. The ref needs to make sure that what he saw happen, happened the way he remembered it. No clear and obvious bollocks. It'll save time if the ref ran to the monitor saw a couple of angles and made a decision rather than have VAR look at it and send the ref to the monitor after 3 minutes. 

 

Ref standards have plummeted since VAR came in and I think it's cos refs and linesmen let things go cos they know that VAR will pick up any howlers. However when VAR look at it they say its not clear and obvious and stick with the onfield decision 

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

1 hour ago, bazza said:

They have an owner who cares.

Without that no team will ever thrive. Expecting Rovers to flourish under the Chicken Chokers is just silly.

[roversfan99]

I dont see how you can start using grey areas like "clear daylight" when trying to get objective offside/onside decisions correct. 

You wouldnt say similar if it was nearly over the line. It was the last minute of an FA cup semi final so the decision had to be correct and it was. You cant review it and go well he is offside but only just so lets give it.

It is unfortunate as we all wanted United to lose but there is no grievance to be had.

[Ewood Ace]

25 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

I dont see how you can start using grey areas like "clear daylight" when trying to get objective offside/onside decisions correct. 

You wouldnt say similar if it was nearly over the line. It was the last minute of an FA cup semi final so the decision had to be correct and it was. You cant review it and go well he is offside but only just so lets give it.

It is unfortunate as we all wanted United to lose but there is no grievance to be had.

These ridiculous offsides are not in the spirit of the game, the offside rule was brought in to stop players goal hanging and gaining an advantage. Wright gained no advantage by having a toe slightly bigger than Wan Bissaka. VAR is trying to suck all of the joy and emotion out of football and turn it into an exact science by checking if someone has a toe or an armpit offside.

And I'm not even convinced he was offside, the angles they use and the way that they draw the lines on never fully convinces me. The line was drawn across Wan Bissaka's boot and not on the very edge of it. I suspect had that goal been scored at the other they would have altered the lines slightly to make it onside.

VAR has to go for the sake of the game.

Edited April 21 by Ewood Ace

[roversfan99]

1 minute ago, Ewood Ace said:

These ridiculous offsides are not in the spirit of the game, the offside rule was brought in to stop players goal hanging and gaining an advantage. Wright gained no advantage by have a toe slightly bigger than Wan Bissaka. VAR is trying to suck all of the joy and emotion out of football and turn it into an exact science by checking if someone has a toe or an armpit offside.

And I'm not even convinced he was offside, the angles they use and the way that they draw the lines on never fully convinces me. The line was drawn across Wan Bissaka's boot and not on the very edge of it. I suspect had that goal been scored at the other they would have altered the lines slightly to make it onside.

VAR has to go for the sake of the game.

Its one of them, you either accept considerably less accuracy in decisions and enjoy a "purer" game or you accept the delays and at times how slight the margins are in favour of much more accuracy.

He was offside at the end of the day. Just. Like some of the penalties JUST avoided hitting the post, like some goals JUST go over the line, tight margins but still there is a right and wrong decision.

Im not really buying into the conspiracy theories of purposely favouring teams, they could have easily ruled out the handball.

[Ewood Ace]

1 minute ago, roversfan99 said:

Its one of them, you either accept considerably less accuracy in decisions and enjoy a "purer" game or you accept the delays and at times how slight the margins are in favour of much more accuracy.

The thing is I'm not convinced that it is accurate that the way the offsides are checked with the dodgy camera angles and lines being drawn all over the place. Not to mention how difficult it is to pinpoint the exact millisecond that the ball is kicked. I do think that the semi-automated thing is much more accurate and much quicker but it still dilutes the game.

[oldjamfan1]

6 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Its one of them, you either accept considerably less accuracy in decisions and enjoy a "purer" game or you accept the delays and at times how slight the margins are in favour of much more accuracy.

He was offside at the end of the day. Just. Like some of the penalties JUST avoided hitting the post, like some goals JUST go over the line, tight margins but still there is a right and wrong decision.

Im not really buying into the conspiracy theories of purposely favouring teams, they could have easily ruled out the handball.

At the end of the day it is bad for the game. Not being able to properly celebrate a goal takes all the joy out of it for fans 

[roversfan99]

Just now, Ewood Ace said:

The thing is I'm not convinced that it is accurate that the way the offsides are checked with the dodgy camera angles and lines being drawn all over the place. Not to mention how difficult it is to pinpoint the exact millisecond that the ball is kicked. I do think that the semi-automated thing is much more accurate and much quicker but it still dilutes the game.

I definitely think that semi automated offsides will help things like they did in the world cup.

VAR certainly isnt perfect and I do take your points on its impact on the spirit of the game. It is a debate between accuracy and keeping the game pure.

[Upside Down]

3 hours ago, K-Hod said:

Problem with United, is they’re being judged by the standards of when Ferguson was in charge.

The reality, is that none of their players are really of the level required to compete at the top level. They’ve also overpaid for a lot of those players, to boot.

Every manager they’ve had since, has ultimately ended with the same outcome. 
I’m sure we can relate to the last sentence and compare it to any manager of ours under Venky’s….

They haven't had the owners deliberately relegate the club though.

We are the only club I can think of where that has happened. And it's happening again this season.

[roversfan99]

Just now, oldjamfan1 said:

At the end of the day it is bad for the game. Not being able to properly celebrate a goal takes all the joy out of it for fans 

But ultimately that goal is agains the rules if it is ruled out, so not valid goals.

[Andy]

I like to think there was a bit of karma for Coventry today, for the way they cheated us in injury time last season.

[wilsdenrover]

1 hour ago, roversfan99 said:

I dont see how you can start using grey areas like "clear daylight" when trying to get objective offside/onside decisions correct. 

You wouldnt say similar if it was nearly over the line. It was the last minute of an FA cup semi final so the decision had to be correct and it was. You cant review it and go well he is offside but only just so lets give it.

It is unfortunate as we all wanted United to lose but there is no grievance to be had.

Other sports allow for close calls to stay with the on field decision and I’m not convinced as to why football should be any different.

 

 

Edited April 21 by wilsdenrover

[oldjamfan1]

45 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

But ultimately that goal is agains the rules if it is ruled out, so not valid goals.

Pre VAR there would hardly have been a murmur about that goal and that includes Utd fans. It was a marginal offside. Some will go for you and some against you. The ‘purity’ of decisions is simply not worth the removal of the spontaneity of the joy of celebrating a goal. If you have ever experienced it ‘live’ at a game it literally sucks all the enjoyment out of it. I’d scrap it tomorrow, with the exception of goal line technology, which gives an immediate decision.

[Upside Down]

27 minutes ago, Andy said:

I like to think there was a bit of karma for Coventry today, for the way they cheated us in injury time last season.

The only people who cheated us last season were the owners when they sabotaged the January transfer window.

[RoverDom]

If we want accuracy, get a system that allows accuracy to be achieved quickly. We don't want people agnosing over a couple of pixels on the screen. VAR has allowed the offside rule to be changed. Now if you are level, chances are you'll be ruled off cos you'll have a leg hair over the line. 

There's also the margin of error that comes with var. You can't tell the exact moment someone touches the ball you just know it is at some point between frame A and frame B. At 50 FPS, that means you know someone touched the ball at some point in a 0.02 second period. In that time period a player at a decent sprint speed of 30kph (8.3 metres per second) moves around 16cm. 

So it's not quite as objective as you think. Better technology is needed if you want to start arguing over toenails being offside.

[Ianrally]

I totally agree. Why don’t we go back to being level is deemed to be onside, and when the lines are drawn, if the red line and the green line are touching each other then that is also classed as onside.
There should be a defined distance between the lines before it’s called offside to negate the exact moment the player passing the ball actually touches the ball.
Goal line technology is perfect and immediate, just like Hawkeye at tennis. Why VAR takes so long is a joke and therefore needs to be scrapped until a better solution is found. 

[wilsdenrover]

10 minutes ago, Ianrally said:

I totally agree. Why don’t we go back to being level is deemed to be onside, and when the lines are drawn, if the red line and the green line are touching each other then that is also classed as onside.
There should be a defined distance between the lines before it’s called offside to negate the exact moment the player passing the ball actually touches the ball.
Goal line technology is perfect and immediate, just like Hawkeye at tennis. Why VAR takes so long is a joke and therefore needs to be scrapped until a better solution is found. 

If it takes more than a few seconds to decide whether a clear and obvious error has been made then by definition any error can’t have been clear and obvious.

They’re looking for perfection when (1) that was never the intention of VAR (2) they’re nowhere near capable of achieving this.