The Official Tottenham Hotspud thread [Vol 12]

[48k]

[redacted]

[m3sye]

lemmingjames said:

Nah but Kane did get a golden boot last year

Who from? the club. Or have you been alseep for a long time?

[NRS]

m3sye said:

lemmingjames said:

Nah but Kane did get a golden boot last year

Who from? the club. Or have you been alseep for a long time?

European one.

[m3sye]

NRS said:

European one.

Who watches international football

[DeltonaS]

Cie said:

DeltonaS said:

Fittster said:

Fairly confident that we need a few new players.

Rumours are strong that Fellaini is on his way to the Tottenham Hotspur Football and Athletic Club.

Who're Ajax selling their best players to though?

Juventus and Barcelona recently, In general the best players in the past always went to clubs like Barcelona, Ac Milan, Juventus and Real.

If the harvest is of a lesser quality, they usually go to Tottenham.

[Pommy]

NRS said:

m3sye said:

lemmingjames said:

Nah but Kane did get a golden boot last year

Who from? the club. Or have you been alseep for a long time?

European one.

There are trophies for penalty taking?

[jammy-git]

Pommy said:

There are trophies for penalty taking?

Depends on how many lives his daughter has.

[48k]

Another week, another ridiculous VAR decision where a player's armpit is considered to be offside. It's getting silly. The margins of the technology are so fine there's literally no way they can be that precise.

[BMW A6]

48k said:

Another week, another ridiculous VAR decision where a player's armpit is considered to be offside. It's getting silly. The margins of the technology are so fine there's literally no way they can be that precise.

Was the player onside or offside?

If offside, why is it wrong to disallow the goal?

[48k]

BMW A6 said:

48k said:

Another week, another ridiculous VAR decision where a player's armpit is considered to be offside. It's getting silly. The margins of the technology are so fine there's literally no way they can be that precise.

Was the player onside or offside?

If offside, why is it wrong to disallow the goal?

Simply because the margin of error in the technology is larger than the margin they are using to make the decision. VAR cameras are running at 50fps, or one frame every 0.02 seconds. If a player is sprinting at, say, 10mph, he moves just under 9cm between two consecutive VAR frames. Add in the screen resolution and width of the line(s) in pixels, add in trying to decide which frame the ball was kicked in, or did the kick actually happen between frames, add in the angles and distance from camera to player(s) and ball, and there's just far too many variables adding to the margin for them to be able to definitively call an offside on a player's armpit.

Plus, you know, Mane is in my Fantasy League team.

[TEKNOPUG]

48k said:

BMW A6 said:

48k said:

Another week, another ridiculous VAR decision where a player's armpit is considered to be offside. It's getting silly. The margins of the technology are so fine there's literally no way they can be that precise.

Was the player onside or offside?

If offside, why is it wrong to disallow the goal?

Simply because the margin of error in the technology is larger than the margin they are using to make the decision. VAR cameras are running at 50fps, or one frame every 0.02 seconds. If a player is sprinting at, say, 10mph, he moves just under 9cm between two consecutive VAR frames. Add in the screen resolution and width of the line(s) in pixels, add in trying to decide which frame the ball was kicked in, or did the kick actually happen between frames, add in the angles and distance from camera to player(s) and ball, and there's just far too many variables adding to the margin for them to be able to definitively call an offside on a player's armpit.

This.

Also, often it's different cameras that they use to determine when the ball was kicked and the player offside. So you have all the issues above, now doubled for 2 cameras and are those 2 cameras perfectly in sync?

They need to allow for the known margin of errors and mandate a minimum distance of "offside" in the favour of the attacker.

[Adam B]

Just posted this on our thread but:


FA and unions looking at adjusting VAR and offsides, including using a thick line so there has to be clearer gap

[ChocolateFrog]

Well put.

The resolution available is significantly lower than the resolution they're judging to.

[48k]

Adam B said:

Just posted this on our thread but:


FA and unions looking at adjusting VAR and offsides, including using a thick line so there has to be clearer gap

On the one hand it's good that they recognise the flaws in the current system and operational implementation, on the downside if they change something mid-season they going to open a can of worms regarding decisions that have already been made using the old method.

[Adam B]

Not sure why that would be an issue though, every team played X games with the stupid VAR offside rules and then play Y games with an adjusted rule

But I am sure they won’t change mid-season and changes have to be ratified by UEFA and FIFA I think

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/sport/fa-to-sor...

Edited by Adam B on Saturday 14th December 16:48

[jammy-git]

ChocolateFrog said:

Well put.

The resolution available is significantly lower than the resolution they're judging to.

I've heard that the footage they see is of a much higher quality and frame rate than what we see on TV.

[TEKNOPUG]

Huge goal by Bournemouth. Opportunity to be above Chelsea by Xmas.

[TEKNOPUG]

jammy-git said:

ChocolateFrog said:

Well put.

The resolution available is significantly lower than the resolution they're judging to.

I've heard that the footage they see is of a much higher quality and frame rate than what we see on TV.

Doesn't matter what frame rate or definition they use, there will always be a margin of error by it's very nature.

Say for example they used 100fps, at some point there must have been a case where at that definition, you could tell that a player wasn't offside. Yet at broadcast fps (which is more likely to be 25fps anyway) it appears that they are offside. How many incidents have you seen where it appears a players toe/elbow is offside and it's not been given as such? There would be cases where there would be daylight between the players being given and vice versa. It would be even more farcical than it is if the footage being reviewed is not the same as that which is being broadcast and used to explain the decision to punters.

[jammy-git]

TEKNOPUG said:

Doesn't matter what frame rate or definition they use, there will always be a margin of error by it's very nature.

Say for example they used 100fps, at some point there must have been a case where at that definition, you could tell that a player wasn't offside. Yet at broadcast fps (which is more likely to be 25fps anyway) it appears that they are offside. How many incidents have you seen where it appears a players toe/elbow is offside and it's not been given as such? There would be cases where there would be daylight between the players being given and vice versa. It would be even more farcical than it is if the footage being reviewed is not the same as that which is being broadcast and used to explain the decision to punters.

So? There will be a point at which the offside technology is as good as the goal-line tech, at which point no one will dispute the decisions whether they look onside from a particular angle or not.

[48k]

jammy-git said:

TEKNOPUG said:

Doesn't matter what frame rate or definition they use, there will always be a margin of error by it's very nature.

Say for example they used 100fps, at some point there must have been a case where at that definition, you could tell that a player wasn't offside. Yet at broadcast fps (which is more likely to be 25fps anyway) it appears that they are offside. How many incidents have you seen where it appears a players toe/elbow is offside and it's not been given as such? There would be cases where there would be daylight between the players being given and vice versa. It would be even more farcical than it is if the footage being reviewed is not the same as that which is being broadcast and used to explain the decision to punters.

So? There will be a point at which the offside technology is as good as the goal-line tech, at which point no one will dispute the decisions whether they look onside from a particular angle or not.

No I don't agree. They should come out and say something along the lines of "the technology measures X and gives us an area of uncertainty of Y and any decisions which fall in the Y zone will be given in favour of the attacker and that decision will be taken within 30 seconds". Job done.