Is English officiating corrupt?

Responding to your first paragraph: the problem there is not that the technology is not precise enough. The problem is that reality does not consist of discrete instants. So eg kicking a ball, like everyting else, takes time. It occurs over a continuum. The more precise your technology is, in fact, the MORE possible "instants" (frames, in the case of TV cameras) that the contact between foot and ball will be spread over. So your problem of which one to choose actually gets worse. It would actually be easier if cameras only ran at 3 frames a second or something. Then there would probably only be one frame as the outstanding candidate to be the moment the ball was kicked, and you could draw your lines in that frame only. (Obvously it would be murder to watch football at that frame rate haha.)

Anyway, the point is the problem of a lack of absolute precision is not a technological problem. Or a problem of human subjectivity. Reality is a flow and so has inherent limits on the precision with which it can be measured. This is also why you have the uncertainty principle in physics. Our footballing example is essentially a variation on the same thing. (So when people say somebody is either offside or they're not, it actually depends. Most offsides, the margin is big enough that they definitely are or not. But for tight enough calls, it will actually be the case that the runner will be onside for part of the time the passer's foot is in contact with the ball, and then offside for part of the time. It will actually be the case. So more precise technology just increases your choice of which one to pick.

Which brings us to your second paragraph:

Because there is an inherent arbitrariness and subjectivity on which frame gets picked as "the" frame, once the official has picked a frame to be the one , that's the one that the lines have to be drawn in. So if he has picked frame 4561, he CAN'T, having zoomed out to see the receiving player, then start winding it forward and drawing lines in frame 4565 or whatever. If he'd picked 4565 first, yes. But he can't go "this is the one we're using", zoom out, and then go "hmm, it's not clear if he's offside in this one, I'll wind forward until he definitely is"!

I wasn't really wanting to get into the realms of philosophy and whether there is such a thing as objective reality...anyway ignoring any metaphysics and trying to demystify offside using Schrodinger's cat principle...
3 frames a second as you say would be unwatchable and in terms of what we're talking about it's quite likely one frame would see a ball going towards a player, with the next frame showing the ball already having been and gone from that player... More frames as you say increases the choice of which frame "to pick"...obviously the frame to pick would be the one which shows a gap between the boot/head of the player as it comes off him....so not arbitrary or subjective at all, in fact it would be definitively accurate.

And that is potentially what happened. There were two frames frozen. The on side one, then that was moved up to the off side one.
The first one was clearly the first interpretation of when the ball was struck. It seems didn't reach the expected outcome, so was moved on until it did.
I think it was clear to everyone watching, how the two positions unfolded.

The paranoia right now is snowballing

The frame shown for the offside shows the ball still on Mo’s foot and Nunez offside

It’s very clear

They look at multiple frames until they get the right one

If the next frame is after the ball has been kicked then they roll it back to the previous frame

They haven’t oicked a frame to ensure it was given as offside

The paranoia right now is snowballing

The frame shown for the offside shows the ball still on Mo’s foot and Nunez offside

It’s very clear

They look at multiple frames until they get the right one

If the next frame is after the ball has been kicked then they roll it back to the previous frame

They haven’t oicked a frame to ensure it was given as offside

Of course they haven't Why would they?...they don't give a monkey's if Liverpool score or not.

I wasn't really wanting to get into the realms of philosophy and whether there is such a thing as objective reality...anyway ignoring any metaphysics and trying to demystify offside using Schrodinger's cat principle...
3 frames a second as you say would be unwatchable and in terms of what we're talking about it's quite likely one frame would see a ball going towards a player, with the next frame showing the ball already having been and gone from that player... More frames as you say increases the choice of which frame "to pick"...obviously the frame to pick would be the one which shows a gap between the boot/head of the player as it comes off him....so not arbitrary or subjective at all, in fact it would be definitively accurate.

Ah right, the guy whose every other post turns into a trite little philosophical lecture would literally rather pretend that I'm asking "whether there is such a thing as objective reality" than engage honestly with what I actually said.

Learned something about you with that post, even if it wasn't anything too surprising.

I wouldnt say the refs are corrupt, they are F***ing rubbish though.

I watch a lot of football and the standard of refereeing differs from team to team.

Just tonight Timber had hold of an Ipswich player, ref played advantagebbut never went back and booked him. Guarantee that same ref will book someone else next week for exactly the same foul

Ah right, the guy whose every other post turns into a trite little philosophical lecture would literally rather pretend that I'm asking "whether there is such a thing as objective reality" than engage honestly with what I actually said.

Learned something about you with that post, even if it wasn't anything too surprising.

I engaged (honestly) in what you actually said. Try skipping the trite lecture and go to the bit about frame count.

I wouldnt say the refs are corrupt, they are F***ing rubbish though.

I watch a lot of football and the standard of refereeing differs from team to team.

Just tonight Timber had hold of an Ipswich player, ref played advantagebbut never went back and booked him. Guarantee that same ref will book someone else next week for exactly the same foul

There was also a case where an Ipswich player hauled an Arsenal player to the floor...again nothing from the ref...at least he was consistently poor.

The paranoia right now is snowballing

The frame shown for the offside shows the ball still on Mo’s foot and Nunez offside

It’s very clear

They look at multiple frames until they get the right one

Why do you continue argue/debate with those that wear rose tints, don’t you get fed up of flogging a dead horse Pj ?

Anthony Taylor in the middle on sunday. Good old Darren England on var and we know all about england after his 'performance' on var at spurs sending off 2 of our players wrongly and ignoring a clearly wrong offside decision and disallowing diaz' goal

The ball is on Mo’s foot in that frame 🤷‍♂️

The only issue I have is it too so long
If it’s that close then just stick to the decision on the pitch

I think VAR should be timed, say 30 secs to prove its on/ off side, if by 30 secs there’s no decision we stick with the on field referees decision, like in the good old days when we were VAR free, some will go for you some won’t, what we’re forgetting here is Football is entertainment, ppl paying top dollar want top entertainment, the whole point being scoring goals to bring about total satisfaction,

We’ve/We’re losing the value by NOT allowing goals, diminishing said entertainment, which ppl pay top dollar for, yet here we are allowing a body of self serving officials who for the most part have never kicked a ball on a professional level, or any level for some, to dictate to those who have played, understood , know exactly what it is like emotionally to score or be denied a goal,  that feeling of elation, or deflation, referees are dead to this emotion so means F**k all to them and they are simply applying the rules as they see fit,

Strikers don’t get 30 secs to make a decision whether to shoot or not, defenders don’t get 30 secs to decide if he has to make that tackle, so why do VAR Officials need so long to look at, on many angles slowed down so it always looks worse, draw imaginary lines to establish distances in millimetres either way, all in the name of fairness,

If it’s that f***in close where’s the benefit of doubt for the attacking team, scoring goals is the reward, that’s what the players train hard for everyday, to train/ be coached into a system designed to open opportunities to dictate tempo and Score goals, it should be a easy decision, it’s either onside or not, so 30 secs, F**k the lines, give the benefit of doubt to the attacking team, if it’s tight 30 secs to prove offside, simples!!


More goals, better entertainment less PGMOL involvement, more fun, happier fans, less frustration, More Goals….Repeat !!!


YNWA

I think VAR should be timed, say 30 secs to prove its on/ off side, if by 30 secs there’s no decision we stick with the on field referees decision, like in the good old days when we were VAR free, some will go for you some won’t, what we’re forgetting here is Football is entertainment, ppl paying top dollar want top entertainment, the whole point being scoring goals to bring about total satisfaction,

We’ve/We’re losing the value by NOT allowing goals, diminishing said entertainment, which ppl pay top dollar for, yet here we are allowing a body of self serving officials who for the most part have never kicked a ball on a professional level, or any level for some, to dictate to those who have played, understood , know exactly what it is like emotionally to score or be denied a goal,  that feeling of elation, or deflation, referees are dead to this emotion so means F**k all to them and they are simply applying the rules as they see fit,

Strikers don’t get 30 secs to make a decision whether to shoot or not, defenders don’t get 30 secs to decide if he has to make that tackle, so why do VAR Officials need so long to look at, on many angles slowed down so it always looks worse, draw imaginary lines to establish distances in millimetres either way, all in the name of fairness,

If it’s that f***in close where’s the benefit of doubt for the attacking team, scoring goals is the reward, that’s what the players train hard for everyday, to train/ be coached into a system designed to open opportunities to dictate tempo and Score goals, it should be a easy decision, it’s either onside or not, so 30 secs, F**k the lines, give the benefit of doubt to the attacking team, if it’s tight 30 secs to prove offside, simples!!


More goals, better entertainment less PGMOL involvement, more fun, happier fans, less frustration, More Goals….Repeat !!!


YNWA

100% spot on

I think VAR should be timed, say 30 secs to prove its on/ off side, if by 30 secs there’s no decision we stick with the on field referees decision, like in the good old days when we were VAR free, some will go for you some won’t, what we’re forgetting here is Football is entertainment, ppl paying top dollar want top entertainment, the whole point being scoring goals to bring about total satisfaction,

We’ve/We’re losing the value by NOT allowing goals, diminishing said entertainment, which ppl pay top dollar for, yet here we are allowing a body of self serving officials who for the most part have never kicked a ball on a professional level, or any level for some, to dictate to those who have played, understood , know exactly what it is like emotionally to score or be denied a goal,  that feeling of elation, or deflation, referees are dead to this emotion so means F**k all to them and they are simply applying the rules as they see fit,

Strikers don’t get 30 secs to make a decision whether to shoot or not, defenders don’t get 30 secs to decide if he has to make that tackle, so why do VAR Officials need so long to look at, on many angles slowed down so it always looks worse, draw imaginary lines to establish distances in millimetres either way, all in the name of fairness,

If it’s that f***in close where’s the benefit of doubt for the attacking team, scoring goals is the reward, that’s what the players train hard for everyday, to train/ be coached into a system designed to open opportunities to dictate tempo and Score goals, it should be a easy decision, it’s either onside or not, so 30 secs, F**k the lines, give the benefit of doubt to the attacking team, if it’s tight 30 secs to prove offside, simples!!


More goals, better entertainment less PGMOL involvement, more fun, happier fans, less frustration, More Goals….Repeat !!!


YNWA

Even better just ditch it altogether. Back in the day when I actually went to the match*...I don't ever remember coming out the ground and discussing the accuracy (or otherwise) of referees and linesmen ( and they were lines-men back then). We just accepted decisions (for and against) and moved on.
* Funny how times change...these days I wouldn't go to a match even if they sent a chauffeur driven limousine and a free seat in the main stand sitting next to Ian Rush.

I think VAR should be timed, say 30 secs to prove its on/ off side, if by 30 secs there’s no decision we stick with the on field referees decision, like in the good old days when we were VAR free, some will go for you some won’t, what we’re forgetting here is Football is entertainment, ppl paying top dollar want top entertainment, the whole point being scoring goals to bring about total satisfaction,

We’ve/We’re losing the value by NOT allowing goals, diminishing said entertainment, which ppl pay top dollar for, yet here we are allowing a body of self serving officials who for the most part have never kicked a ball on a professional level, or any level for some, to dictate to those who have played, understood , know exactly what it is like emotionally to score or be denied a goal,  that feeling of elation, or deflation, referees are dead to this emotion so means F**k all to them and they are simply applying the rules as they see fit,

Strikers don’t get 30 secs to make a decision whether to shoot or not, defenders don’t get 30 secs to decide if he has to make that tackle, so why do VAR Officials need so long to look at, on many angles slowed down so it always looks worse, draw imaginary lines to establish distances in millimetres either way, all in the name of fairness,

If it’s that f***in close where’s the benefit of doubt for the attacking team, scoring goals is the reward, that’s what the players train hard for everyday, to train/ be coached into a system designed to open opportunities to dictate tempo and Score goals, it should be a easy decision, it’s either onside or not, so 30 secs, F**k the lines, give the benefit of doubt to the attacking team, if it’s tight 30 secs to prove offside, simples!!


More goals, better entertainment less PGMOL involvement, more fun, happier fans, less frustration, More Goals….Repeat !!!


YNWA

Agree the benefit of the doubt should go to the attacking side. The offside rule was designed to stop teams leaving a poacher standing on the 6 yard line and hoofing balls up to him. This scratching around for ages trying to find a way of ruling goals out cos somebody might have been a millimetre behind a defender is a joyless, jobsworth approach to the game.

Don't agree on a 30 second rule though. Inevitably there'd be loads of calls that would be shown later to be incorrect cos the official didn't get his lines drawn in time. Then we'd all be up in arms about what took them so long, and how they'd have drawn them quicker if it was to chalk off a gosl against City etc. (Well those who think bias can't apply to referees wouldn't but the rest of us would, including me.)

The solution for quicker decisions is either to get in the semi-automated VAR (which would also presumably reduce opportunities for bias, since you would think it would follow the same process each time rather than making it up as they go along as seems to be the case now), or scrap it altogether.

Why do you continue argue/debate with those that wear rose tints, don’t you get fed up of flogging a dead horse Pj ?

Why do you persist with the same biased rose tinted bollix nobody cares but you have befriended the forums ,.......


You can fill in the blank but change the record

Why do you persist with the same biased rose tinted bollix nobody cares but you have befriended the forums ,.......


You can fill in the blank but change the record

Walt we all have friends on here that some get on with and some don’t, you get on with a couple that don’t like me and visa versa. I’ve had my issues with Pj in the passed just like yourself, you choose to block but I don’t.

We all chat sh*te sometimes, even me 😂 I choose to move on and try not take it personally. We all have are own way of dealing with it. If I can take London Red you should be able to take anyone. 

Walt we all have friends on here that some get on with and some don’t, you get on with a couple that don’t like me and visa versa. I’ve had my issues with Pj in the passed just like yourself, you choose to block but I don’t.

We all chat sh*te sometimes, even me 😂 I choose to move on and try not take it personally. We all have are own way of dealing with it. If I can take London Red you should be able to take anyone. 

Blocking peeps on a public forum is the pits 

Take all in. Or none...

Blocking peeps on a public forum is the pits 

Take all in. Or none...

You’re blocked can’t read your post 

Blocking peeps on a public forum is the pits 

Take all in. Or none...

Some prefer to just surround themselves with people who won’t challenge them

Walt we all have friends on here that some get on with and some don’t, you get on with a couple that don’t like me and visa versa. I’ve had my issues with Pj in the passed just like yourself, you choose to block but I don’t.
 
We all chat sh*te sometimes, even me 😂 I choose to move on and try not take it personally. We all have are own way of dealing with it. If I can take London Red you should be able to take anyone. 

I agree, I don’t normally admit this but after talking to you I have to go and rim a tramp’s arsehole just to get rid of the taste of a Fat Mancunian dipshit   🖕🖕🏿🖕🖕🏿🖕🖕🏿🖕🖕🏿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

Some prefer to just surround themselves with people who won’t challenge them

That's probably it LiP me auld pal. Hope you had a nice Christmas by the way... 

What other game this season has VAR gone so far back to  review a goal in an attempt to cancel a goal it was ridiculous both how far back and how long the took to review the goal “ just plain bent “ reffing they are killing football

What other game this season has VAR gone so far back to  review a goal in an attempt to cancel a goal it was ridiculous both how far back and how long the took to review the goal “ just plain bent “ reffing they are killing football

Most of the VAR reviews for offsides will go though a number of phases 🤷‍♂️

I wouldnt say the refs are corrupt, they are F***ing rubbish though.

Pretty much where I've always been on this debate as well.