Prem Officiating Abomination Journal 24/25

[squidsworth]

2 minutes ago, Foxdiamond said:

Not good enough angle to reverse the on field decision imo

Yeah that's what the tech says one way or another, thought it didn't need manual / corruption to decide? Hold on though, this took two minutes for 'officials' to reach a decision. Not even sure right lines drawn. Official on field was right, offside. They corruption takes its hand. It's not even fair, PL as corrupt as you could think. 

[dylanlegend]

Richest league in the world and they are checking VAR angles with the most dodgy side view, surely there is enough money to get a better view of the pitch at 40 differnet side viewpoints of the pitch. In the euros there was a semi-automated system. Why does VAR in the EPL seem so amateur? 

[katieakita]

Well that is 2 points for a start we have been docked. For a multi billion pound industry it is pretty poor that no camera angle can confirm the guy was onside 

[trabuch]

Just now, katieakita said:

Well that is 2 points for a start we have been docked. For a multi billion pound industry it is pretty poor that no camera angle can confirm the guy was onside 

If that is the case - and it was - how do they over rule the original decision? It's ****ing bent (like their lines)

[kyleolly]

6 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

 

Can you be offside if the ball is passed backwards? Yes, it is possible to be judged offside if the ball is passed backwards, as long as the player who receives the ball is in front of it when it is initially passed. For this to happen, the ball must deflect off a defender and into their path.

 

And where was the deflection

[lcfcbluearmy]

20 minutes ago, funkyrobot said:

Ball doesn’t have to go forward to be offside. You can be offside from a backwards pass.

Not really well only if you were in front of the ball when it was played and came back to get it 

[squidsworth]

1 minute ago, katieakita said:

Well that is 2 points for a start we have been docked. For a multi billion pound industry it is pretty poor that no camera angle can confirm the guy was onside 

So unless it's obviously wrong, on field decision stands, so much tech exists to say offside or not, but this was manual intervention. Not only that, no one could see how he was onside, lines drawn. Just corruption my friend... I'll let them review that in court. 

 

[funkyrobot]

5 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

 

Can you be offside if the ball is passed backwards? Yes, it is possible to be judged offside if the ball is passed backwards, as long as the player who receives the ball is in front of it when it is initially passed. For this to happen, the ball must deflect off a defender and into their path.

 

The ball can go backwards and not touch a defender and still mean a player is offside. As long as it fits the criteria of offside when the ball is played. - ie the ball is received by a player who is ahead of the player that’s passed it to him and ahead of the last line of defence when the ball leaves the passers foot, then they are offside whether the ball is passed in a forwards, sideways or backwards direction. 

[funkyrobot]

6 minutes ago, lcfcbluearmy said:

Not really well only if you were in front of the ball when it was played and came back to get it 

You’ve said not really and then contradicted yourself. The fact is you can be offside from a pass that goes backwards. 

[funkyrobot]

9 minutes ago, kyleolly said:

And where was the deflection

There doesn’t need to be a deflection. 

[squidsworth]

FFS, just look at the replay. Was he onside or not? Everybody seen he offside, some well shit dodgy line try to say onside. Nobody with their eyes could see that.

[Foxdiamond]

12 minutes ago, squidsworth said:

FFS, just look at the replay. Was he onside or not? Everybody seen he offside, some well shit dodgy line try to say onside. Nobody with their eyes could see that.

Nothing clear or fair to cancel original offside. Var ref bent over backwards to overrule without justification 

[Cincinnati Fox]

3 hours ago, ronnup said:

Hes on side. Move on

 

No, he was offside

[Sol thewall Bamba]

LCFC voted to keep VAR this summer remember

[Hollism]

The bigger issue for me is the lack of camera angles available at Selhurst. It’s common knowledge that EFL don’t have VAR or GLT because it costs £250k-500k to install. So how have they spent that much money at Palace to have to use a camera near the halfway line to judge an offside?

[foxes_rule1978]

Seems to me that was very dodgy, if it was hard to determine offside or not because the angle available is poor then the on field decision should have been taken. 

[whoareyaaa]

I thought they was given the on field refs more power so when the linesman called the on field decision even though they couldn't be 100% certain they still over ruled it.

 

Like I said when they first announced this new power, they can bend the rules how they see fit.

Edited Sunday at 11:58 by whoareyaaa

[adejo92]

It's not like it's even one of those close ones where you need 8 angles and 32 lines.

 

He's quite clearly offside without the need for VAR. The fact that VAR have somehow come to a decision using only 1 line and the 1 angle is baffling, almost comical. Like how stupid do they really think we are?

[st albans fox]

The lack of an angle should make no difference to the tech 

The var is supposed to freeze the frame as the ball is played ( he got this wrong imo) and then just marks the furthest point forward on mateta’s body and back on Justin’s 

the tech does the rest 

what we haven’t seen is where mateta’s body has been marked. The incorrect freeze frame also extended the point backwards where JJ’s foot is . 

[foxinsocks]

There us no way the var had a view that could counter the onfield decision. If var can't decide (as in this case) then it should be the on field decision.

 

Frankly even with the line it looked offside.  So they need to look at what went on here.

[The Doctor]

16 hours ago, squidsworth said:

Onside my arse, that was literally pl punishing us for shitting on their rules. Apparently JJ dick hair played him on side. You'll never see that decision for us, the PREMIER LEAGUE ARE CORRUPT. See you inside the court house, counts. x

 

PGMOL and PL are two separate organisations, can we not do this "everything is a conspiracy" shit? like having El Empty back

[Lcfc82]

3 hours ago, st albans fox said:

The lack of an angle should make no difference to the tech 

The var is supposed to freeze the frame as the ball is played ( he got this wrong imo) and then just marks the furthest point forward on mateta’s body and back on Justin’s 

the tech does the rest 

what we haven’t seen is where mateta’s body has been marked. The incorrect freeze frame also extended the point backwards where JJ’s foot is . 

The angle does make a difference as from the angle that has been shown there is no way they can be certain what the furthest point forward of Mateta is. Without that they can’t have sufficient evidence to overturn the on field decision. 

[st albans fox]

10 minutes ago, Lcfc82 said:

The angle does make a difference as from the angle that has been shown there is no way they can be certain what the furthest point forward of Mateta is. Without that they can’t have sufficient evidence to overturn the on field decision. 

They just don’t the furthest point forward on mateta 

You could argue that they can’t know where that is without a better angle - but surely they can mark knee, head, shoulder in turn and see what that delivers on the lines 

I’ve no idea how they gave the decision yesterday - it could be that they marked JJ’s foot and then superimposed the green line across the pitch. They then looked at the other angle close up on mateta with that green line position taken across on the same frame to that image. The judgment being that mateta wasn’t close to it.  Looked a bit weird and if they’ve got the freeze point wrong then everything else is potentially wrong 

[Pita]

17 hours ago, katieakita said:

Well that is 2 points for a start we have been docked. For a multi billion pound industry it is pretty poor that no camera angle can confirm the guy was onside 

Only another 10 points to go then. Or maybe more 😳😳😳

[Bert]

6 hours ago, whoareyaaa said:

I thought they was given the on field refs more power so when the linesman called the on field decision even though they couldn't be 100% certain they still over ruled it.

 

Like I said when they first announced this new power, they can bend the rules how they see fit.

Not for “factual” - more closer to umpires call in cricket.