Technology in football

[AzzurroMark]

I know VAR causes a lot of heated debate, but there are times when it can/could be useful. Don't get me wrong as I'm no fan of it, however take a look back at Tuanzebe's first yellow on Saturday! Now while it was in no way, in many eyes, a yellow card offence, it was not until I saw the MOTD replays, in slow motion, that the pundits pointed out that Tuanzebe actually touched the ball first prior to the foul. Whilst a very harsh decision from the ref, he can't be blamed for not being able to see that challenge in real time.

Now to the point of my topic! No doubt technology is here to stay in officiating sport, but with semi-automated offside technology to be used for the first time (in the next round of the FA Cup) in English domestic football, how does everyone feel about it and also whether AI can be used to the greater good of the game, or not?

Do you see a time where AI is loaded with various parameters to make decisions, either separate or in assistance to human officials? Do we go one step further where human officiating at the top level becomes almost irrelevant? I sincerely hope not, but then again at times it is perhaps hard to argue against it, even more so when there is apparently a dwindling number of people (especially at a lower level) wanting to become matchday officials.

I think for me personally could a VAR review panel look at contentious issues post-match or does that just serve to muddy the waters? Let's go back to Tuanzebe, seeing where he was placed (pretty centrally) for both yellow cards, could his presence have prevented Phillips (being in a similar position) conceding the free kick which lead to the equaliser? Could we have gone on to win the game with 11 men? Nothing changes the result and possibly Ipswich could appeal the first yellow card, though I doubt it. My point is that a review panel could have overruled the first yellow afterwards, meaning we didn't have to lose one of our most experienced players for the Spurs game. While on the subject, how the hell did Konate avoid a 2nd yellow for Liverpool!

Take penalties as another example. Jota (whilst overturned by VAR) went down with no contact from the defender and should have been cautioned for it, but wasn't (blatant cheating deserves a straight red, if clearly proven, in my eyes. Could AI be programmed to decipher levels of player simulation, where the human eye possibly can't? I am pretty sure that a few decades ago you didn't see all of these players dragging a leg to initiate contact to win a foul/penalty. Now, to my annoyance, even the pundits are calling 'penalty' when years ago it would not have been the case.

Anyway, sorry for my ramblings. I guess my recent part-sabatical from posting has left me with too much time on my hands!

[The Odious Mr Rossi]

Whilst a very harsh decision from the ref, he can't be blamed for not being able to see that challenge in real time.

He can be blamed, however for being alongside the incident with an un-interrupted view and failing to see what happened, and he can be blamed for being too quick to show a yellow card.

Let's be honest here, Mark - if match officials did their jobs properly then VAR would be seldom required.

[marko69]

I know VAR causes a lot of heated debate, but there are times when it can/could be useful. Don't get me wrong as I'm no fan of it, however take a look back at Tuanzebe's first yellow on Saturday! Now while it was in no way, in many eyes, a yellow card offence, it was not until I saw the MOTD replays, in slow motion, that the pundits pointed out that Tuanzebe actually touched the ball first prior to the foul. Whilst a very harsh decision from the ref, he can't be blamed for not being able to see that challenge in real time.

Now to the point of my topic! No doubt technology is here to stay in officiating sport, but with semi-automated offside technology to be used for the first time (in the next round of the FA Cup) in English domestic football, how does everyone feel about it and also whether AI can be used to the greater good of the game, or not?

Do you see a time where AI is loaded with various parameters to make decisions, either separate or in assistance to human officials? Do we go one step further where human officiating at the top level becomes almost irrelevant? I sincerely hope not, but then again at times it is perhaps hard to argue against it, even more so when there is apparently a dwindling number of people (especially at a lower level) wanting to become matchday officials.

I think for me personally could a VAR review panel look at contentious issues post-match or does that just serve to muddy the waters? Let's go back to Tuanzebe, seeing where he was placed (pretty centrally) for both yellow cards, could his presence have prevented Phillips (being in a similar position) conceding the free kick which lead to the equaliser? Could we have gone on to win the game with 11 men? Nothing changes the result and possibly Ipswich could appeal the first yellow card, though I doubt it. My point is that a review panel could have overruled the first yellow afterwards, meaning we didn't have to lose one of our most experienced players for the Spurs game. While on the subject, how the hell did Konate avoid a 2nd yellow for Liverpool!

Take penalties as another example. Jota (whilst overturned by VAR) went down with no contact from the defender and should have been cautioned for it, but wasn't (blatant cheating deserves a straight red, if clearly proven, in my eyes. Could AI be programmed to decipher levels of player simulation, where the human eye possibly can't? I am pretty sure that a few decades ago you didn't see all of these players dragging a leg to initiate contact to win a foul/penalty. Now, to my annoyance, even the pundits are calling 'penalty' when years ago it would not have been the case.

Anyway, sorry for my ramblings. I guess my recent part-sabatical from posting has left me with too much time on my hands!

"WORD" on that part in massive blue......, maybe even a fine of one months wages like in some AFL cases. Gets that sorted out. And one more paragraph of wisdom from you and it's the "WORD" hattrick for the day!

And yep, I can see AI taking over completely in the years to come. My bro-in-law, a respiratory consultant in an English south coast hospital has already told us that large parts of his work is going to AI. He is financially loaded anyway but he is currently looking into opening a separate private consultancy practice in case the NHS one day decide that humans are OUT!
If the "AI" can diagnose "life" stuff, fairly certain it'll be able to watch sports and sort it all out.

The human race is FKD! But we did it to ourselves ....., even though most of us didn't ask for it.

[AzzurroMark]

Whilst a very harsh decision from the ref, he can't be blamed for not being able to see that challenge in real time.

He can be blamed, however for being alongside the incident with an un-interrupted view and failing to see what happened, and he can be blamed for being too quick to show a yellow card.

Let's be honest here, Mark - if match officials did their jobs properly then VAR would be seldom required.

Hence my 'very harsh' description. I only applied that thinking to the fact that the pundits on MOTD had slow motion replays to pick out Tuanzebe connecting with the ball, whereas the ref had one real time view, as you say. The referee definitely got it wrong with the yellow card. Despite being very well placed, as I can see from watching it again, different angles give different impressions. After showing the card, the referee, I noticed, raised two fingers as though to say it was his second poor challenge (in the ref's eyes, not mine I add).
The context of any post can be misread I know, but by the fact that I lead on the Tuanzebe incidents, I hoped it would come across that I considered it enough of a serious mistake to form the base of my 'technology in football' topic. Yes, the decision was wrong, yes, the ref is to blame for being too hasty to show a yellow, it is a Very minor defence to use "real time v slow motion replay" as the ONLY defence of his decision, apologies that I didn't explain it better!

[hallamblue]

Whilst a very harsh decision from the ref, he can't be blamed for not being able to see that challenge in real time.

He can be blamed, however for being alongside the incident with an un-interrupted view and failing to see what happened, and he can be blamed for being too quick to show a yellow card.

Let's be honest here, Mark - if match officials did their jobs properly then VAR would be seldom required.

...and let's not forget the much missed
" linesmen"..... between those two and the ref they effectively had a 1/3rd of the pitch to monitor. Not impossible. to manage....

[The Odious Mr Rossi]

Whilst a very harsh decision from the ref, he can't be blamed for not being able to see that challenge in real time.

He can be blamed, however for being alongside the incident with an un-interrupted view and failing to see what happened, and he can be blamed for being too quick to show a yellow card.

Let's be honest here, Mark - if match officials did their jobs properly then VAR would be seldom required.

Hence my 'very harsh' description. I only applied that thinking to the fact that the pundits on MOTD had slow motion replays to pick out Tuanzebe connecting with the ball, whereas the ref had one real time view, as you say. The referee definitely got it wrong with the yellow card. Despite being very well placed, as I can see from watching it again, different angles give different impressions. After showing the card, the referee, I noticed, raised two fingers as though to say it was his second poor challenge (in the ref's eyes, not mine I add).
The context of any post can be misread I know, but by the fact that I lead on the Tuanzebe incidents, I hoped it would come across that I considered it enough of a serious mistake to form the base of my 'technology in football' topic. Yes, the decision was wrong, yes, the ref is to blame for being too hasty to show a yellow, it is a Very minor defence to use "real time v slow motion replay" as the ONLY defence of his decision, apologies that I didn't explain it better!

I wasn't having a go at what you said at all, and I did get the gist of what you were saying .
I just get frustrated at the general p*ss poor quality of match officials (and I include 4th Referee and VAR in that). Nobody asks them to do the job - I think that most of them just see it as a far better way to make a living than shovelling sh*t or working at a McD. So if they want the job, why can't they do it properly?

[AzzurroMark]

He can be blamed, however for being alongside the incident with an un-interrupted view and failing to see what happened, and he can be blamed for being too quick to show a yellow card.

Let's be honest here, Mark - if match officials did their jobs properly then VAR would be seldom required.

Hence my 'very harsh' description. I only applied that thinking to the fact that the pundits on MOTD had slow motion replays to pick out Tuanzebe connecting with the ball, whereas the ref had one real time view, as you say. The referee definitely got it wrong with the yellow card. Despite being very well placed, as I can see from watching it again, different angles give different impressions. After showing the card, the referee, I noticed, raised two fingers as though to say it was his second poor challenge (in the ref's eyes, not mine I add).
The context of any post can be misread I know, but by the fact that I lead on the Tuanzebe incidents, I hoped it would come across that I considered it enough of a serious mistake to form the base of my 'technology in football' topic. Yes, the decision was wrong, yes, the ref is to blame for being too hasty to show a yellow, it is a Very minor defence to use "real time v slow motion replay" as the ONLY defence of his decision, apologies that I didn't explain it better!

I wasn't having a go at what you said at all, and I did get the gist of what you were saying .
I just get frustrated at the general p*ss poor quality of match officials (and I include 4th Referee and VAR in that). Nobody asks them to do the job - I think that most of them just see it as a far better way to make a living than shovelling sh*t or working at a McD. So if they want the job, why can't they do it properly?

Having posted about context in a post being misread, after posting my reply to you I thought perhaps I'd gone a bit too defensive! At heart I guess I realised you were not being critical of my opinion, but just the refereeing performance.
Hey, no harm done, didn't end in a dust up.