| A little var conspiracy theory 21:37 - Apr 30 with 1413 views | redrickstuhaart |
This semi automated stuff which uses cgi images to show the decision. Is it just to prevent fans actually seeing the real images and being able to make their own decisions?
First the lines have virtually disappeared, and now this. Its as if they want to ensure that decisions arent questioned... I dont trust it.
|  | | |  |
| A little var conspiracy theory on 21:42 - Apr 30 with 1362 views | blueasfook |
Is the VAR in the room with us now? |  |
| |
| A little var conspiracy theory on 21:44 - Apr 30 with 1349 views | J2BLUE |
Some nerd would have the computer generated image alongside the real image and it would be a massive scandal. |  |
| |
| A little var conspiracy theory on 21:51 - Apr 30 with 1290 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
You mean like the virtual tramlines/ball in tennis or Hawkeye in cricket for LBW? This is based on well established technology that was introduced 25 years ago, and is objective rather than fans’ often subjective assessments.
I really don’t get all these conspiracy theorist. It’s an aid that can improve decisions and lead to more consistent decisions once fully automated, as Hawkeye is in other sports (unlike VAR which still has a significant subjective element in the form of the 4th official). | | | |
| A little var conspiracy theory on 21:58 - Apr 30 with 1257 views | redrickstuhaart |
| A little var conspiracy theory on 21:51 - Apr 30 by SuffolkPunchFC |
You mean like the virtual tramlines/ball in tennis or Hawkeye in cricket for LBW? This is based on well established technology that was introduced 25 years ago, and is objective rather than fans’ often subjective assessments.
I really don’t get all these conspiracy theorist. It’s an aid that can improve decisions and lead to more consistent decisions once fully automated, as Hawkeye is in other sports (unlike VAR which still has a significant subjective element in the form of the 4th official). |
Hawkeye is one thing. How is this system projecting precisely where someone's knee is? Why cant we see the actual pictures anymore? Suddenly the arguments are gone. | | | |
| A little var conspiracy theory on 22:08 - Apr 30 with 1212 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
| A little var conspiracy theory on 21:58 - Apr 30 by redrickstuhaart |
Hawkeye is one thing. How is this system projecting precisely where someone's knee is? Why cant we see the actual pictures anymore? Suddenly the arguments are gone. |
It’s the same fundamental technology as Hawkeye, but evolved. I work with a similar technology called pose detection, which uses machine learning for modelling human movement and limb/skeletal mapping. Once rendered as a virtual representation of the human, you can select which elements of the virtual representation to show / use for your calculation. This is what is shown in the semi-automated offside visualisation - only the parts that are relevant to the conclusion, removing any distraction (or something that was obscuring the key element). | | | |
| A little var conspiracy theory on 22:50 - Apr 30 with 1095 views | redrickstuhaart |
| A little var conspiracy theory on 22:08 - Apr 30 by SuffolkPunchFC |
It’s the same fundamental technology as Hawkeye, but evolved. I work with a similar technology called pose detection, which uses machine learning for modelling human movement and limb/skeletal mapping. Once rendered as a virtual representation of the human, you can select which elements of the virtual representation to show / use for your calculation. This is what is shown in the semi-automated offside visualisation - only the parts that are relevant to the conclusion, removing any distraction (or something that was obscuring the key element). |
I want to see the photo. I dont trust them. Even if the tech is perfect, I dont trust them not to avoid controversy etc by making convenient decisions. | | | |
| A little var conspiracy theory on 23:19 - Apr 30 with 1031 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
| A little var conspiracy theory on 22:50 - Apr 30 by redrickstuhaart |
I want to see the photo. I dont trust them. Even if the tech is perfect, I dont trust them not to avoid controversy etc by making convenient decisions. |
Think about what you’re (on the face of it) saying though - that you want it to be subjective, making assumptions in many circumstances, leaving it open for argument. Sure, some are clear cut with an unhindered view, but often they’re not.
We had one earlier in the season, where other players in the picture were obscuring critical views of feet/leg/arm positions. This resulted in different conclusions, because different viewers made different assumptions about where an arm or leg that was hidden was in relation to the potentially offside player. So the discussion was inconclusive, and just allowed people to continue arguing if it was correct or not. There is nothing definitive about this situation, and it just leave everyone thinking was the right decision reached.
This technology allows objects that obscure critical information to be removed, and not distort the decision. It’s probably not 100% foolproof, but will offer better insight than pictures in situations as I’ve described above. So whereas pictures maybe get it right 90% of the time, this technology might make it 98%.
Of course, where people just distrust technology, no reasoned argument is going to convince otherwise. I see it as a tool to improve the accuracy of decisions, rather than a conspiricy designed to marginalise fans. YMMV. | | | |
| A little var conspiracy theory on 23:24 - Apr 30 with 1008 views | ronnyd |
Watched the highlights of Barca and Inter earlier. That disallowed goal for Inter near the end was ludicrous. As the comms said, about a bunion off. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| A little var conspiracy theory on 23:25 - Apr 30 with 997 views | redrickstuhaart |
| A little var conspiracy theory on 23:19 - Apr 30 by SuffolkPunchFC |
Think about what you’re (on the face of it) saying though - that you want it to be subjective, making assumptions in many circumstances, leaving it open for argument. Sure, some are clear cut with an unhindered view, but often they’re not.
We had one earlier in the season, where other players in the picture were obscuring critical views of feet/leg/arm positions. This resulted in different conclusions, because different viewers made different assumptions about where an arm or leg that was hidden was in relation to the potentially offside player. So the discussion was inconclusive, and just allowed people to continue arguing if it was correct or not. There is nothing definitive about this situation, and it just leave everyone thinking was the right decision reached.
This technology allows objects that obscure critical information to be removed, and not distort the decision. It’s probably not 100% foolproof, but will offer better insight than pictures in situations as I’ve described above. So whereas pictures maybe get it right 90% of the time, this technology might make it 98%.
Of course, where people just distrust technology, no reasoned argument is going to convince otherwise. I see it as a tool to improve the accuracy of decisions, rather than a conspiricy designed to marginalise fans. YMMV. |
I dont want it to be subjective. I want to see the actual evidence, not the CGId version.
If its inconclusive- fine. The on field decision remains.
I am not convinced of the tech. but more to the point, we cant trust the people adminstering it and making the decisions. Needs to be transparent. | | | |
| A little var conspiracy theory on 23:31 - Apr 30 with 979 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
| A little var conspiracy theory on 23:25 - Apr 30 by redrickstuhaart |
I dont want it to be subjective. I want to see the actual evidence, not the CGId version.
If its inconclusive- fine. The on field decision remains.
I am not convinced of the tech. but more to the point, we cant trust the people adminstering it and making the decisions. Needs to be transparent. |
That’s the whole point though - once it’s fully automated (it’s not there quite yet), like in tennis and cricket, there aren’t people involved in the decision. | | | |
| A little var conspiracy theory on 23:41 - Apr 30 with 957 views | redrickstuhaart |
| A little var conspiracy theory on 23:31 - Apr 30 by SuffolkPunchFC |
That’s the whole point though - once it’s fully automated (it’s not there quite yet), like in tennis and cricket, there aren’t people involved in the decision. |
Perhaps. Right now though, we have gone from seeing what the officials see and being able to assess it, to being presented with a stylised image which we are required to take on trust. | | | |
| A little var conspiracy theory on 23:49 - Apr 30 with 930 views | stonojnr |
| A little var conspiracy theory on 21:51 - Apr 30 by SuffolkPunchFC |
You mean like the virtual tramlines/ball in tennis or Hawkeye in cricket for LBW? This is based on well established technology that was introduced 25 years ago, and is objective rather than fans’ often subjective assessments.
I really don’t get all these conspiracy theorist. It’s an aid that can improve decisions and lead to more consistent decisions once fully automated, as Hawkeye is in other sports (unlike VAR which still has a significant subjective element in the form of the 4th official). |
tbf in LWB the hawkeye ball hitting the stumps part is a prediction, it cant show you something that hasnt happened, so it cant be described as an objective assessment | | | |
| A little var conspiracy theory on 08:21 - May 1 with 517 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
| A little var conspiracy theory on 23:49 - Apr 30 by stonojnr |
tbf in LWB the hawkeye ball hitting the stumps part is a prediction, it cant show you something that hasnt happened, so it cant be described as an objective assessment |
OBJECTIVE
adjective
(of a person or their judgement) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.
For LBW Hawkeye is 100% objective - no person is involved in the decision. Computer vision and set algorithms create the projection, and give a deterministic out or not out. Is it infallible? No, because, as you say, it’s a prediction - but one that is likely correct 99.9% of the time, and inevitably more reliably than the human eye - which is affected by judgement, and therefore influenced by subjectivity. It also eliminates the risk of bias. | | | |
| A little var conspiracy theory on 10:41 - May 1 with 303 views | Swansea_Blue |
Given that VAR was introduced because officials kept screwing up, and then we saw that the VAR started screwing up (same people, so no surprise), it does ask a lot to implicitly trust them. IMO, the more transparency the better. |  |
| |
| A little var conspiracy theory on 11:35 - May 1 with 190 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
| A little var conspiracy theory on 10:41 - May 1 by Swansea_Blue |
Given that VAR was introduced because officials kept screwing up, and then we saw that the VAR started screwing up (same people, so no surprise), it does ask a lot to implicitly trust them. IMO, the more transparency the better. |
Exactly this - people make mistakes, so take them out of the equation where possible. This is very much what Tennis and Cricket has done for some decisions, where technology can replace the flawed human input.
VAR in it's current form is still very dependent on a human interpreting the available information, with some aid from tools that the on-field ref doesn't have - but still ultimately flawed due to human limitations and unconscious bias. The decision has just been divided to involve more officials. IMO goal-line and offside decisions are ideal candidates for fully automated systems that can eliminate any mistakes or unconscious bias from officials, and should be capable of delivering that decision very quickly.
Of course that won't stop fans claiming that the technology got it wrong, but if it's a computer driven, automated system, then you finally have a level playing field for both teams, with no chance for officiating bias/interpretation to creep in. | | | |
| A little var conspiracy theory on 12:39 - May 1 with 115 views | monty_radio |
| A little var conspiracy theory on 23:24 - Apr 30 by ronnyd |
Watched the highlights of Barca and Inter earlier. That disallowed goal for Inter near the end was ludicrous. As the comms said, about a bunion off. |
If you use the technology, you get the precise call. If that seems harsh I suppose you could introduce, say, a 6 inch buffer zone in which you were on even when you were off. That would sure close off any debate! | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
