Soccer Thread 2019-2020

[Lathum]

I enjoy having something on in the middle of the day to throw on. I have been betting on the matches, a small amount, and doing pretty well.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

I hate the piped in crowd though.

I haven't seen/heard it, hell I probably won't.

But I thought the espn article a couple weeks back about how that crowd noise is being done was pretty darned interesting fwiw

I mean, it may or may not work, but it sure seems like they're TRYING.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I haven't seen/heard it, hell I probably won't.

But I thought the espn article a couple weeks back about how that crowd noise is being done was pretty darned interesting fwiw

I mean, it may or may not work, but it sure seems like they're TRYING.

First, I have accepted that the game is behind closed doors. I don’t need them to try and convince me otherwise. The article you posted highlighted the second complaint. I would use a night club analogy. The songs they are playing may all be number one hits but the mixing abilities of the sounds DJ has me just standing against the wall and not on the dance floor. I am sure it works for some though.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

I don’t need them to try and convince me otherwise.

I'm not sure whether it has changed or not (since a couple weeks or so has passed since that article) but IIRC it mentioned how the sweetened audio feed was optional in Germany but was the feed used for international audiences.

I think you're probably in the minority of U.S. viewers that would be more thrown by the added audio than they would be with the game in virtual silence.

I have no real interest in watching anything where ambient sound is "normal" if it's played without an audience (wrestling taught me a lot about my personal reaction to that scenario). It feels so "off" that I can't get around how "off" it feels. I'm left somewhere between distracted & irritated, neither of which is a feeling I'm willing to voluntarily subject myself to.

The video game benchmark mentioned is the article was particularly interesting to me. I think that IS kind of the gauge for me about whether those enhancements are successful. There are sports games that use noise in a way that's inobtrusive, that it basically blends into the background. Where the epic fail button gets pushed is when its used in a way that feels off and breaks the immersion.

[bhlloy]

Yeah, I was pleasantly surprised by the Bundesliga games that had piped dynamic sound noise. With that and no empty crowd shots you could have convinced me of a sense of normalcy, which definitely isn't the case when you can hear every ball being kicked and every yell in high def. I agree with Jon, it's massively offputting and takes away from my enjoyment of the game.

[bhlloy]

So we welcome the premiership back to apparently find they forgot to turn the goal line technology back on. Michael Oliver has always been a shit referee though so no surprise it’s him on the end of it. Clear goal even to the naked eye.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

So we welcome the premiership back to apparently find they forgot to turn the goal line technology back on. Michael Oliver has always been a shit referee though so no surprise it’s him on the end of it. Clear goal even to the naked eye.

I mean... I don’t....the keeper was in side netting with the ball clutched to his chest.

[AlexB]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

So we welcome the premiership back to apparently find they forgot to turn the goal line technology back on. Michael Oliver has always been a shit referee though so no surprise it’s him on the end of it. Clear goal even to the naked eye.

Clearly a goal, but I think you’re being very harsh on Michael Oliver. The Villa defender was blocking his view, and if his watch says no goal and he can’t see, he can’t give it.

The assistant has a question to answer, and why VAR didn’t intervene? They’re fair questions.

[AlexB]

Dola, also don’t understand why they didn’t check the penalty to Sheffield United just after the restart for a blatant shirt pull, u less it was to even out the non-goal

[bhlloy]

Originally Posted by AlexB

Clearly a goal, but I think you’re being very harsh on Michael Oliver. The Villa defender was blocking his view, and if his watch says no goal and he can’t see, he can’t give it.

The assistant has a question to answer, and why VAR didn’t intervene? They’re fair questions.

Any referee at any level should have known what happened there and to go to VAR. It was blatantly obvious from player reactions and positioning what actually happened. I don’t know what the VAR protocol is and the technology clearly let him down but to just let the game go on is shocking, shocking refereeing.

Hawkeye has come out and said the cameras were occluded and didn’t catch it. With VAR not sure if it’s needed any more anyway. Clearly it can’t be relied on moving forward either way.

[AlexB]

The ref can’t decide to go to VAR, VAR has to alert the ref. It was a major balls up, but not Michael Oliver’s fault

[AlexB]

Out of interest, does the US feed have artificial crowd noise? It’s on two channels here, and I didn’t realise I had the option of stadium sounds / artificial crowd...

Started on the latter, but it is a little off, so thought I’d try the stadium sounds. Wow, 5 seconds later back to artificial crowd noise!!! Even just having a hubbub in the back is so much better than nothing.

[bhlloy]

Yeah, I don’t agree but maybe I’m wrong. My understanding is the referee has ultimate authority of what happens on the pitch. If it’s obvious technology has got it wrong, stop the game and figure it out.

I do agree, wtf was the assistant doing. I’d demote them both but that linesman definitely shouldn’t be anywhere near the prem ever again.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by AlexB

Out of interest, does the US feed have artificial crowd noise? It’s on two channels here, and I didn’t realise I had the option of stadium sounds / artificial crowd...

Started on the latter, but it is a little off, so thought I’d try the stadium sounds. Wow, 5 seconds later back to artificial crowd noise!!! Even just having a hubbub in the back is so much better than nothing.

I am watching through the NBC app. We have both feeds and I did the exact opposite of what you did. I haven’t had the courage to switch to the enhanced (with noise) feed during the current game. Natural sounds for me.

David Luiz is right on form straight from the start.

[AlexB]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

David Luiz is right on form straight from the start.

Sign of a player’s quality, he’s come back after three months and not skipped a beat

[bhlloy]

I’m watching the TV feed and don’t mind the crowd noise. I hate that they picked up the “obviously not live but let’s pretend it is” zoom fan reactions from the NFL draft though.

The look on Luiz’s face as he realized he’d done it yet again was priceless. Although he’s out of contract in 2 weeks so I doubt he’s overly bothered.

[AlexB]

David Luiz, why?

[kingfc22]

WTF Luiz. Why does he even dress?

[bhlloy]

At this rate Arteta will be playing next week

[AlexB]

Hawkeye apologises after goalline technology error denies Sheffield United - BBC Sport

[kingfc22]

That is one of the worst collisions I've seen on a soccer pitch.

[AlexB]

It was bad, but at least is was accidental.

Not sure if you’re aware of this from the 1982 World Cup, still one of the worst deliberate actions I’ve ever seen on a sports field

[miami_fan]

Have the players in all of the leagues that have restarted just decided they are not going to berate the match officials? I don't think I have seen a yellow card for dissent or even seen anyone curse the official out. Maybe the fans are bad influences on the players.

[AlexB]

Even when the goalline decision system didn't give the goal for Sheffield United, when Norwood went to the ref all he said was "Is it working", no histrionics. Also seems to be less playacting?

Maybe it is the crowd, and it's definitely good that there's more respect, but it's still stale without fans, even with the artificial crowd sounds

[AlexB]

Dola, not sure if you had Roy Keane at halftime on the international feed, but if not, Google his analysis of the Spurs goal. Best bit of Project Restart so far!

[AlexB]

Double Dola, Jon Moss is the worst top-flight ref I can remember

[miami_fan]

Even VAR is faster lol!

[kingfc22]

Arsenal extending Luiz’s contract by a season

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by kingfc22

Arsenal extending Luiz’s contract by a season

Maybe the Kroenkes forgot what team they were dealing with and are trying to get some cap relief for this season?

[SirFozzie]

Turner is out of the Champions League business, effective immediately.

[miami_fan]

That was Arsenal level defending by Manchester City.

[miami_fan]

I think there is a at least one Liverpool supporter down the street. Now sure who yet, but hearing YNWA being bellowed out by multiple male voices is my first clue.

Congrats Liverpool fans.

[AlexB]

Huge point for Leicester there, not sure we would have got it without the red card, but still only the second time in PL history we haven’t lost away at Arsenal. That’s our 2nd point since 1992 in this fixture!

It means realistically the worst we should finish is 6th, and I don’t see Arsenal getting ahead of us now. 4 points or more from the next two games against Sheffield United and Bournemouth and 5th looks promising

[miami_fan]

José Mourinho playing 9 men behind the ball for 75 minutes against that Bournemouth side should be a fire-able offense.

[miami_fan]

That is a brutal penalty against Aston Villa.

[Ksyrup]

Yep

[AlexB]

Another for the Jon Moss collection. He is the worst ref I can ever remember at top flight level.

On the other hand, the Villa sub may have the best name in the history of the Premier League: Indiana Vasiliev!

[Ksyrup]

What I hated about the decision is the whole clear and obvious error thing. When you see offsides ruling based on a fingernail and then other decisions allowed to stand because no obvious error, it makes no sense. Just decide to call it correctly or never overrule unless it was clear error. But doing both is a terrible way to decide games. And that goes for all sports replay systems.

[ISiddiqui]

Though offside based on a fingernail (well, toenail as fingernails don't count ) is clear and obvious. Now one can make the argument that the Prem's system tries to make an exact judgement when it does depend on when you stop the frame, but when you have a computer draw that line, there is a clear and obvious offside or no.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[Ksyrup]

The frame-by-frame analysis make it clear whether it is technically offsides but it's not clear and obvious if you have to go frame-by-frame. It's like a lot of baseball replays - they may be technically right but no one expected the most important part of a stolen base to be keeping the tag on the runner hoping he lifts off the bases for a split second.

[ISiddiqui]

I think that's a misunderstanding of the clear and obvious error standard. If the person is offside and you called it the other way then it is a clear and obvious error. The frame by frame analysis shows the clear and obvious error.

By that logic one couldn't look at any play in slow motion, even if the slow motion showed a foul that was not seen in real time (or vice versa, how many times has something looked like a foul in real time only to be seen in slow motion to not be a foul at all)

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[Ksyrup]

It's more about the role/usefulness of replay working in coordination with the way the sport is played. It's the point at which "getting it right" ruins the experience. Again, stolen bases in baseball are the perfect example, but offsides in the way it is getting called in a hyper-technical way only by use of replay is frustrating as well. I just don't think in either of those sports/scenarios, that was the intent.

The problem here is that they didn't/couldn't just look at the video and determine the right call. They had to manipulate the video further to determine the right call. That's not "clear and obvious." And then when you juxtapose that with some of the judgment calls that are being let stand under the guise of not being "clear and obvious" errors, they aren't consistently applying the standard. Either all calls are right or wrong without deference to the ref if there's judgment involved, or they must be truly clear and obvious errors in all cases. And again, if you're having to put up a line on a video because the video itself is unclear, that decision should stand under a clear and obvious standard.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

That's not "clear and obvious." And then when you juxtapose that with some of the judgment calls that are being let stand under the guise of not being "clear and obvious" errors, they aren't consistently applying the standard. Either all calls are right or wrong without deference to the ref if there's judgment involved, or they must be truly clear and obvious errors in all cases. And again, if you're having to put up a line on a video because the video itself is unclear, that decision should stand under a clear and obvious standard.

So once again, I think you are misinterpreting clear and obvious error, especially with respect to offside. If you draw a line and a toe is over, it's a clear and obvious error. Because the line shows they are offside and therefore the error is clear and it is obvious.

In a lot of other fouls, there isn't such a clear standard and it is based on referee judgement (how much contact is enough to be foul). Offside, as according to the Laws of the Game, has no judgement aspect involved - if any playing part of the body is beyond the second to last defender, you are off.

I will also note that sometimes reviews have taken a long time in order to judge if a foul was outside or inside the box. That's another issue where if the ref judges a foul, if it's inside the box there is no judgement after that. Therefore they take forever to determine that. That doesn't make it any less of a clear and obvious error if the ref originally judged the foul to be outside the box, but after super slow motion realizes that it was inside the box.

[Ksyrup]

And again, I'm talking about the role of video replay. By having to draw a line to determine the correct ruling, that means the video itself wasn't conclusive. That alone should render the on-field decision upheld.

[Ksyrup]

It's the difference between having sports played in a way in which it doesn't violate the spirit of what we want to watch and doing everything possible to split hairs to make sure the decision is correct. Having spent a number of years watching sports with replay, I've kinda evolved my position to a "law of diminishing returns" feel to the way replay is being used in a hyper-technical way - even if the answer is right.

For instance, I don't want to watch a debate about whether a runner is out at 1B by spending 4 minutes judging whether the ball hit the glove and was "caught" before the runner's foot hit the bag. It's technically possible to sit there and run the tape back and forth to a 1/1000th frame to decide the split second the catch was made. But it makes sports suck to take it to that level.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

And again, I'm talking about the role of video replay. By having to draw a line to determine the correct ruling, that means the video itself wasn't conclusive. That alone should render the on-field decision upheld.

As am I. Because being in an offside position is a non-judgement call, as per Laws of the Game, the line was developed to get it exactly right.

Now, like I said, one can argue that the line does not do that because of when it is drawn. One can also argue that maybe the offside law should have some element of judgment included within it. However, arguing that the line makes it not a clear and obvious error seems an utterly ridiculous argument to me.

[Ksyrup]

I understand the argument, but many of these calls are now being made that weren't being made prior to repay because they split hairs. It's fundamentally changing the game (as are calls in other sports) because they go beyond just what you can see in a replay, let alone in real time.

I guess the best way I'd explain it is winning the battle (a correct call) but losing the war (a bad sporting experience). If we want a system where every call is right no matter what, we need to rapidly progress to a system that removes refs because this mish-mash of hyper-technical decisions and letting other things stand even though they are wrong but not egregious just plain sucks as a sports viewer.

[AlexB]

I think the issue is that the ‘clear and obvious error’ was intended to refer to the ref/linesman missed something they clearly should have been able to see with the naked eye.

Being millimetres offside is not something that they should be able to see 100% of the time, but Imran is right, once you draw a line that shows the player was a millimetre offside, if you trust the tech, you can’t ignore it.

And even if you take the back foot of the forward, build in a margin of error through thicker lines, there will always be an incident where one line is 1mm ahead of the other, and the decision has to be made.

Offside is the one area where VAR works both brilliantly and terribly - it is definitive and inarguable, and at the same time is killing the game

[ISiddiqui]

IIRC, only the EPL uses the line. So the answer there, IMO, is to use VAR for offside like everyone else does - realize there can be some flaws with drawing the computer lines (mostly with the 'when') so just have the refs reanalyze the play from on field camera angles.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by AlexB

Offside is the one area where VAR works both brilliantly and terribly - it is definitive and inarguable, and at the same time is killing the game

Yes, this is a good summary. Again, I draw a comparison to the way baseball is being killed by decisions no one really wants even though they are right. I hate the base slide reviews so much that I would almost be for a rule that says all runners are safe as long as they beat the tag and didn't slide past the bag or make an attempt toward the next bag. Calling guys out who are safe but who lose contact with the bag for a split second while their body slides violently across the bag is totally not the intent of replay (except in obvious cases where the player slides past the bag). I see the offsides replay the same way.