The MIB and the SFA are at it…..again…
From Bhoy on CQN
CHAIRBHOY on
12TH NOVEMBER 2022 6:16 AM
Good Morning Celts – A Must Win Game Today, again…
Reading through the machinations surrounding Jota’s chalked off master goal, it’s interesting that some Celtic supporters and others are still of the view that Jota “could have been off side”, this is not the case.
VAR has to prove he was offside, if they can’t prove he was offside then the default was he is onside. It’s not up to the VAR to guess, in an offside situation it is a binary yes or no.
If it comes down to a subjective opinion then the decision has to be made by the referee, of course he can consult his assistant referee but ultimately he is the only one who can take a “subjective” decision.
The fact is the Hawkeye technology is designed to take out the guess work, if used properly it does.
Now one of the reasons that some think Jota “could be offside” is he’s leaning forward and his head is in advance of his body, that’s not the case and this exact phenomenon is known and is actually warned against in the EPL Q&A on VAR as follows…
… “the camera angle can make him appear to be further back or forward than he is in reality of the horizontal line drawn.
In the photo below, Eric Dier’s left knee is his body part that is furthest back, but the camera angle makes his head appear closer to the goalline.”
https://www.premierleague.com/news/1488423
If you look at the photo of Eric Dier you will see that the angle from the camera to his head is much tighter than the angle used in the Jota decision.
Now it begs the question, if the F.A. in England knew about this illusory effect, why didn’t the S.F.A. Officials?
We were told they got extensive training on VAR, they have had hours “playing” with the systems before they went live.
How come the SFA VAR didn’t know they couldn’t rely on such an angle from only one camera? That “gridline” photo that the VAR produced could not ascertain accurately if Jota was onside or not.
Now let’s run a few scenarios
No 1 – The VAR didn’t have the camera angles he required, due to failures with the broadcasters, he was lost for what to do and in the rush to get back to the referee produced an inaccurate and mistaken decision to go with a far off camera.
No 2 – The VAR did have a view from the camera he would typically use, he was pretty sure the attacker was offside (confirmation bias!? ) yet the angle he had was showing Jota onside, so needing to get back to the referee, he manipulated the view from another camera angle and produced what he thought was the right result
No 3 – The camera that the VAR was supposed to use had a photo, in the angle he had to work with it was showing Jota onside on crosshair line calibration, he didn’t want to confirm the onside and in effect “allow” a Celtic goal – knowing the illusory “Eric Dier” effect, he decided to go for another camera at an accute angle and go for gridline analysis as he could show Jota offside.
Now, we must consider that officials are normally given the benefit of the doubt – yet due to Scottish officials track record and the “statement” the SFA issued yesterday we must ask ourselves if they deserve any benefit of doubt for their excuses or whether their is collusion and a cover-up going on.
Do Scottish officials think it’s their job to stymie Celtic and give it’s closest opponent a carry cody!? Or are they just hugely incompetent.
Hail Hail
