[ad_1]
The Fenerbahçe statement is as follows:
“We make this statement with the responsibility of disclosing concrete facts on behalf of the interests of both our club and Turkish football, after the events of the arbitration management, which we believe affected the result of the match, which was revealed in week 24. match of our team, the Super League.
In the 75th minute of the match, our goal position recorded by Ozan Tufan and canceled in 30 seconds for “offside” reasons as if they were smuggling goods from the fire, and our sportscasters, our Club and our fans could not make clear decision on how he was offside clearly revealed a fact.
This is real; Under the name of “VAR technology” it is tried to be introduced as “100% reliable”; However, it is the need to question the system, which can become a tool to legitimize manipulations in the wrong or malicious hands.
The “legitimation of manipulation with unstable practices”, which we have tried to emphasize, is sometimes manifested as “omitted from the agenda” by skipping a red card or penalty position, and sometimes as “misrepresenting” an offside position .
On this occasion, we would like to present to the public how the VAR system is not based on automation as described and is open to manipulation, especially at the point of offside lines, with concrete examples and physical rules:
1) First of all, we would like to emphasize that the 100% reliable and objective line measurement technologies used by the VAR system are the goal line technology, which is only shot and measured with cameras positioned at a 90 degree vertical angle. with respect to the goal lines.
2) As the camera angles are not set at a 90 degree vertical angle to the last player on defense in all positions other than the goal line, the laws of physics dictate that the lines drawn on the images taken with these angles are only and only a prediction model.
3) In this direction; Although the lines are drawn to determine if the positions are out of play, the elections that are not part of a technology, belonging entirely to the subjective choices of the referees and technicians in charge of the VAR system and that directly affect the results are listed below in order:
a) Decide at which camera angle the line will be drawn in the shot from among shots taken with many cameras.
b) Decide exactly in what millisecond the image will stop and the line will be drawn when the ball leaves the foot or body of the attacker who last played with the ball.
c) Identify and create projections of the body parts of the defender and the attacking players closest to the attacked goal that can play with the ball closest to the goal.
d) Applying lines to images
e) Display of several different angled views on the same screen, in which the moment of hitting the ball and the line-ups of the players at that moment can be seen simultaneously in offside positions.
As can be clearly understood in light of the above elements, the offside lines determined by VAR technology are not automatically determined with software in a 100% reliable way as they are trying to present themselves to the football public opinion. Turkish. As a result of the subjective selection of the referees and technicians in charge of the VAR system, the results are determined, and matters such as the moment of the blow and the most forward limb are determined at their discretion.
At this point, we want to share Ozan Tufan’s goals in regards to the subjective selection criteria listed above and some of the striking examples that came to light in our league this season with his images and show how the decision can be based on criteria. subjective. with subjective choices:
