Venomous statement about VAR from F. Garden: Manipulations are legitimized

Fenerbahce Club, Galatasaray made a statement about the VAR’s decisions regarding the match.

In the statement of the yellow-blue people, titled “About the” VAR SYSTEM “that legitimizes manipulations”, concern was expressed about the VAR decisions.

Here is the statement made by Fenerbahçe from its official site;

We are making this statement with the responsibility of revealing concrete facts on behalf of the interests of both our club and Turkish football, after the events of the referee management, which we think affected the outcome of the match, which was revealed in the 24th week match of our team, the Super League.

In the 75th minute of the match, Ozan Tufanand our goal position, which was canceled on the grounds of “offside” as if missing goods from the fire within 30 seconds, and our sports commentators, our club and our fans could not make a clear decision about how it was offside, clearly revealed a fact.

This is real; Under the name of “VAR technology”, attempts to be introduced as “100% reliable”; However, it is the necessity to question the system, which can turn into a tool for legitimizing manipulations under inadequate or malicious hands.

The “legitimization of manipulation by unstable practices”, which we have tried to emphasize, sometimes manifests as “missed out of the agenda” by skipping a red card position or penalty, 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 technology used by the VAR system is the goal line technology, which is only shot and measured with cameras positioned at a vertical angle of 90 degrees to the goal lines.

2) Since the camera angles are not positioned at a vertical angle of 90 degrees to the last player in defense in all positions outside the goal line, it is fixed by the laws of physics that the lines drawn on the images taken with these angles are only and only a prediction modeling.

3) In this direction; While the lines are drawn to determine whether the positions are offside, the choices that are not part of a technology, completely belonging to the subjective choices of the referees and technicians at the head of the VAR system and directly affecting the results are listed below in order:

a) Deciding on which camera angle the line will be drawn on the shot from among the shots made with many cameras.

b) Deciding on exactly which millisecond the image will be stopped and the line will be drawn when the ball leaves the foot or body of the attacker who last played with the ball.

c) Determining and projecting the body parts of the defensive players and attacking players closest to the attacked goal that can play with the ball closest to the goal.

d) Application of lines to images

e) Displaying several different angled views on the same screen, where the moment of hitting the ball and the players’ lineup at this moment can be seen simultaneously in offside positions.

As can be clearly understood in the light of the above articles, the offside lines determined by VAR technology are not automatically determined with a software in a 100% reliable way, as they are trying to be introduced to the Turkish football public opinion. The results are determined as a result of the subjective selection of the referees and technicians at the head of the VAR system, and the issues such as the moment of the hit and the foremost limb are determined at their discretion.

At this point, we want to share the goals of Ozan Tufan regarding the subjective selection criteria listed above and some of the striking examples that came to the fore in our league this season with his pictures and show how the decision can be based on subjective criteria through subjective choices:

In the goal of Ozan Tufan, the camera angle is preferred from a rear angle instead of the goal line camera, making alignment difficult and a square where all the limbs of the players cannot be seen. Consequently, it is left to chance to reach the most accurate result by trying to determine from the rear image which player has a limb in the front.

– Again, in the same goal, we think it is not possible to determine the exact moment when Mesut Özil, who uses the standing ball, touches the ball from the wrong camera perspective. Whereas, in almost all offside positions, the screen is divided and the moment of the ball touched is shown with a simultaneous image, in this position, the VAR referee selection, which is a subjective data, is the only reality, using a frame where Mesut Özil’s foot is behind the ball and the full touch moment cannot be seen. imposed. This situation is one of the reasons for the question marks that arise in the minds of all Fenerbahçe people.

– Again, in one of the two incidents that took place in the Gaziantepspor Stadium in our league, Pelkas’s goal was canceled on the grounds of offside, while the opponent’s goal was determined as “not offside” with the VAR elections that we could not be convinced of.

He has emphasized many times from the very beginning that we support the VAR system and the innovations brought by technology; In addition to what we have experienced in previous seasons, although we did not show any reaction despite our team’s goals canceled by VAR this season, these non-standard practices, which attracted our attention with the Gaziantep match, and after the events on Saturday, question marks began to arise about this system and the officials who managed it.

We are waiting for our sincere criticism by sharing the images of the events we have summarized above with the public once again. According to the 3 images above, it is the fixed facts that the closest position according to the public opinion is scored for minutes and the other 2 positions are decided to be offside within 1 minute with very quick reviews and decisions. In this critical application, where even a punctuation is important, as you can see from the attached image, it is understood that at least 4 markings were made in Pelkas’ canceled goal, which will conflict with each other. Even this sampling undermines the trust of the entire public, especially us, Fenerbahce, to the system.

These manual and subjective touches make the identity, relationships and closeness of the people at the head of the VAR system more important.

We are sure that people who care about justice and fairness in the world of football will decipher any suspicious relationships sooner or later.

As long as Fenerbahçe exists, we will continue to struggle to create a football climate in which fair and decent people can speak freely.

In this direction; Fenerbahce Sport As the club; We hope that the implications of the words ‘He who adjusts the judges, becomes the champion’, voiced by a competitor’s manager in the early 2000s, are not valid for VAR referees today.

In order to prove this, we would like to emphasize that we will inform the society until the slightest question marks remain in the practices, and that we will equip all sports lovers, especially Fenerbahçe, with the equipment and perspective that they will demand the correct functioning of the order.

We are sure that when the football community has sufficient knowledge and equipment, our discomfort will be the point of view of every objective sports lover and then those who dare to subjective touches will not be able to stay in this game.

FENERBAHÇE SPORTS CLUB”