Yes, and I understand those. The player could theoretically be one foot either ahead or behind the line on a marginal call. I guess I’m asking more why the pixels are inferior to the naked eye. There has to be some limit, why not use the best possible technology to determine where that limit should be?I provided some calculations upthread. The camera’s framerate creates uncertainty. Players and the ball can move on the order of more than a foot between stills. There does not seem to be a standard for what still is selected for the offside decision. Using pixels to determine offside is completely arbitrary. The uncertainty must be incorporated or it’s a total coin flip of a decision with no basis in fact.
Those close cases have to be decided one way or another. Is your view that they should be called goals (which I assume would get you thrown out of the GK union!), or based what what was first called by the official with the naked eye?