Confirmation about offside fouls

comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right... (U17054)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by JustYourAverageFan (U21016)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right; you have to be effective (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
“There was a theory no action could be taken because of the offside decision. However, while that would have prevented a penalty being awarded, it would not have stopped Pickford being shown a red card.”

Did you read the article?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the question is, why didn't happen then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the officials deemed the challenge not to be a red card offence. Obviously.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did they not already say the VAR team were concentrating on the offside and didn't look at the challenge? Thought I read that earlier.

Its like if there's a bad tackle say and the ref blows the whistle, then all the players mill into each other, if a player punches another player it thiabstage, after whistle is blown, he canstill be sent off

Yeah, the player can be sent off.

It’s happened in the past. But like Son Pickford will be disturbed and impacted by what has happened. He will need support just like Son and the other Spurs lad after they did Gomes.

comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right... (U17054)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by JustYourAverageFan (U21016)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right; you have to be effective (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
“There was a theory no action could be taken because of the offside decision. However, while that would have prevented a penalty being awarded, it would not have stopped Pickford being shown a red card.”

Did you read the article?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the question is, why didn't happen then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the officials deemed the challenge not to be a red card offence. Obviously.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did they not already say the VAR team were concentrating on the offside and didn't look at the challenge? Thought I read that earlier.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
“The FA determined the incident was seen at the time having consulted with the match officials, including VAR.“

And...

“As Van Dijk was being treated, the VAR noted it was checking for a 'possible penalty'.“

comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right; you have to be effective (U17054)
posted 44 minutes ago
comment by JustYourAverageFan (U21016)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right; you have to be effective (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
“There was a theory no action could be taken because of the offside decision. However, while that would have prevented a penalty being awarded, it would not have stopped Pickford being shown a red card.”

Did you read the article?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the question is, why didn't happen then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the officials deemed the challenge not to be a red card offence. Obviously.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They shouldn't be officiating a game of football then really.

comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right... (U17054)
posted 23 minutes ago
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right... (U17054)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by JustYourAverageFan (U21016)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right; you have to be effective (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
“There was a theory no action could be taken because of the offside decision. However, while that would have prevented a penalty being awarded, it would not have stopped Pickford being shown a red card.”

Did you read the article?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the question is, why didn't happen then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the officials deemed the challenge not to be a red card offence. Obviously.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did they not already say the VAR team were concentrating on the offside and didn't look at the challenge? Thought I read that earlier.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
“The FA determined the incident was seen at the time having consulted with the match officials, including VAR.“

And...

“As Van Dijk was being treated, the VAR noted it was checking for a 'possible penalty'.“
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ah ok

A few observations/thoughts:

- The published photo accompanying the tackle in question clearly shows that the ball was in play. I don't believe that Pickford intended the damage that was done.

- It is very unfortunate that Van Dijk was so seriously injured, however, he is a great and aggressive player. His aggressive play is what contributes to his value.

- Pickford has often been criticized for his erratic play, especially not properly commanding his penalty area. Did his seeing Van Ditk a few feet from the goal line influence his decision to make that tackle?

- Most importantly, we see the "off-side" rule playing a dominant role in the determination of a game! The goal did not count because it was deemed "off-side"!
The Pickford tackle has been reviewed and no further action is to be taken.

- VAR was implemented because it was thought to be superior to relying solely on the judgement of human officials. This was a split-second play and VAR, in conjunction with the human officials, seem to have gotten it right.

- Getting rid of VAR, or wanting it overhauled, is short-sighted especially when it is motivated by a decision that we don't like.

Not much talk of VAR being dispensed with.

It’s the incompetent refs that get to referee more than one match a day sat in a room of equipment they probably don’t know how to use that’s the problem.

when it is motivated by a decision that we don't like.

no need to get rid, but the decision was incorrect

comment by Taki Minamino (U20650)
posted 2 hours, 44 minutes ago
when it is motivated by a decision that we don't like.

no need to get rid, but the decision was incorrect
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Taki,
Honestly I'm not a fan of either team. However to simply say the decision(s) were wrong after VAR and the match officials ruled otherwise leaves little more to say. This officiating combination is the best we currently have.