Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Since when has "common sense" come into any descision made by authorities of any description in situations like this?
The amount of time it took in the WFWC was beyond a joke - anyone would think they were choosing wallpaper for their lounge.
comment by it was hippo the whole time! it was a trick! - formerly definitely not hippo. (U1301)
posted 15 seconds ago
a bit of common sense would suggest that the player has gained no advantage for being offside?!
..............
?
"onside by the time they receive the ball"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah - not sure this is even implementable! Basically you are offside when the ball is passed but running back towards an on side position so that you are in an onside position when you receive the ball - there foe have gained no advantage!
comment by Σγωυσε - Γωγυ'σ Αρμυ (U9675)
posted 12 minutes ago
Since when has "common sense" come into any descision made by authorities of any description in situations like this?
The amount of time it took in the WFWC was beyond a joke - anyone would think they were choosing wallpaper for their lounge.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree - but really doesn't need to be that way - if its that hard to judge, stick with the on pitch ref!
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Every Ronaldo goal should be disallowed for offside - he such a narcissistic unt.
Doesn't matter what the original intent of the offside rule is, only what the rule is now. Big toe offside is offside. You can't turn around and say that it's only a wee bit offside. Its still offside.
VAR should not be about opinion but about fact. CLEAR fouls, CLEAR handballs CLEAR offsides- not these situations where a player may or may not have been touched, or where the ball brushes the top of a shoulder on the way down. It's developing into a farce.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by maybe it's hippo (U1301)
posted 37 minutes ago
i think there is no problem with var and 9 times out of 10 it gets us the correct decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Need to speed-up the process though.
Taking more than a minute is crazy though, (never mind 4 minutes plus). If it is that difficult to tell, just go with the original ref's decision.
I think they should get the right decision, in the few games it happens in where the call is tight and they have to watch it several times, so be it.
You cant just punish the team because it was tight. Also what is tight? 2cms? How do they judge that? They'd need to watch it several times to try judge it.
With offside for example, if it is offside it's offside, you shouldn't get a grace distance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gf2esnLYgo
you are wrong on this, check out ronaldo's goal at number 7 in the list.
he's offside when the ball is passed, is moving backwards and receives it while he is in line with the other players. so by your logic this should not be offside but clearly it is.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
?! No he's not moving backwards!
comment by Manfrombelmonty (U1705)
posted 2 hours, 26 minutes ago
Doesn't matter what the original intent of the offside rule is, only what the rule is now. Big toe offside is offside. You can't turn around and say that it's only a wee bit offside. Its still offside.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes for open play - i mean for VAR - if it's so close it takes a computer to work it out, then go with the original decision (which could be either way) - keep the human element of the game
comment by Eric_Draven (U20260)
posted 1 hour, 39 minutes ago
VAR should not be about opinion but about fact. CLEAR fouls, CLEAR handballs CLEAR offsides- not these situations where a player may or may not have been touched, or where the ball brushes the top of a shoulder on the way down. It's developing into a farce.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly - CLEAR - if it takes 10 people 10 mins of watching in tiny detail, then just crack on with the game and go with the original decision!
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 51 minutes ago
I think they should get the right decision, in the few games it happens in where the call is tight and they have to watch it several times, so be it.
You cant just punish the team because it was tight. Also what is tight? 2cms? How do they judge that? They'd need to watch it several times to try judge it.
With offside for example, if it is offside it's offside, you shouldn't get a grace distance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So VAR watch it for 5 mins, then the ref watches for another 5 mins and your still not sure - its a game with a flow, its just not worth it and destroys the game! It goes both ways for both teams!
comment by CutMeAndIBleedRed (U7593)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Manfrombelmonty (U1705)
posted 2 hours, 26 minutes ago
Doesn't matter what the original intent of the offside rule is, only what the rule is now. Big toe offside is offside. You can't turn around and say that it's only a wee bit offside. Its still offside.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes for open play - i mean for VAR - if it's so close it takes a computer to work it out, then go with the original decision (which could be either way) - keep the human element of the game
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the intent of VAR is to get decisions correct, we can't complain when they get the correct decision.
If you want the human element in the game, then don't adopt VAR.
It's daft to complain that an offside was given when a player was offside, no matter by how much or little.
comment by maybe it's hippo (U1301)
posted 1 hour, 55 minutes ago
i think there is no problem with var and 9 times out of 10 it gets us the correct decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That is the problem!!
9 times out of 10 ain't good enough.
Marginal offsides need scrapping altogether, that would help VAR get caught up in inconsistent decisions there. VAR is supposed to see off the ball incidents and to make certain what actually happened, not to penalise a player for having a knee cap in front of the defenders big toe
VAR still keeps the human element of the game. It’s not machines making the decisions.
The OPs suggestions are complicated and unnecessary. They won't help VAR, they'll just make it worse and more complicated. Not to mention they are not practicable.
comment by CutMeAndIBleedRed (U7593)
posted 5 hours, 52 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 51 minutes ago
I think they should get the right decision, in the few games it happens in where the call is tight and they have to watch it several times, so be it.
You cant just punish the team because it was tight. Also what is tight? 2cms? How do they judge that? They'd need to watch it several times to try judge it.
With offside for example, if it is offside it's offside, you shouldn't get a grace distance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So VAR watch it for 5 mins, then the ref watches for another 5 mins and your still not sure - its a game with a flow, its just not worth it and destroys the game! It goes both ways for both teams!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If it's taking ten minutes then something is clearly wrong and it's not the rules. We can watch replays in seconds and see if it's offside.
comment by Manfrombelmonty (U1705)
posted 17 hours, 34 minutes ago
comment by CutMeAndIBleedRed (U7593)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Manfrombelmonty (U1705)
posted 2 hours, 26 minutes ago
Doesn't matter what the original intent of the offside rule is, only what the rule is now. Big toe offside is offside. You can't turn around and say that it's only a wee bit offside. Its still offside.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes for open play - i mean for VAR - if it's so close it takes a computer to work it out, then go with the original decision (which could be either way) - keep the human element of the game
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the intent of VAR is to get decisions correct, we can't complain when they get the correct decision.
If you want the human element in the game, then don't adopt VAR.
It's daft to complain that an offside was given when a player was offside, no matter by how much or little.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I refer once again to cricket - this is exactly what they do - for lbw decisions that are too fine, they go with the on pitch umpire!
comment by Thörgen Kloppinson, First of mine own nameth, h'rald of demise, songbird of Asgard, defend'r/ protecteth'r of the weak and innocent, mast'r of disast'r, king of stingeth, dancing destroyeth'r and counteth of monte fisto (U1282)
posted 12 hours, 39 minutes ago
The OPs suggestions are complicated and unnecessary. They won't help VAR, they'll just make it worse and more complicated. Not to mention they are not practicable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How are they complicated?! If you have to watch it 50 times its too close to call so go with the original decision! The worse part about VAR is it takes way to long for very fine decisions - get rid of that and let the game flow!
Granted, the offside thing is a bit out there!
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 11 hours, 58 minutes ago
comment by CutMeAndIBleedRed (U7593)
posted 5 hours, 52 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 51 minutes ago
I think they should get the right decision, in the few games it happens in where the call is tight and they have to watch it several times, so be it.
You cant just punish the team because it was tight. Also what is tight? 2cms? How do they judge that? They'd need to watch it several times to try judge it.
With offside for example, if it is offside it's offside, you shouldn't get a grace distance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So VAR watch it for 5 mins, then the ref watches for another 5 mins and your still not sure - its a game with a flow, its just not worth it and destroys the game! It goes both ways for both teams!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If it's taking ten minutes then something is clearly wrong and it's not the rules. We can watch replays in seconds and see if it's offside.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes offsides you can - but not pen decisions! There are times where the cameras dont show it clearly enough - like England's women against USA! The ref alone must have watched it 30/40 times and you could see the pain on her face trying to work out which way to go! Just let the VAR ref decide - its either a clear pen or not!
Of course another option would be to go fully down the cricket/tennis route and give each team 5 reviews per game to use at their discretion.
comment by CutMeAndIBleedRed (U7593)
posted 19 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 11 hours, 58 minutes ago
comment by CutMeAndIBleedRed (U7593)
posted 5 hours, 52 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 51 minutes ago
I think they should get the right decision, in the few games it happens in where the call is tight and they have to watch it several times, so be it.
You cant just punish the team because it was tight. Also what is tight? 2cms? How do they judge that? They'd need to watch it several times to try judge it.
With offside for example, if it is offside it's offside, you shouldn't get a grace distance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So VAR watch it for 5 mins, then the ref watches for another 5 mins and your still not sure - its a game with a flow, its just not worth it and destroys the game! It goes both ways for both teams!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If it's taking ten minutes then something is clearly wrong and it's not the rules. We can watch replays in seconds and see if it's offside.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes offsides you can - but not pen decisions! There are times where the cameras dont show it clearly enough - like England's women against USA! The ref alone must have watched it 30/40 times and you could see the pain on her face trying to work out which way to go! Just let the VAR ref decide - its either a clear pen or not!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think the current logic is fine. VAR highlights if the referee has made an error, referee watches it then decides.
Sign in if you want to comment
VAR improvements
Page 1 of 2
posted on 10/7/19
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 10/7/19
Since when has "common sense" come into any descision made by authorities of any description in situations like this?
The amount of time it took in the WFWC was beyond a joke - anyone would think they were choosing wallpaper for their lounge.
posted on 10/7/19
comment by it was hippo the whole time! it was a trick! - formerly definitely not hippo. (U1301)
posted 15 seconds ago
a bit of common sense would suggest that the player has gained no advantage for being offside?!
..............
?
"onside by the time they receive the ball"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah - not sure this is even implementable! Basically you are offside when the ball is passed but running back towards an on side position so that you are in an onside position when you receive the ball - there foe have gained no advantage!
posted on 10/7/19
comment by Σγωυσε - Γωγυ'σ Αρμυ (U9675)
posted 12 minutes ago
Since when has "common sense" come into any descision made by authorities of any description in situations like this?
The amount of time it took in the WFWC was beyond a joke - anyone would think they were choosing wallpaper for their lounge.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree - but really doesn't need to be that way - if its that hard to judge, stick with the on pitch ref!
posted on 10/7/19
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 10/7/19
Every Ronaldo goal should be disallowed for offside - he such a narcissistic unt.
posted on 10/7/19
Doesn't matter what the original intent of the offside rule is, only what the rule is now. Big toe offside is offside. You can't turn around and say that it's only a wee bit offside. Its still offside.
posted on 10/7/19
VAR should not be about opinion but about fact. CLEAR fouls, CLEAR handballs CLEAR offsides- not these situations where a player may or may not have been touched, or where the ball brushes the top of a shoulder on the way down. It's developing into a farce.
posted on 10/7/19
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 10/7/19
comment by maybe it's hippo (U1301)
posted 37 minutes ago
i think there is no problem with var and 9 times out of 10 it gets us the correct decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Need to speed-up the process though.
Taking more than a minute is crazy though, (never mind 4 minutes plus). If it is that difficult to tell, just go with the original ref's decision.
posted on 10/7/19
I think they should get the right decision, in the few games it happens in where the call is tight and they have to watch it several times, so be it.
You cant just punish the team because it was tight. Also what is tight? 2cms? How do they judge that? They'd need to watch it several times to try judge it.
With offside for example, if it is offside it's offside, you shouldn't get a grace distance.
posted on 10/7/19
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gf2esnLYgo
you are wrong on this, check out ronaldo's goal at number 7 in the list.
he's offside when the ball is passed, is moving backwards and receives it while he is in line with the other players. so by your logic this should not be offside but clearly it is.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
?! No he's not moving backwards!
posted on 10/7/19
comment by Manfrombelmonty (U1705)
posted 2 hours, 26 minutes ago
Doesn't matter what the original intent of the offside rule is, only what the rule is now. Big toe offside is offside. You can't turn around and say that it's only a wee bit offside. Its still offside.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes for open play - i mean for VAR - if it's so close it takes a computer to work it out, then go with the original decision (which could be either way) - keep the human element of the game
posted on 10/7/19
comment by Eric_Draven (U20260)
posted 1 hour, 39 minutes ago
VAR should not be about opinion but about fact. CLEAR fouls, CLEAR handballs CLEAR offsides- not these situations where a player may or may not have been touched, or where the ball brushes the top of a shoulder on the way down. It's developing into a farce.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly - CLEAR - if it takes 10 people 10 mins of watching in tiny detail, then just crack on with the game and go with the original decision!
posted on 10/7/19
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 51 minutes ago
I think they should get the right decision, in the few games it happens in where the call is tight and they have to watch it several times, so be it.
You cant just punish the team because it was tight. Also what is tight? 2cms? How do they judge that? They'd need to watch it several times to try judge it.
With offside for example, if it is offside it's offside, you shouldn't get a grace distance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So VAR watch it for 5 mins, then the ref watches for another 5 mins and your still not sure - its a game with a flow, its just not worth it and destroys the game! It goes both ways for both teams!
posted on 10/7/19
comment by CutMeAndIBleedRed (U7593)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Manfrombelmonty (U1705)
posted 2 hours, 26 minutes ago
Doesn't matter what the original intent of the offside rule is, only what the rule is now. Big toe offside is offside. You can't turn around and say that it's only a wee bit offside. Its still offside.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes for open play - i mean for VAR - if it's so close it takes a computer to work it out, then go with the original decision (which could be either way) - keep the human element of the game
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the intent of VAR is to get decisions correct, we can't complain when they get the correct decision.
If you want the human element in the game, then don't adopt VAR.
It's daft to complain that an offside was given when a player was offside, no matter by how much or little.
posted on 10/7/19
comment by maybe it's hippo (U1301)
posted 1 hour, 55 minutes ago
i think there is no problem with var and 9 times out of 10 it gets us the correct decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That is the problem!!
9 times out of 10 ain't good enough.
Marginal offsides need scrapping altogether, that would help VAR get caught up in inconsistent decisions there. VAR is supposed to see off the ball incidents and to make certain what actually happened, not to penalise a player for having a knee cap in front of the defenders big toe
posted on 10/7/19
VAR still keeps the human element of the game. It’s not machines making the decisions.
posted on 10/7/19
The OPs suggestions are complicated and unnecessary. They won't help VAR, they'll just make it worse and more complicated. Not to mention they are not practicable.
posted on 10/7/19
comment by CutMeAndIBleedRed (U7593)
posted 5 hours, 52 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 51 minutes ago
I think they should get the right decision, in the few games it happens in where the call is tight and they have to watch it several times, so be it.
You cant just punish the team because it was tight. Also what is tight? 2cms? How do they judge that? They'd need to watch it several times to try judge it.
With offside for example, if it is offside it's offside, you shouldn't get a grace distance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So VAR watch it for 5 mins, then the ref watches for another 5 mins and your still not sure - its a game with a flow, its just not worth it and destroys the game! It goes both ways for both teams!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If it's taking ten minutes then something is clearly wrong and it's not the rules. We can watch replays in seconds and see if it's offside.
posted on 11/7/19
comment by Manfrombelmonty (U1705)
posted 17 hours, 34 minutes ago
comment by CutMeAndIBleedRed (U7593)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Manfrombelmonty (U1705)
posted 2 hours, 26 minutes ago
Doesn't matter what the original intent of the offside rule is, only what the rule is now. Big toe offside is offside. You can't turn around and say that it's only a wee bit offside. Its still offside.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes for open play - i mean for VAR - if it's so close it takes a computer to work it out, then go with the original decision (which could be either way) - keep the human element of the game
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the intent of VAR is to get decisions correct, we can't complain when they get the correct decision.
If you want the human element in the game, then don't adopt VAR.
It's daft to complain that an offside was given when a player was offside, no matter by how much or little.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I refer once again to cricket - this is exactly what they do - for lbw decisions that are too fine, they go with the on pitch umpire!
posted on 11/7/19
comment by Thörgen Kloppinson, First of mine own nameth, h'rald of demise, songbird of Asgard, defend'r/ protecteth'r of the weak and innocent, mast'r of disast'r, king of stingeth, dancing destroyeth'r and counteth of monte fisto (U1282)
posted 12 hours, 39 minutes ago
The OPs suggestions are complicated and unnecessary. They won't help VAR, they'll just make it worse and more complicated. Not to mention they are not practicable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How are they complicated?! If you have to watch it 50 times its too close to call so go with the original decision! The worse part about VAR is it takes way to long for very fine decisions - get rid of that and let the game flow!
Granted, the offside thing is a bit out there!
posted on 11/7/19
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 11 hours, 58 minutes ago
comment by CutMeAndIBleedRed (U7593)
posted 5 hours, 52 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 51 minutes ago
I think they should get the right decision, in the few games it happens in where the call is tight and they have to watch it several times, so be it.
You cant just punish the team because it was tight. Also what is tight? 2cms? How do they judge that? They'd need to watch it several times to try judge it.
With offside for example, if it is offside it's offside, you shouldn't get a grace distance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So VAR watch it for 5 mins, then the ref watches for another 5 mins and your still not sure - its a game with a flow, its just not worth it and destroys the game! It goes both ways for both teams!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If it's taking ten minutes then something is clearly wrong and it's not the rules. We can watch replays in seconds and see if it's offside.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes offsides you can - but not pen decisions! There are times where the cameras dont show it clearly enough - like England's women against USA! The ref alone must have watched it 30/40 times and you could see the pain on her face trying to work out which way to go! Just let the VAR ref decide - its either a clear pen or not!
posted on 11/7/19
Of course another option would be to go fully down the cricket/tennis route and give each team 5 reviews per game to use at their discretion.
posted on 11/7/19
comment by CutMeAndIBleedRed (U7593)
posted 19 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 11 hours, 58 minutes ago
comment by CutMeAndIBleedRed (U7593)
posted 5 hours, 52 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 51 minutes ago
I think they should get the right decision, in the few games it happens in where the call is tight and they have to watch it several times, so be it.
You cant just punish the team because it was tight. Also what is tight? 2cms? How do they judge that? They'd need to watch it several times to try judge it.
With offside for example, if it is offside it's offside, you shouldn't get a grace distance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So VAR watch it for 5 mins, then the ref watches for another 5 mins and your still not sure - its a game with a flow, its just not worth it and destroys the game! It goes both ways for both teams!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If it's taking ten minutes then something is clearly wrong and it's not the rules. We can watch replays in seconds and see if it's offside.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes offsides you can - but not pen decisions! There are times where the cameras dont show it clearly enough - like England's women against USA! The ref alone must have watched it 30/40 times and you could see the pain on her face trying to work out which way to go! Just let the VAR ref decide - its either a clear pen or not!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think the current logic is fine. VAR highlights if the referee has made an error, referee watches it then decides.
Page 1 of 2