Well there you have it. Just look at that Wolves goal. All the geometry shapes being drawn on the screen - load of nonsense.
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is D... (U5901)
posted 4 hours, 1 minute ago
Well efficiency can certainly translate. Speed not so much. It depends whether you can live with 24 seconds on average in 30% of games. I can.
----------------------------------------------------
I was at the Etihad on Satyrday and the players had all returned to their own halves of the pitch ready to restart before Jesus's goal was disallowed.
Amazing they could do all that in 34 seconds.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Take off the time for the celebration. How long do you think it took from the point the goal went in and the point it showed no goal on the screen? The celebration occurs anyhow, so that is not time that would be 'saved'.
Everyone in stadium assumed it was a goal, the Spurs players were waiting to restart as there was only a couple of minutes left.
I had a conversation with the guy next to me about how long was left, fans were already leaving the ground because they assumed the game was as good as over.
It was anything but a spontaneous decision.
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is Dead (U5901)
posted 13 hours, 15 minutes ago
Everyone in stadium assumed it was a goal, the Spurs players were waiting to restart as there was only a couple of minutes left.
I had a conversation with the guy next to me about how long was left, fans were already leaving the ground because they assumed the game was as good as over.
It was anything but a spontaneous decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone in the stadium was wrong then.
I've seen dozens of games where people have left the stadium because they assumed a game was over with a couple of minutes left, only to miss 2 late goals that turned it around. This is the problem of the people who left.
I always wait to the end, personal choice but it was over 3 minutes before the game restarted.
Neil Swarbrick said this morning that it took 1.17 minutes for VAR to make the decision, why should it take that long if the referee has missed something that’s “clear and obvious”?
Sometimes it takes longer sometimes not.
What we should be looking at is the average time it takes to make a decision, not how long one incident took.
The officials are getting used to the system too. 1.17 minutes isn't too bad for starters. In future they should be able to do it much quicker as it becomes second nature.
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is D... (U5901)
posted 2 hours, 29 minutes ago
I always wait to the end, personal choice but it was over 3 minutes before the game restarted.
Neil Swarbrick said this morning that it took 1.17 minutes for VAR to make the decision, why should it take that long if the referee has missed something that’s “clear and obvious”?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Take off the 30 seconds given for the celebration and that's 47 seconds. I told you the average was 46, which you had an issue with.
It took 1.17 to make the decision, it didn’t include the time taken for the decision to be relayed to the ref or the time it took the ref to explain to the players
If you’re at home and it’s not your team you can go for a slash and make a cup of coffee, if you’re in a stadium and you still don’t get an explanation it’s a lot different
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is D... (U5901)
posted 51 minutes ago
It took 1.17 to make the decision, it didn’t include the time taken for the decision to be relayed to the ref or the time it took the ref to explain to the players
If you’re at home and it’s not your team you can go for a slash and make a cup of coffee, if you’re in a stadium and you still don’t get an explanation it’s a lot different
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps they should send out some cheerleaders or Delia Smith or something?
It took 1.17 to make the decision, it didn’t include the time taken for the decision to be relayed to the ref or the time it took the ref to explain to the players
=====
Link?
Last night was nothing short of ridiculous and if that is the best they can do then just get rid altogether. I'd be happy keeping it for handballs and actual fouls but looking for any sort of minute infraction shouldn't be the case.
comment by Klopptimus Prime - Die Unerträglichen (U1282)
posted 27 minutes ago
It took 1.17 to make the decision, it didn’t include the time taken for the decision to be relayed to the ref or the time it took the ref to explain to the players
=====
Link?
-------------------------------------
Radio 5Live podcast, Neil Swarbrick (Head of VAR) was the guest this morning between 08.00 and 09.00.
He also reckoned Rodri dived and wasn't pulled down by the neck by Lamela.
but looking for any sort of minute infraction shouldn't be the case.
=====
It clearly isn't IMO.
Boris... Fair enough.
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 1 day, 17 hours ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 1 hour, 37 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 3 seconds ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 43 seconds ago
Absolutely by the very letter of the current rule.
My argument is that it’s too harsh and wasn’t the original intent of the law. I get that’s not everyone’s view though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The exact intent of a law created 150 years ago won't be the same intent of what is required now. This law gave advantage to the defenders. 150 years ago you had to be behind three defenders, this changed to two decades later to two defenders, adjusting it slightly to favour attackers. I don't hear anybody complaining that it should still be three. In 1990 they adjusted it again, to favour attackers by saying level counted as onside. Now you want to adjust it again to say that you can actually be offside slightly. At this rate we'll have done away with offside altogether.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You made a really good point about that law change in 1990. That definition of being ‘level’ was what changed. When that was introduced, they wouldn’t have been thinking about VAR and being able to judge decisions and rule out goals for tiny margins.
So you’re absolutely right, the offside law needs to adapt and change with the times. Including adapting to the technology available to judge on those decisions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct, which it has done.
So we have a law that was brought in to favour the defending team, it has progressed over the years and now it is neutral. Not only that but we have technology to help with the difficult ones to judge. Job done.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We will see. Someone made an interesting point earlier about marginal calls evening themselves out. As in attacking teams will get the advantage of not being called offside when they’re just onside.
I don’t have any statistics for it but my feeling is that it hasn’t happened so far. It feels as though the defending team is getting more decisions going their way as it’s hard to stay exactly level with a defender while making a run with no part of tour body being offside. It will be interesting to see if attacking teams can adapt to this or whether this will favour defenders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You won't be able to notice it so far. With VAR linesman are instructed to ot flag unless they are absolutely certain it was offside. The reasoning being that VAR cant overturn a call that has already stopped play. So whilst you will notice the decisions where an offside is pulled back, you won't notice the opposite because that incorrect decision won't have happened and then been reversed because this isn't possible.
We don't know how many occasions there are where a linesman may have flagged before but is now instructed to keep the flag down. What I can say is that I haven't noticed any incorrect offsides that have been given so far this season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just on this, we would notice where borderline decisions have gone in favour of the attacking team as once the play is completed the linesmen raise their flag if they feel it is offside.
Obviously it’s early but I don’t think there have been many incidents were a borderline onside has been ruled offside by the linesmen only to be corrected by VAR.
That suggests that VAR has made those borderline calls more in favour of the defending team, I don’t know the reason for this. It’s been suggested by a few that it’s almost impossible to be ‘level’ anymore when it’s analysed in microscopic detail as some part of your body will more likely than not be slightiy in ahead of a defender, even by a toe. My feeling is that VAR has tipped the balance in favour of defenders on those borderline calls.
comment by RJC (U17308)
posted 14 hours, 37 minutes ago
Last night was nothing short of ridiculous and if that is the best they can do then just get rid altogether. I'd be happy keeping it for handballs and actual fouls but looking for any sort of minute infraction shouldn't be the case.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What happened last night?
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 8 hours, 5 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 1 day, 17 hours ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 1 hour, 37 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 3 seconds ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 43 seconds ago
Absolutely by the very letter of the current rule.
My argument is that it’s too harsh and wasn’t the original intent of the law. I get that’s not everyone’s view though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The exact intent of a law created 150 years ago won't be the same intent of what is required now. This law gave advantage to the defenders. 150 years ago you had to be behind three defenders, this changed to two decades later to two defenders, adjusting it slightly to favour attackers. I don't hear anybody complaining that it should still be three. In 1990 they adjusted it again, to favour attackers by saying level counted as onside. Now you want to adjust it again to say that you can actually be offside slightly. At this rate we'll have done away with offside altogether.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You made a really good point about that law change in 1990. That definition of being ‘level’ was what changed. When that was introduced, they wouldn’t have been thinking about VAR and being able to judge decisions and rule out goals for tiny margins.
So you’re absolutely right, the offside law needs to adapt and change with the times. Including adapting to the technology available to judge on those decisions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct, which it has done.
So we have a law that was brought in to favour the defending team, it has progressed over the years and now it is neutral. Not only that but we have technology to help with the difficult ones to judge. Job done.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We will see. Someone made an interesting point earlier about marginal calls evening themselves out. As in attacking teams will get the advantage of not being called offside when they’re just onside.
I don’t have any statistics for it but my feeling is that it hasn’t happened so far. It feels as though the defending team is getting more decisions going their way as it’s hard to stay exactly level with a defender while making a run with no part of tour body being offside. It will be interesting to see if attacking teams can adapt to this or whether this will favour defenders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You won't be able to notice it so far. With VAR linesman are instructed to ot flag unless they are absolutely certain it was offside. The reasoning being that VAR cant overturn a call that has already stopped play. So whilst you will notice the decisions where an offside is pulled back, you won't notice the opposite because that incorrect decision won't have happened and then been reversed because this isn't possible.
We don't know how many occasions there are where a linesman may have flagged before but is now instructed to keep the flag down. What I can say is that I haven't noticed any incorrect offsides that have been given so far this season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just on this, we would notice where borderline decisions have gone in favour of the attacking team as once the play is completed the linesmen raise their flag if they feel it is offside.
Obviously it’s early but I don’t think there have been many incidents were a borderline onside has been ruled offside by the linesmen only to be corrected by VAR.
That suggests that VAR has made those borderline calls more in favour of the defending team, I don’t know the reason for this. It’s been suggested by a few that it’s almost impossible to be ‘level’ anymore when it’s analysed in microscopic detail as some part of your body will more likely than not be slightiy in ahead of a defender, even by a toe. My feeling is that VAR has tipped the balance in favour of defenders on those borderline calls.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Off the top if my head, Iheaneacho for Leicester in the FA cup. One of the first VAR decisions in english football. I'm pretty sure it happened a couple of times in the various world cups.
Also, if the attack doesn't lead to a goal then even if the linesman flags, the ref will probably allow play on since the other team will have gained possession in order for the attack to break down. We are also unlikely to review in that scenario for that reason.
There is no evidence that VAR has tilted anything in favour of defenders. It is simply applying the law as written and intended.
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 40 minutes ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 8 hours, 5 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 1 day, 17 hours ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 1 hour, 37 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 3 seconds ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 43 seconds ago
Absolutely by the very letter of the current rule.
My argument is that it’s too harsh and wasn’t the original intent of the law. I get that’s not everyone’s view though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The exact intent of a law created 150 years ago won't be the same intent of what is required now. This law gave advantage to the defenders. 150 years ago you had to be behind three defenders, this changed to two decades later to two defenders, adjusting it slightly to favour attackers. I don't hear anybody complaining that it should still be three. In 1990 they adjusted it again, to favour attackers by saying level counted as onside. Now you want to adjust it again to say that you can actually be offside slightly. At this rate we'll have done away with offside altogether.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You made a really good point about that law change in 1990. That definition of being ‘level’ was what changed. When that was introduced, they wouldn’t have been thinking about VAR and being able to judge decisions and rule out goals for tiny margins.
So you’re absolutely right, the offside law needs to adapt and change with the times. Including adapting to the technology available to judge on those decisions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct, which it has done.
So we have a law that was brought in to favour the defending team, it has progressed over the years and now it is neutral. Not only that but we have technology to help with the difficult ones to judge. Job done.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We will see. Someone made an interesting point earlier about marginal calls evening themselves out. As in attacking teams will get the advantage of not being called offside when they’re just onside.
I don’t have any statistics for it but my feeling is that it hasn’t happened so far. It feels as though the defending team is getting more decisions going their way as it’s hard to stay exactly level with a defender while making a run with no part of tour body being offside. It will be interesting to see if attacking teams can adapt to this or whether this will favour defenders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You won't be able to notice it so far. With VAR linesman are instructed to ot flag unless they are absolutely certain it was offside. The reasoning being that VAR cant overturn a call that has already stopped play. So whilst you will notice the decisions where an offside is pulled back, you won't notice the opposite because that incorrect decision won't have happened and then been reversed because this isn't possible.
We don't know how many occasions there are where a linesman may have flagged before but is now instructed to keep the flag down. What I can say is that I haven't noticed any incorrect offsides that have been given so far this season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just on this, we would notice where borderline decisions have gone in favour of the attacking team as once the play is completed the linesmen raise their flag if they feel it is offside.
Obviously it’s early but I don’t think there have been many incidents were a borderline onside has been ruled offside by the linesmen only to be corrected by VAR.
That suggests that VAR has made those borderline calls more in favour of the defending team, I don’t know the reason for this. It’s been suggested by a few that it’s almost impossible to be ‘level’ anymore when it’s analysed in microscopic detail as some part of your body will more likely than not be slightiy in ahead of a defender, even by a toe. My feeling is that VAR has tipped the balance in favour of defenders on those borderline calls.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Off the top if my head, Iheaneacho for Leicester in the FA cup. One of the first VAR decisions in english football. I'm pretty sure it happened a couple of times in the various world cups.
Also, if the attack doesn't lead to a goal then even if the linesman flags, the ref will probably allow play on since the other team will have gained possession in order for the attack to break down. We are also unlikely to review in that scenario for that reason.
There is no evidence that VAR has tilted anything in favour of defenders. It is simply applying the law as written and intended.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Written yes, intended we’ll have to agree to disagree.
With laser technology they should be able to measure how far a player's nasal hair's offside to the nearest micron.
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is D... (U5901)
posted 4 minutes ago
With laser technology they should be able to measure how far a player's nasal hair's offside to the nearest micron.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What about the refraction from Ozil's eyes?
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is Dead (U5901)
posted 11 minutes ago
With laser technology they should be able to measure how far a player's nasal hair's offside to the nearest micron.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We’re not a million miles away from it!
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/var-premier-league-offside-raheem-sterling-bundesliga-mls-clear-and-obvious-a9056906.html%3famp
Another excellent article on the subject. Interesting that, due to margin of error, MLS uses an ‘umpires call’ for offside decisions that are not clear and obvious mistakes. Makes an awful lot of sense.
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 1 hour, 59 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 40 minutes ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 8 hours, 5 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 1 day, 17 hours ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 1 hour, 37 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 3 seconds ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 43 seconds ago
Absolutely by the very letter of the current rule.
My argument is that it’s too harsh and wasn’t the original intent of the law. I get that’s not everyone’s view though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The exact intent of a law created 150 years ago won't be the same intent of what is required now. This law gave advantage to the defenders. 150 years ago you had to be behind three defenders, this changed to two decades later to two defenders, adjusting it slightly to favour attackers. I don't hear anybody complaining that it should still be three. In 1990 they adjusted it again, to favour attackers by saying level counted as onside. Now you want to adjust it again to say that you can actually be offside slightly. At this rate we'll have done away with offside altogether.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You made a really good point about that law change in 1990. That definition of being ‘level’ was what changed. When that was introduced, they wouldn’t have been thinking about VAR and being able to judge decisions and rule out goals for tiny margins.
So you’re absolutely right, the offside law needs to adapt and change with the times. Including adapting to the technology available to judge on those decisions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct, which it has done.
So we have a law that was brought in to favour the defending team, it has progressed over the years and now it is neutral. Not only that but we have technology to help with the difficult ones to judge. Job done.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We will see. Someone made an interesting point earlier about marginal calls evening themselves out. As in attacking teams will get the advantage of not being called offside when they’re just onside.
I don’t have any statistics for it but my feeling is that it hasn’t happened so far. It feels as though the defending team is getting more decisions going their way as it’s hard to stay exactly level with a defender while making a run with no part of tour body being offside. It will be interesting to see if attacking teams can adapt to this or whether this will favour defenders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You won't be able to notice it so far. With VAR linesman are instructed to ot flag unless they are absolutely certain it was offside. The reasoning being that VAR cant overturn a call that has already stopped play. So whilst you will notice the decisions where an offside is pulled back, you won't notice the opposite because that incorrect decision won't have happened and then been reversed because this isn't possible.
We don't know how many occasions there are where a linesman may have flagged before but is now instructed to keep the flag down. What I can say is that I haven't noticed any incorrect offsides that have been given so far this season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just on this, we would notice where borderline decisions have gone in favour of the attacking team as once the play is completed the linesmen raise their flag if they feel it is offside.
Obviously it’s early but I don’t think there have been many incidents were a borderline onside has been ruled offside by the linesmen only to be corrected by VAR.
That suggests that VAR has made those borderline calls more in favour of the defending team, I don’t know the reason for this. It’s been suggested by a few that it’s almost impossible to be ‘level’ anymore when it’s analysed in microscopic detail as some part of your body will more likely than not be slightiy in ahead of a defender, even by a toe. My feeling is that VAR has tipped the balance in favour of defenders on those borderline calls.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Off the top if my head, Iheaneacho for Leicester in the FA cup. One of the first VAR decisions in english football. I'm pretty sure it happened a couple of times in the various world cups.
Also, if the attack doesn't lead to a goal then even if the linesman flags, the ref will probably allow play on since the other team will have gained possession in order for the attack to break down. We are also unlikely to review in that scenario for that reason.
There is no evidence that VAR has tilted anything in favour of defenders. It is simply applying the law as written and intended.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Written yes, intended we’ll have to agree to disagree.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you are saying that the people who created the rule wrote down something completely different from what they intended to write down?
The original rules never said anything about a player being penalised because his armpit is 2cm 'offside'.
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 23 minutes ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 1 hour, 59 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 40 minutes ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 8 hours, 5 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 1 day, 17 hours ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 1 hour, 37 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 3 seconds ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 43 seconds ago
Absolutely by the very letter of the current rule.
My argument is that it’s too harsh and wasn’t the original intent of the law. I get that’s not everyone’s view though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The exact intent of a law created 150 years ago won't be the same intent of what is required now. This law gave advantage to the defenders. 150 years ago you had to be behind three defenders, this changed to two decades later to two defenders, adjusting it slightly to favour attackers. I don't hear anybody complaining that it should still be three. In 1990 they adjusted it again, to favour attackers by saying level counted as onside. Now you want to adjust it again to say that you can actually be offside slightly. At this rate we'll have done away with offside altogether.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You made a really good point about that law change in 1990. That definition of being ‘level’ was what changed. When that was introduced, they wouldn’t have been thinking about VAR and being able to judge decisions and rule out goals for tiny margins.
So you’re absolutely right, the offside law needs to adapt and change with the times. Including adapting to the technology available to judge on those decisions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct, which it has done.
So we have a law that was brought in to favour the defending team, it has progressed over the years and now it is neutral. Not only that but we have technology to help with the difficult ones to judge. Job done.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We will see. Someone made an interesting point earlier about marginal calls evening themselves out. As in attacking teams will get the advantage of not being called offside when they’re just onside.
I don’t have any statistics for it but my feeling is that it hasn’t happened so far. It feels as though the defending team is getting more decisions going their way as it’s hard to stay exactly level with a defender while making a run with no part of tour body being offside. It will be interesting to see if attacking teams can adapt to this or whether this will favour defenders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You won't be able to notice it so far. With VAR linesman are instructed to ot flag unless they are absolutely certain it was offside. The reasoning being that VAR cant overturn a call that has already stopped play. So whilst you will notice the decisions where an offside is pulled back, you won't notice the opposite because that incorrect decision won't have happened and then been reversed because this isn't possible.
We don't know how many occasions there are where a linesman may have flagged before but is now instructed to keep the flag down. What I can say is that I haven't noticed any incorrect offsides that have been given so far this season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just on this, we would notice where borderline decisions have gone in favour of the attacking team as once the play is completed the linesmen raise their flag if they feel it is offside.
Obviously it’s early but I don’t think there have been many incidents were a borderline onside has been ruled offside by the linesmen only to be corrected by VAR.
That suggests that VAR has made those borderline calls more in favour of the defending team, I don’t know the reason for this. It’s been suggested by a few that it’s almost impossible to be ‘level’ anymore when it’s analysed in microscopic detail as some part of your body will more likely than not be slightiy in ahead of a defender, even by a toe. My feeling is that VAR has tipped the balance in favour of defenders on those borderline calls.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Off the top if my head, Iheaneacho for Leicester in the FA cup. One of the first VAR decisions in english football. I'm pretty sure it happened a couple of times in the various world cups.
Also, if the attack doesn't lead to a goal then even if the linesman flags, the ref will probably allow play on since the other team will have gained possession in order for the attack to break down. We are also unlikely to review in that scenario for that reason.
There is no evidence that VAR has tilted anything in favour of defenders. It is simply applying the law as written and intended.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Written yes, intended we’ll have to agree to disagree.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you are saying that the people who created the rule wrote down something completely different from what they intended to write down?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No they wrote it with no idea that VAR would judge by microscopic distances - we are working from the 1990 wording of the rule which was the last official change in the law itself rather than the various directions that assistant referees have been given the years since. VAR has changed the game where offside decisions are concerned.
The Times are reporting that IFAB are looking at reviewing the offside law in light of the Man City goal and similar incidents so there’s clearly something there.
Sign in if you want to comment
VAR IS The Issue
Page 7 of 8
6 | 7 | 8
posted on 19/8/19
Well there you have it. Just look at that Wolves goal. All the geometry shapes being drawn on the screen - load of nonsense.
posted on 19/8/19
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is D... (U5901)
posted 4 hours, 1 minute ago
Well efficiency can certainly translate. Speed not so much. It depends whether you can live with 24 seconds on average in 30% of games. I can.
----------------------------------------------------
I was at the Etihad on Satyrday and the players had all returned to their own halves of the pitch ready to restart before Jesus's goal was disallowed.
Amazing they could do all that in 34 seconds.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Take off the time for the celebration. How long do you think it took from the point the goal went in and the point it showed no goal on the screen? The celebration occurs anyhow, so that is not time that would be 'saved'.
posted on 19/8/19
Everyone in stadium assumed it was a goal, the Spurs players were waiting to restart as there was only a couple of minutes left.
I had a conversation with the guy next to me about how long was left, fans were already leaving the ground because they assumed the game was as good as over.
It was anything but a spontaneous decision.
posted on 20/8/19
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is Dead (U5901)
posted 13 hours, 15 minutes ago
Everyone in stadium assumed it was a goal, the Spurs players were waiting to restart as there was only a couple of minutes left.
I had a conversation with the guy next to me about how long was left, fans were already leaving the ground because they assumed the game was as good as over.
It was anything but a spontaneous decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone in the stadium was wrong then.
I've seen dozens of games where people have left the stadium because they assumed a game was over with a couple of minutes left, only to miss 2 late goals that turned it around. This is the problem of the people who left.
posted on 20/8/19
I always wait to the end, personal choice but it was over 3 minutes before the game restarted.
Neil Swarbrick said this morning that it took 1.17 minutes for VAR to make the decision, why should it take that long if the referee has missed something that’s “clear and obvious”?
posted on 20/8/19
Sometimes it takes longer sometimes not.
What we should be looking at is the average time it takes to make a decision, not how long one incident took.
The officials are getting used to the system too. 1.17 minutes isn't too bad for starters. In future they should be able to do it much quicker as it becomes second nature.
posted on 20/8/19
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is D... (U5901)
posted 2 hours, 29 minutes ago
I always wait to the end, personal choice but it was over 3 minutes before the game restarted.
Neil Swarbrick said this morning that it took 1.17 minutes for VAR to make the decision, why should it take that long if the referee has missed something that’s “clear and obvious”?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Take off the 30 seconds given for the celebration and that's 47 seconds. I told you the average was 46, which you had an issue with.
posted on 20/8/19
It took 1.17 to make the decision, it didn’t include the time taken for the decision to be relayed to the ref or the time it took the ref to explain to the players
If you’re at home and it’s not your team you can go for a slash and make a cup of coffee, if you’re in a stadium and you still don’t get an explanation it’s a lot different
posted on 20/8/19
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is D... (U5901)
posted 51 minutes ago
It took 1.17 to make the decision, it didn’t include the time taken for the decision to be relayed to the ref or the time it took the ref to explain to the players
If you’re at home and it’s not your team you can go for a slash and make a cup of coffee, if you’re in a stadium and you still don’t get an explanation it’s a lot different
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps they should send out some cheerleaders or Delia Smith or something?
posted on 20/8/19
It took 1.17 to make the decision, it didn’t include the time taken for the decision to be relayed to the ref or the time it took the ref to explain to the players
=====
Link?
posted on 20/8/19
Last night was nothing short of ridiculous and if that is the best they can do then just get rid altogether. I'd be happy keeping it for handballs and actual fouls but looking for any sort of minute infraction shouldn't be the case.
posted on 20/8/19
comment by Klopptimus Prime - Die Unerträglichen (U1282)
posted 27 minutes ago
It took 1.17 to make the decision, it didn’t include the time taken for the decision to be relayed to the ref or the time it took the ref to explain to the players
=====
Link?
-------------------------------------
Radio 5Live podcast, Neil Swarbrick (Head of VAR) was the guest this morning between 08.00 and 09.00.
He also reckoned Rodri dived and wasn't pulled down by the neck by Lamela.
posted on 20/8/19
but looking for any sort of minute infraction shouldn't be the case.
=====
It clearly isn't IMO.
Boris... Fair enough.
posted on 21/8/19
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 1 day, 17 hours ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 1 hour, 37 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 3 seconds ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 43 seconds ago
Absolutely by the very letter of the current rule.
My argument is that it’s too harsh and wasn’t the original intent of the law. I get that’s not everyone’s view though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The exact intent of a law created 150 years ago won't be the same intent of what is required now. This law gave advantage to the defenders. 150 years ago you had to be behind three defenders, this changed to two decades later to two defenders, adjusting it slightly to favour attackers. I don't hear anybody complaining that it should still be three. In 1990 they adjusted it again, to favour attackers by saying level counted as onside. Now you want to adjust it again to say that you can actually be offside slightly. At this rate we'll have done away with offside altogether.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You made a really good point about that law change in 1990. That definition of being ‘level’ was what changed. When that was introduced, they wouldn’t have been thinking about VAR and being able to judge decisions and rule out goals for tiny margins.
So you’re absolutely right, the offside law needs to adapt and change with the times. Including adapting to the technology available to judge on those decisions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct, which it has done.
So we have a law that was brought in to favour the defending team, it has progressed over the years and now it is neutral. Not only that but we have technology to help with the difficult ones to judge. Job done.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We will see. Someone made an interesting point earlier about marginal calls evening themselves out. As in attacking teams will get the advantage of not being called offside when they’re just onside.
I don’t have any statistics for it but my feeling is that it hasn’t happened so far. It feels as though the defending team is getting more decisions going their way as it’s hard to stay exactly level with a defender while making a run with no part of tour body being offside. It will be interesting to see if attacking teams can adapt to this or whether this will favour defenders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You won't be able to notice it so far. With VAR linesman are instructed to ot flag unless they are absolutely certain it was offside. The reasoning being that VAR cant overturn a call that has already stopped play. So whilst you will notice the decisions where an offside is pulled back, you won't notice the opposite because that incorrect decision won't have happened and then been reversed because this isn't possible.
We don't know how many occasions there are where a linesman may have flagged before but is now instructed to keep the flag down. What I can say is that I haven't noticed any incorrect offsides that have been given so far this season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just on this, we would notice where borderline decisions have gone in favour of the attacking team as once the play is completed the linesmen raise their flag if they feel it is offside.
Obviously it’s early but I don’t think there have been many incidents were a borderline onside has been ruled offside by the linesmen only to be corrected by VAR.
That suggests that VAR has made those borderline calls more in favour of the defending team, I don’t know the reason for this. It’s been suggested by a few that it’s almost impossible to be ‘level’ anymore when it’s analysed in microscopic detail as some part of your body will more likely than not be slightiy in ahead of a defender, even by a toe. My feeling is that VAR has tipped the balance in favour of defenders on those borderline calls.
posted on 21/8/19
comment by RJC (U17308)
posted 14 hours, 37 minutes ago
Last night was nothing short of ridiculous and if that is the best they can do then just get rid altogether. I'd be happy keeping it for handballs and actual fouls but looking for any sort of minute infraction shouldn't be the case.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What happened last night?
posted on 21/8/19
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 8 hours, 5 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 1 day, 17 hours ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 1 hour, 37 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 3 seconds ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 43 seconds ago
Absolutely by the very letter of the current rule.
My argument is that it’s too harsh and wasn’t the original intent of the law. I get that’s not everyone’s view though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The exact intent of a law created 150 years ago won't be the same intent of what is required now. This law gave advantage to the defenders. 150 years ago you had to be behind three defenders, this changed to two decades later to two defenders, adjusting it slightly to favour attackers. I don't hear anybody complaining that it should still be three. In 1990 they adjusted it again, to favour attackers by saying level counted as onside. Now you want to adjust it again to say that you can actually be offside slightly. At this rate we'll have done away with offside altogether.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You made a really good point about that law change in 1990. That definition of being ‘level’ was what changed. When that was introduced, they wouldn’t have been thinking about VAR and being able to judge decisions and rule out goals for tiny margins.
So you’re absolutely right, the offside law needs to adapt and change with the times. Including adapting to the technology available to judge on those decisions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct, which it has done.
So we have a law that was brought in to favour the defending team, it has progressed over the years and now it is neutral. Not only that but we have technology to help with the difficult ones to judge. Job done.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We will see. Someone made an interesting point earlier about marginal calls evening themselves out. As in attacking teams will get the advantage of not being called offside when they’re just onside.
I don’t have any statistics for it but my feeling is that it hasn’t happened so far. It feels as though the defending team is getting more decisions going their way as it’s hard to stay exactly level with a defender while making a run with no part of tour body being offside. It will be interesting to see if attacking teams can adapt to this or whether this will favour defenders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You won't be able to notice it so far. With VAR linesman are instructed to ot flag unless they are absolutely certain it was offside. The reasoning being that VAR cant overturn a call that has already stopped play. So whilst you will notice the decisions where an offside is pulled back, you won't notice the opposite because that incorrect decision won't have happened and then been reversed because this isn't possible.
We don't know how many occasions there are where a linesman may have flagged before but is now instructed to keep the flag down. What I can say is that I haven't noticed any incorrect offsides that have been given so far this season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just on this, we would notice where borderline decisions have gone in favour of the attacking team as once the play is completed the linesmen raise their flag if they feel it is offside.
Obviously it’s early but I don’t think there have been many incidents were a borderline onside has been ruled offside by the linesmen only to be corrected by VAR.
That suggests that VAR has made those borderline calls more in favour of the defending team, I don’t know the reason for this. It’s been suggested by a few that it’s almost impossible to be ‘level’ anymore when it’s analysed in microscopic detail as some part of your body will more likely than not be slightiy in ahead of a defender, even by a toe. My feeling is that VAR has tipped the balance in favour of defenders on those borderline calls.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Off the top if my head, Iheaneacho for Leicester in the FA cup. One of the first VAR decisions in english football. I'm pretty sure it happened a couple of times in the various world cups.
Also, if the attack doesn't lead to a goal then even if the linesman flags, the ref will probably allow play on since the other team will have gained possession in order for the attack to break down. We are also unlikely to review in that scenario for that reason.
There is no evidence that VAR has tilted anything in favour of defenders. It is simply applying the law as written and intended.
posted on 21/8/19
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 40 minutes ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 8 hours, 5 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 1 day, 17 hours ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 1 hour, 37 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 3 seconds ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 43 seconds ago
Absolutely by the very letter of the current rule.
My argument is that it’s too harsh and wasn’t the original intent of the law. I get that’s not everyone’s view though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The exact intent of a law created 150 years ago won't be the same intent of what is required now. This law gave advantage to the defenders. 150 years ago you had to be behind three defenders, this changed to two decades later to two defenders, adjusting it slightly to favour attackers. I don't hear anybody complaining that it should still be three. In 1990 they adjusted it again, to favour attackers by saying level counted as onside. Now you want to adjust it again to say that you can actually be offside slightly. At this rate we'll have done away with offside altogether.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You made a really good point about that law change in 1990. That definition of being ‘level’ was what changed. When that was introduced, they wouldn’t have been thinking about VAR and being able to judge decisions and rule out goals for tiny margins.
So you’re absolutely right, the offside law needs to adapt and change with the times. Including adapting to the technology available to judge on those decisions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct, which it has done.
So we have a law that was brought in to favour the defending team, it has progressed over the years and now it is neutral. Not only that but we have technology to help with the difficult ones to judge. Job done.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We will see. Someone made an interesting point earlier about marginal calls evening themselves out. As in attacking teams will get the advantage of not being called offside when they’re just onside.
I don’t have any statistics for it but my feeling is that it hasn’t happened so far. It feels as though the defending team is getting more decisions going their way as it’s hard to stay exactly level with a defender while making a run with no part of tour body being offside. It will be interesting to see if attacking teams can adapt to this or whether this will favour defenders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You won't be able to notice it so far. With VAR linesman are instructed to ot flag unless they are absolutely certain it was offside. The reasoning being that VAR cant overturn a call that has already stopped play. So whilst you will notice the decisions where an offside is pulled back, you won't notice the opposite because that incorrect decision won't have happened and then been reversed because this isn't possible.
We don't know how many occasions there are where a linesman may have flagged before but is now instructed to keep the flag down. What I can say is that I haven't noticed any incorrect offsides that have been given so far this season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just on this, we would notice where borderline decisions have gone in favour of the attacking team as once the play is completed the linesmen raise their flag if they feel it is offside.
Obviously it’s early but I don’t think there have been many incidents were a borderline onside has been ruled offside by the linesmen only to be corrected by VAR.
That suggests that VAR has made those borderline calls more in favour of the defending team, I don’t know the reason for this. It’s been suggested by a few that it’s almost impossible to be ‘level’ anymore when it’s analysed in microscopic detail as some part of your body will more likely than not be slightiy in ahead of a defender, even by a toe. My feeling is that VAR has tipped the balance in favour of defenders on those borderline calls.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Off the top if my head, Iheaneacho for Leicester in the FA cup. One of the first VAR decisions in english football. I'm pretty sure it happened a couple of times in the various world cups.
Also, if the attack doesn't lead to a goal then even if the linesman flags, the ref will probably allow play on since the other team will have gained possession in order for the attack to break down. We are also unlikely to review in that scenario for that reason.
There is no evidence that VAR has tilted anything in favour of defenders. It is simply applying the law as written and intended.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Written yes, intended we’ll have to agree to disagree.
posted on 21/8/19
With laser technology they should be able to measure how far a player's nasal hair's offside to the nearest micron.
posted on 21/8/19
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is D... (U5901)
posted 4 minutes ago
With laser technology they should be able to measure how far a player's nasal hair's offside to the nearest micron.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What about the refraction from Ozil's eyes?
posted on 21/8/19
Offside is offside.
posted on 21/8/19
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson - Football Is Dead (U5901)
posted 11 minutes ago
With laser technology they should be able to measure how far a player's nasal hair's offside to the nearest micron.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We’re not a million miles away from it!
posted on 21/8/19
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/var-premier-league-offside-raheem-sterling-bundesliga-mls-clear-and-obvious-a9056906.html%3famp
Another excellent article on the subject. Interesting that, due to margin of error, MLS uses an ‘umpires call’ for offside decisions that are not clear and obvious mistakes. Makes an awful lot of sense.
posted on 21/8/19
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 1 hour, 59 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 40 minutes ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 8 hours, 5 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 1 day, 17 hours ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 1 hour, 37 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 3 seconds ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 43 seconds ago
Absolutely by the very letter of the current rule.
My argument is that it’s too harsh and wasn’t the original intent of the law. I get that’s not everyone’s view though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The exact intent of a law created 150 years ago won't be the same intent of what is required now. This law gave advantage to the defenders. 150 years ago you had to be behind three defenders, this changed to two decades later to two defenders, adjusting it slightly to favour attackers. I don't hear anybody complaining that it should still be three. In 1990 they adjusted it again, to favour attackers by saying level counted as onside. Now you want to adjust it again to say that you can actually be offside slightly. At this rate we'll have done away with offside altogether.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You made a really good point about that law change in 1990. That definition of being ‘level’ was what changed. When that was introduced, they wouldn’t have been thinking about VAR and being able to judge decisions and rule out goals for tiny margins.
So you’re absolutely right, the offside law needs to adapt and change with the times. Including adapting to the technology available to judge on those decisions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct, which it has done.
So we have a law that was brought in to favour the defending team, it has progressed over the years and now it is neutral. Not only that but we have technology to help with the difficult ones to judge. Job done.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We will see. Someone made an interesting point earlier about marginal calls evening themselves out. As in attacking teams will get the advantage of not being called offside when they’re just onside.
I don’t have any statistics for it but my feeling is that it hasn’t happened so far. It feels as though the defending team is getting more decisions going their way as it’s hard to stay exactly level with a defender while making a run with no part of tour body being offside. It will be interesting to see if attacking teams can adapt to this or whether this will favour defenders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You won't be able to notice it so far. With VAR linesman are instructed to ot flag unless they are absolutely certain it was offside. The reasoning being that VAR cant overturn a call that has already stopped play. So whilst you will notice the decisions where an offside is pulled back, you won't notice the opposite because that incorrect decision won't have happened and then been reversed because this isn't possible.
We don't know how many occasions there are where a linesman may have flagged before but is now instructed to keep the flag down. What I can say is that I haven't noticed any incorrect offsides that have been given so far this season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just on this, we would notice where borderline decisions have gone in favour of the attacking team as once the play is completed the linesmen raise their flag if they feel it is offside.
Obviously it’s early but I don’t think there have been many incidents were a borderline onside has been ruled offside by the linesmen only to be corrected by VAR.
That suggests that VAR has made those borderline calls more in favour of the defending team, I don’t know the reason for this. It’s been suggested by a few that it’s almost impossible to be ‘level’ anymore when it’s analysed in microscopic detail as some part of your body will more likely than not be slightiy in ahead of a defender, even by a toe. My feeling is that VAR has tipped the balance in favour of defenders on those borderline calls.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Off the top if my head, Iheaneacho for Leicester in the FA cup. One of the first VAR decisions in english football. I'm pretty sure it happened a couple of times in the various world cups.
Also, if the attack doesn't lead to a goal then even if the linesman flags, the ref will probably allow play on since the other team will have gained possession in order for the attack to break down. We are also unlikely to review in that scenario for that reason.
There is no evidence that VAR has tilted anything in favour of defenders. It is simply applying the law as written and intended.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Written yes, intended we’ll have to agree to disagree.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you are saying that the people who created the rule wrote down something completely different from what they intended to write down?
posted on 21/8/19
The original rules never said anything about a player being penalised because his armpit is 2cm 'offside'.
posted on 21/8/19
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 23 minutes ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 1 hour, 59 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 40 minutes ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 8 hours, 5 minutes ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 1 day, 17 hours ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 1 hour, 37 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 3 seconds ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by JohnTerrysHardTackle - #Lampard211 (U1634)
posted 43 seconds ago
Absolutely by the very letter of the current rule.
My argument is that it’s too harsh and wasn’t the original intent of the law. I get that’s not everyone’s view though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The exact intent of a law created 150 years ago won't be the same intent of what is required now. This law gave advantage to the defenders. 150 years ago you had to be behind three defenders, this changed to two decades later to two defenders, adjusting it slightly to favour attackers. I don't hear anybody complaining that it should still be three. In 1990 they adjusted it again, to favour attackers by saying level counted as onside. Now you want to adjust it again to say that you can actually be offside slightly. At this rate we'll have done away with offside altogether.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You made a really good point about that law change in 1990. That definition of being ‘level’ was what changed. When that was introduced, they wouldn’t have been thinking about VAR and being able to judge decisions and rule out goals for tiny margins.
So you’re absolutely right, the offside law needs to adapt and change with the times. Including adapting to the technology available to judge on those decisions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct, which it has done.
So we have a law that was brought in to favour the defending team, it has progressed over the years and now it is neutral. Not only that but we have technology to help with the difficult ones to judge. Job done.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We will see. Someone made an interesting point earlier about marginal calls evening themselves out. As in attacking teams will get the advantage of not being called offside when they’re just onside.
I don’t have any statistics for it but my feeling is that it hasn’t happened so far. It feels as though the defending team is getting more decisions going their way as it’s hard to stay exactly level with a defender while making a run with no part of tour body being offside. It will be interesting to see if attacking teams can adapt to this or whether this will favour defenders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You won't be able to notice it so far. With VAR linesman are instructed to ot flag unless they are absolutely certain it was offside. The reasoning being that VAR cant overturn a call that has already stopped play. So whilst you will notice the decisions where an offside is pulled back, you won't notice the opposite because that incorrect decision won't have happened and then been reversed because this isn't possible.
We don't know how many occasions there are where a linesman may have flagged before but is now instructed to keep the flag down. What I can say is that I haven't noticed any incorrect offsides that have been given so far this season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just on this, we would notice where borderline decisions have gone in favour of the attacking team as once the play is completed the linesmen raise their flag if they feel it is offside.
Obviously it’s early but I don’t think there have been many incidents were a borderline onside has been ruled offside by the linesmen only to be corrected by VAR.
That suggests that VAR has made those borderline calls more in favour of the defending team, I don’t know the reason for this. It’s been suggested by a few that it’s almost impossible to be ‘level’ anymore when it’s analysed in microscopic detail as some part of your body will more likely than not be slightiy in ahead of a defender, even by a toe. My feeling is that VAR has tipped the balance in favour of defenders on those borderline calls.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Off the top if my head, Iheaneacho for Leicester in the FA cup. One of the first VAR decisions in english football. I'm pretty sure it happened a couple of times in the various world cups.
Also, if the attack doesn't lead to a goal then even if the linesman flags, the ref will probably allow play on since the other team will have gained possession in order for the attack to break down. We are also unlikely to review in that scenario for that reason.
There is no evidence that VAR has tilted anything in favour of defenders. It is simply applying the law as written and intended.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Written yes, intended we’ll have to agree to disagree.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you are saying that the people who created the rule wrote down something completely different from what they intended to write down?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No they wrote it with no idea that VAR would judge by microscopic distances - we are working from the 1990 wording of the rule which was the last official change in the law itself rather than the various directions that assistant referees have been given the years since. VAR has changed the game where offside decisions are concerned.
The Times are reporting that IFAB are looking at reviewing the offside law in light of the Man City goal and similar incidents so there’s clearly something there.
Page 7 of 8
6 | 7 | 8