comment by Metro.⚽️ (U6770)
posted 23 minutes ago
comment by Ji Sung Park's Cousin - Ole's joy Manticore (U2958)
posted 3 hours, 18 minutes ago
https://twitter.com/DaleJohnsonESPN/status/1230092230234378240
This thread sums it up... No more or less goals will be ruled offside by VAR... literally just moving the millimetre line
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Surely it’s better for the game if players are allowed to be 99% onside instead of 1% off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I see them as two separate points really.
1) How VAR is implemented for offsides and 2) Whether the current offside system is good enough, with or without VAR.
This rule change will not make any difference to the amount of VAR calls made, it's literally just moving a line.
Whether we should be looking at changing the offside rule is a different thing. I don't really think it was broke, as long as advantage was given to the attacker.
The offiside rule was brought in so that attackers don't have an advantage over defenders. The current VAR is not being used in the spirit of the rule. A toe offside does not give an attacker the advantage. Whatever is implemented it has to be on this basis. Maybe the simplest option is just to come up with a measurable distance.ll e.g. 1 yard
The offside rule has its roots in rugby, back when forward passes weren’t permitted in football. Its evolution has been to actually benefit attackers more than defenders. Which is one of the reasons why giving the advantage to the attacker was a thing.
Sign in if you want to comment
Wenger to the rescue
Page 3 of 3
posted on 19/2/20
comment by Metro.⚽️ (U6770)
posted 23 minutes ago
comment by Ji Sung Park's Cousin - Ole's joy Manticore (U2958)
posted 3 hours, 18 minutes ago
https://twitter.com/DaleJohnsonESPN/status/1230092230234378240
This thread sums it up... No more or less goals will be ruled offside by VAR... literally just moving the millimetre line
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Surely it’s better for the game if players are allowed to be 99% onside instead of 1% off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I see them as two separate points really.
1) How VAR is implemented for offsides and 2) Whether the current offside system is good enough, with or without VAR.
This rule change will not make any difference to the amount of VAR calls made, it's literally just moving a line.
Whether we should be looking at changing the offside rule is a different thing. I don't really think it was broke, as long as advantage was given to the attacker.
posted on 19/2/20
The offiside rule was brought in so that attackers don't have an advantage over defenders. The current VAR is not being used in the spirit of the rule. A toe offside does not give an attacker the advantage. Whatever is implemented it has to be on this basis. Maybe the simplest option is just to come up with a measurable distance.ll e.g. 1 yard
posted on 19/2/20
The offside rule has its roots in rugby, back when forward passes weren’t permitted in football. Its evolution has been to actually benefit attackers more than defenders. Which is one of the reasons why giving the advantage to the attacker was a thing.
Page 3 of 3