What would the debate actually be? How would that possibly work? Lenient offsides, so the refs just decide at will if someone is offside enough to be called offside? It would be the stupidest debate ever. Offside is offside. The offside line has to be drawn somewhere and that is offside. Simple. You can't have lenient offside, it is a line. Nor can you have lenient goal lines or sidelines.
VAR - Not the hero we want, the one we need
- Thread starter Pavl3n
- Start date
Yes it's the same with the concept of VAR itself. Some people only want it for "clear and obvious" errors etc. but it's impossible to define that. So VAR has to judge every error and every offside, no matter how marginal. It's all or nothing. I'd just rather have nothing -- sacrifice a few errors for a free flowing game.
I don't believe that anyone can even know for sure that he IS offside there.
camera angles for 3D vs 2D, elbow vs toe is it?, frame rate, curvature of the earth
OK, the last one is a joke but it's possibly too close to call with or without the tech
camera angles for 3D vs 2D, elbow vs toe is it?, frame rate, curvature of the earth
OK, the last one is a joke but it's possibly too close to call with or without the tech
Please stop ruin our great game with this nonsense.
I just don’t consider these marginal offsides “human error”. A strict interpretation of the rule has no positive effect on the game and really has to be changed if they’re going to stick with being accurate to the nearest millimetre. It’s totally against the spirit of what the actual offside rule is there for.
Less proper goals and more penalties is not a positive step in the game imo.
The debate could be about your whole body has to be offside not just part of it. That there has to be space between the offense player and the last defender. If any part of your body is on side the goal could stand.
I am generally against VAR but, I think offside is the one thing they should use it for.
Edit and violent conduct the refs did not see.
Edit and violent conduct the refs did not see.
I am against VAR totally, but if we were to go for it, I would introduce error margins for decisions. Offsides above a certain distance say,10-20 cm are considered obvious and overturned. Anything tighter than that has to stand with ref's call.
10cm are obvious?
There's already a margin of error. VAR doesn't overturn they decision unless they are clear that the on-field decision was wrong. Because of VAR the instructions are to rather let play keep going than flagging immediately so the attackers are given the benefit in that regard.
God bless VAR.
This. I understand how offsides is that one thing that is black and white, but reviewing these razor thin offsides calls just ruins the flow of the game. The offside rule is meant to stop the attacker from having a positional advantage. Being a few millimeters ahead does not really even constitute an advantage. Wonderful if the ref sees it, but if not no one can claim a couple millimeters made the difference and should just be treated as part of the game. Whats next using a tape measure to make sure the wall is exactly how far back as it should be.
Well, not if it leads to players being more mindful of their actions on the pitch, which in turn should lead to more goals. Most footballers are trained to do stuff that is hard to spot for the refs.
Excellent use of VAR in both games. Did exactly what it was supposed to do.
I didn’t like the VAR ruling but you can’t deny the correct decision was made. It’s refreshing that cheats don’t win and there are no more grave injustices.
Well that’s not VAR’s fault, that’s the current set of rules that are responsible for that.
I think we’ll see a change in some of the rules over the next couple of seasons so the game flows better. For example, there’s no reason now that every goal is microscopically scrutinised for offside that they can’t only rule for offside if the body part that scored the goal was offside, not someone’s left hand or shoelaces.
In the current ruling, Lingard was offside last night and rightfully, the goal shouldn’t stand.
I think overall... just as a general impression. And IMO, obviously.
1 - it seems like a lot of aggravation for the elimination of a few pretty rare 'grave injustices'
2 - it is fairly hilarious, how many goals seems to have been getting wrongly allowed (the borderline stuff)
3 - it's going to over-favour attackers (esp the ones who like falling over when they feel ANY contact) & the best teams
4 - a lot of the criticism is speculative, a lot of the support just blindly supports every decision it makes
5 - defenders are going to hate it
1 - it seems like a lot of aggravation for the elimination of a few pretty rare 'grave injustices'
2 - it is fairly hilarious, how many goals seems to have been getting wrongly allowed (the borderline stuff)
3 - it's going to over-favour attackers (esp the ones who like falling over when they feel ANY contact) & the best teams
4 - a lot of the criticism is speculative, a lot of the support just blindly supports every decision it makes
5 - defenders are going to hate it
I understand your frustration, but VAR is the future. This system is yet a baby. Needs to grow up and become more defined and effective.
The “rules of football” are designed to stop people goal hanging, not penalise a player for being a few milimeters ahead of the opponent and gaining no tangible advantage.
Understanding the rules doesn’t mean you understand the fundamental aspects of what makes football great.
Goalline technology is completely different because it’s not being used to disallow goals that were otherwise given due to the ball being marginally on the line. It enhances football by giving goals that would otherwise have been denied, not making it worse by taking them away after the fact.
Yeah let's go back to having incorrect decisions instead.
VAR is fine providing refs don't mis-use it, people just need to get used to it tbh.
I understand criticism on VAR, but not when it comes to offside. Offside is a very clear cut rule, even 0.1 mm offside is still offside. Why would you make a more lenient offside rule, how does that even work? "meh, kid worked hard for it, let's turn a blind eye".
Yesterday was an example of why we need VAR. Apart from it being fair, the emotional rollercoaster is funny. That Pep celebration turned disbelief turned denial turned mourning was fecking brilliant.
Yesterday was an example of why we need VAR. Apart from it being fair, the emotional rollercoaster is funny. That Pep celebration turned disbelief turned denial turned mourning was fecking brilliant.
This is pretty much how it has always been interpreted. Benefit of the doubt goes to the attacker as it should be.
Without technology? Yes but when you have technology and it shows the player is offside then it should be given as offside.
To be able to assess offside you need a view in line with the last defender to be certain. A camera even slightly to the side doesn’t give a true reflection of the play.
We may see a lot of fans missing their trains next season with VAR in force. Games can be held up for up to 15/20 minutes and more.
I'm sure the software they use is quite accurate. I actually screamed offside right away yesterday.
Though to be fair, I also screamed dive when Xabi Alonso went down after that Nigel de Jong challenge in 2010...
And probably offside when Iniesta scored as well. We could hear the agony even from across the border
The disappointment in your Dutch commentator's voice when he sees that Iniesta was onside is pure gold
You obviously don’t remember the squiggly line they used. They’re using the cameras the television uses. Which aren’t in line.
I accept that at the moment its a technical decision but I do feel in such cases as last night the law should be changed to advantage the attackers. The hold up was far too long and there was zero advantage gained by Lingard from his 'offside' position. The game also wants more, not less, goals.
Fixed that for you.
No, it just took too long to check.
This. Can’t go around making photo-finishes obsolete in cycling and start handing the wins by means of arbitrary favouritism under the principle of “the lad made a good effort and it really did seem to me he won till I saw the top down photo, but I’m gonna go with my first instincts cause I’m the nostalgic sort who doesn’t actually care about who won in this Post-Truth Trumpian world”.
So we need an additional VAR to decide if it is in the 10-20cm range or the 20cm and three millimeters range, right?
I’m all in favour of the VAR, I just want a time limit on the decisionmaking because it interrupts the flow of a match. Hence I would introduce a time limit - in the absence of swift and accurate technology to provide an objective ruling, which exists - such that if a clear corrective call cannot be made within 30s of the VAR check, then the initial ruling stands. Hence IMO the tech should be made to rule faster with the same or higher degree of accuracy as today.
With one exemption: fouls committed that physically and deliberately could have harmed other players. After 30s play should have commenced, but the investigation should continue for a few minutes if needed. In that case the free kick, card or penalty might not have been awarded in due time before the game continued, but yellow and red cards can still be handed out in time to make an impact on the remainder of the match.
The worst thing was that Sneijder hit a freekick that fecking obviously deflected out of touch from the wall Spain put up. Somehow the ref missed that, gave a goal kick from which they made the goal. Injustice I tell you!And probably offside when Iniesta scored as well. We could hear the agony even from across the border
The disappointment in your Dutch commentator's voice when he sees that Iniesta was onside is pure gold
Aside from the De Jong should've been send of after 20 minutes
Looks offside to me. I doubt they draw an arbitrary pencil line. It's tough luck for England, but they didn't deserve the win anyway.
I wasn’t referring to last night. Though even from that one you can the picture isn’t in line so the prospective isn’t right.
Looks offside to me.
Ah fair enough. Regarding the picture, you can see from the line in the grass that Jlingz is slightly further up the pitch I think.
I might be naive in thinking they draw these lines fairly though. And I'm obviously biased towards The Netherlands.
My problem with VAR is it's fixing "problems" that were never actually problems in the first place.
In a world without VAR, that goal stands - and do the Netherlands players complain? I don't think so - it's so marginal that no advantage has been gained at all (which is the whole point of offiside - gaining an advantage).
Also, if you take the frame rate back another millisecond,... is the ball still at Barkley's foot and is Lingard onside? I mean we're talking frame rate here... I find it easy to believe if you take it back a split second Lingard would be onside and the ball would still be at Barkley's foot.
For VAR to work well, the offside rule needs to be changed IMO - there needs to be some sort of threshold (above millimeters) where the distance between the defender and the striker actually constitutes as an advantage.
In a world without VAR, that goal stands - and do the Netherlands players complain? I don't think so - it's so marginal that no advantage has been gained at all (which is the whole point of offiside - gaining an advantage).
Also, if you take the frame rate back another millisecond,... is the ball still at Barkley's foot and is Lingard onside? I mean we're talking frame rate here... I find it easy to believe if you take it back a split second Lingard would be onside and the ball would still be at Barkley's foot.
For VAR to work well, the offside rule needs to be changed IMO - there needs to be some sort of threshold (above millimeters) where the distance between the defender and the striker actually constitutes as an advantage.
I think having clear rules is a good thing. Take the handball, the reason for all the arguing about it is the room interpretation. Offside is very clearcut it's a simple yes/no. I think that's great. Seems harsh in this scenario, but it's clear.
The line you can see is the one they’ve put on the screen. Which isn’t done from an in line perspective. You change the angle of that picture and it will look different. Which is what the problem is. Not that offsides are perfect without VAR but that’s the whole issue I have. It’s still far from perfect and it adds a huge delay every time it’s used.
Offside isn’t just yes or no though. There’s phases of play, has the attacker made an obvious movement towards the ball etc. The only yes or no decision in football is has the ball crossed a line. That’s where technology should’ve stopped.