If you can't tell with certainty then give the goal. It's really not complicated.
Get rid of VAR NOW! We want our game back! (...or not, some are happy)
- Thread starter RedFish
- Start date
If you can't tell with certainty then give the goal. It's really not complicated.
Show me an article from that far back that says that offside was an exception to that rule.
Was it clear and obvious or just clear or just obvious? A player being 10cm offside is offside. We now have the technology to see that. End of.
A clear and obvious mistake. If you can't expect the assistant ref to call it then it is not a clear and obvious mistake.
So in your brain being pro offside and happy to see it enforced with some consistency is the same as being pro mass killings - and you also deem having a goal disallowed an equal offense to that of being murdered? Sir - I believe you've lost the plot. You should rewind and start from the beginning - because what you think is right is actually completely bonkers
Quiet, bootlicker.
So we should let some offsides stand even if we see that they’re offside because they’re not off by super much? Now the next team’s going to be pissed because the VAR judged a player to be off but not super off.
When it comes to offside, it’s as black and white as goal line technology (as far as the rules are concerned, which is what we’re going by...), albeit with some technical limitations in terms of fps etc. We wouldn’t want goals to be disallowed because the ball was just 0.2cm over the line, would we?
Yes. The rule is crap.
We've had this situation with offside since the dawn of time and it's never been an issue. The benefit of the doubt has gone to the attacker and 99.99% of people have been fine with that. What people weren't happy with was penalties being given for blatant dives or stone wallers being denied. That's why VAR was needed but instead it has become a trojan horse to bring in this petty, pedantic nonsense. It's bollocks.
Because I'm not for ruling out class goals like that over mere millimetres. I love the romance and art of the game not binary decisions.
So your issue is with the rule, not with VAR
Thats not how it works. Offside is a binary decision. If the linesman gets it wrong it doesnt matter if its by 2cm or 10cm or 10 metres. Its the wrong decision so it is a clear and obvious situation.
Yes. I would rather a goal like that stand even when City score it.
Use invested, doesn't make a damn difference.
Clear rule and more goals. Let’s go with it.
So you’d rule it out if the player shins it but not if it’s a class goal? Cool.
VAR has been on point so far and proved to be quick. Value added for me and makes the game more fair.
Well what if it’s touch and go if there’s daylight or not? It’s the same bloody discussion again.
I don't agree.
Where would you draw the line on allowance?
Would you just go on a goal-by-goal basis? Wouldn’t that allow for some inherent biases, the exact ones we’re trying to get away from?
1. Yes. Because there is no significant advantage gained when you are offside by 0.2 mm. So the question needs to be, should the offside rule be evolved here?
2. It's different with a goal because for a ball to be in the net, the entire ball needs to be in the net.
A clear and obvious mistake where you go wow how did the assistant ref not see that.
Why? I'm not arguing that they published articles highlighting that offside was an exception to the rule. It may well be that not one single person ever pointed out that offside was an objective call that would be treated differently to subjective calls. That still wouldn't be the shifting of goalposts you're claiming happened though. It's not like they lied to you and started pretending that offsides were subjective calls before later changing their mind, or said that only subjective calls would be judged under VAR.
1. Where do you draw the line, and what happens if the player is 1mm over this arbitrary line?
2. For offside, any goalscoring part of the body needs to be level with the second-to-last defender. It’s the same thing: If A is past B then C happens.
So completely arbitrary then?
I’m done.It's not about whether you agree those are the rules. Be pissed off with the rules VAR has nothing to do with it.
When it's clear and obvious (i.e. can be determined on slow mo replays without freeze frame within 30 seconds) that there was daylight between attacker and defender.
This would create endless debates though. Completely subjective, a line has to be drawn somewhere
Looks like keeper on the line isn’t part of VAR but encroaching is.
Regardless, keeper on the line has always been the rule, it’s just that it’s been completely ignored by referees, like the 6 second rule for GKs and many others.
That's what I have noticed too. A clear confusion between the rules and VAR.
VAR is just a tool
For me the question should be, "what is a reasonable distance beyond which an unfair advantage can be gained?" Answers will vary but I think that for most sensible viewers, the answer is greater than zero, not zero. An average greater than zero, but where there is no discernable space between the attacker and the defensive line, would work.
As far as I'm aware VAR won't be applied to the goalkeeper staying on the line. That's the assistant's job, VAR won't intervene.
VAR is being used to implement rules that were not designed for VAR. There's a clear overlap.
Both are very flawed and partially responsible for some of the shite we've seen so far.
The game is perfect when it's not perfert. Like a box of chocolates, you don't know what you're going to get That'smakes it exciting. Referee feck ups, a cheeky handball, feeling wronged or cheated, then nicking an undeserved win, a last min offside goal.
I don't want to see analysis of how an otherwise beautiful goal was a hairline offside or not.
.
I want to feel the dread of being reffed by Michael Oliver and giving him shit. I dont want to take all the mistakes out of football.
I am for it 100%.
1. If the player is 1 mm over the line then you rule it offside. But at least at that limit there is far more evidence that an unfair advantage has been gained.
2. Yes, but unlike the benefit of realizing a goal has completely crossed the line, there is no football advantage to realizing that Sterling is 0.2 mm off the last defender. VAR did it's job, but seriously, what advantage did this enforcement provide? Was there some injustice wrought?
You're still going I see.
We have been shite for years before VAR. Worse than what we see now, by far even
I don't know why you're so shocked I've been making the point that VAR should only be for clear mistakes for the last 10 pages.So completely arbitrary then?
It does. If it's only used for clear and obvious mistakes then that goal would have stood.
I know that we can't put the gene back in the bottle but it doesn't mean I have to like it.
It works.
It's great.
It's going to upset a load of people.
Perfect.
It's great.
It's going to upset a load of people.
Perfect.
Nore me