Well that will be an issue of millimetres.
New Rules
- Thread starter trevor newnham
- Start date
Also in the middle of a ball. Would be very close to the center of mass making it the ideal location for accurate measurements. I wonder if subs would ask for tape to make sure they're tucked tightly before coming on.
I like the idea of all of them. Something needs to change, the sport has become a little farcical
The first one wont get rid of decisions based on millimetre accuracy, all they are doing is moving the lines such decisions are based on, not changing the accuracy. In fact, theres no real way of fixing this issue with var because its the accuracy of var thats the issue. It doesn't matter where you put the lines, or if you add some kind of buffer therefore making the lines bigger, it still comes down to a decision based on the bit between the lines or lack thereof which is exactly as it is now. Daylight only works if your point of reference is perfectly in line with the offside line which it almost never is and being behind or ahead of play will alter your perception of the offside just like it does now. It will result in more goals which may ultimately be the point but it wont solve any of the accuracy issues we have now.
The offside rule change is great. Football is a generally low scoring sport by and large. It is ridiculous that you can be offside by a kneecap or one foot, that’s not a real advantage.
Also it might push tactics away from this high line, compress the field and turn everything into a scrap in the middle of the field stuff that we see all the time now.
Also it might push tactics away from this high line, compress the field and turn everything into a scrap in the middle of the field stuff that we see all the time now.
I imagine there will be less close calls, no? If any part of an attacker is onside then they are onside. Sure there will still be some close ones but it should be more straightforward.
Would this change not make it even more low scoring? Teams will start dropping into low blocks more with a fear that a higher line would be easy to penetrate now.
But all you are doing is changing "If any part of an attacker is offside then they are offside." to "If any part of an attacker is onside then they are onside.", the accuracy is exactly the same, its just the other way around. It will be exactly as straightforward as it is now.
Surely manager requested VAR reviews would have limits in a game?
I don't hate it as much as most on here. That could greatly reduce or completely remove the need for VAR refs.
If managers want to spend the number of their available challenges on silly things, up to them.
In terms of refs explaining their decisions to the stadium, could work but at the same time could cause refs to just stop calling anything at all.
What I would love is for refs to be interviewed after a game to explain their key decisions
I don't hate it as much as most on here. That could greatly reduce or completely remove the need for VAR refs.
If managers want to spend the number of their available challenges on silly things, up to them.
In terms of refs explaining their decisions to the stadium, could work but at the same time could cause refs to just stop calling anything at all.
What I would love is for refs to be interviewed after a game to explain their key decisions
Yep. That's clearly true.
If the priority is giving more benefit to the attackers in order to increase the amount of goals, then it'll probably achieve it's objective.
But has as been said plenty of times, it definitely won't make much difference in terms of how much controversy there is regarding very tight decisions, as that'll remain every bit as much of an issue.
As regards the increased goals bit, I can see why they'd think that's a good idea. Even though it feels quite manufactured and cynical. In a technological age where more and more entertainments compete for people's attention, the concentration spans and patience levels are reducing and the expectations for instant gratification increasing. It's why most sports new versions are shorter and zanier with much more emphasis on entertainment. So the fact that Football is pretty much the most likely sport you can go to and see no goals scored (or points, tries, etc, in other sports) is probably something they're trying to move away from, rather than play up as an endearing quirk of the game.
I wonder how the consultation system will work - say you're allowed 2 reviews per match - if your first review is correct - does it roll forward and you keep your 2 or is it 2 reviews no matter the outcome? Also, can "mundane" things like a corner kick or throw in be reviewed or how do they define "controversial"? Might add unnecessary stoppages to the game.
All in all, mostly positive changes IMO.
All in all, mostly positive changes IMO.
Wenger's offside rule is as moronic as it gets. It'll still be millimetre decisions, just with a different point of reference. I can imagine the FIFA marketing team drooling at how it gives attackers a significant advantage over the defending team though. More goals! More spectacle! Goal celebration presented to you by Qatar Airways!
Referee announcing their reasoning over the mike is a good change if it leads to better accountability of their actions.
VAR-calls by the teams is questionable. VAR should be checking scenes anyway, that's their entire job, so what good is going to be an extra option for the teams to appeal to them? VAR did not decide to intervene when they looked at it, why would they do it then? It might do something if it also led to the referee on the pitch reviewing the scene, but if it's only a VAR check I don't see the point.
Clock-stopping in this way is half-arsed and arbitrary. Either keep it as-is, with extra time making up for delays in play, or go the full way and stop the clock every time the ball is not in play like some other sports do.
Referee announcing their reasoning over the mike is a good change if it leads to better accountability of their actions.
VAR-calls by the teams is questionable. VAR should be checking scenes anyway, that's their entire job, so what good is going to be an extra option for the teams to appeal to them? VAR did not decide to intervene when they looked at it, why would they do it then? It might do something if it also led to the referee on the pitch reviewing the scene, but if it's only a VAR check I don't see the point.
Clock-stopping in this way is half-arsed and arbitrary. Either keep it as-is, with extra time making up for delays in play, or go the full way and stop the clock every time the ball is not in play like some other sports do.
This is happening on a trial at the United vs Fulham game on Sunday isn't it?
That offside rule is idiotic, every time a sport arbitrarily changes the rules to force more scoring it makes the whole spectacle worse. To hell with defenders so we can see 100 more "pacy winger runs in behind, latches on to a long ball and scores" goals of the exact same type right? It would completely alter defending too and force us even more down the road of CBs basically having to be fast first and foremost and actual defensive ability being secondary to that. Do they really think the problem with modern football is that there isn't enough goals?
Semiautomatic led system will help with offside and should be any part to simplify it or remain in current state.
Don’t agree with entire body offside. This will give advantage to fast attackers and will limit slow paced defenders in game even if they are really good.
Also has the potential for increased number of red cards for last defender and if it’s utd team then it will be nightmares given how utd is treated.
Number of review for team has positive potential
Don’t agree with entire body offside. This will give advantage to fast attackers and will limit slow paced defenders in game even if they are really good.
Also has the potential for increased number of red cards for last defender and if it’s utd team then it will be nightmares given how utd is treated.
Number of review for team has positive potential
Referees should automatically stop the clock for VAR checks, injuries, substitutions and goals ie open-ended delays which can last for minutes - but keep it running for other deadball situations, which should only last a few seconds each (and there should be tougher enforcement of timewasting in those situations - the ref could start verbally counting down if there’s a hold-up with automatic yellow cards for any and all breaches)
Don’t like the offside rule proposal at all.
Watching the NHL regularly I find the system of coaches challenging goals or decisions to be pretty decent.
However, they don’t have a standard VAR check for possible offsides. Offside reviews come from coach challenge, who has a video analysist watching the game proposing them to make the refs check an offside.
Since football have standard checks, can see how the game gets worsened even further with too many reviews.
1 coaches challenge would be enough. If they rule it to be a wrong decision by the refs they get the challenge back.
If the coach is wrong, the team gets a 2 minute penalty(playing with 4 men instead of 5 for those who don’t know hockey), which is good in a way since it makes coaches hesitant to use their challenge.
Watching the NHL regularly I find the system of coaches challenging goals or decisions to be pretty decent.
However, they don’t have a standard VAR check for possible offsides. Offside reviews come from coach challenge, who has a video analysist watching the game proposing them to make the refs check an offside.
Since football have standard checks, can see how the game gets worsened even further with too many reviews.
1 coaches challenge would be enough. If they rule it to be a wrong decision by the refs they get the challenge back.
If the coach is wrong, the team gets a 2 minute penalty(playing with 4 men instead of 5 for those who don’t know hockey), which is good in a way since it makes coaches hesitant to use their challenge.
OFFSIDE RULE PROPOSED BY ARSENE WENGER: A player will be considered offside if their entire body crosses the last defender's line. This means offside decisions based on a few millimeters will no longer be penalized.
I wonder how dim someone has to be in order to read the proposed rule and not understand that it'll still involve offside decisions based on a few millimeters.
Not a fan of the consultation VAR checks, these should be getting picked up anyways so there is no need for more delays.
It doesn't matter what the criteria are for offside, it will always come down to millimeters. You're just changing where you're measuring.
All seem reasonable decisions except the third which I don't see the point of.
According to World Soccer Talk
FIFA will review the introduction of 4 groundbreaking rules to reshape football starting on March 1st:
OFFSIDE RULE PROPOSED BY ARSENE WENGER: A player will be considered offside if their entire body crosses the last defender's line. This means offside decisions based on a few millimeters will no longer be penalized.
REFEREE DECISIONS WILL BE EXPLAINED THROUGH MICROPHONES TO THE ENTIRE STADIUM: After consulting VAR, referees will explain their decision via a microphone to all spectators present in the stadium.
THE CONSULTATION SYSTEM: Each coach will be allowed to request a limited number of VAR checks during the match to review a controversial action.
REFEREES CAN STOP THE CLOCK: Referees will be able to stop the clock to assess a situation or in case of a severe injury. The goal is to eliminate time-wasting and prioritize actual playing time.
If these rules are APPROVED, they will be implemented on July 1, 2025.
I dunno if this has been discussed on here already. If so would the mods kindly delete it.
On offside, they should just look at the feet of the players rarher than looking at arms etc.
If that offside rule had been in play last season we'd have been knocked out of the FA Cup by Coventry.
The thing with offside is that it's always boiling down to mms no matter what you do to move the goalposts.
Best thing to do would be to let linesmen decide and use VAR only if the error is clear and obvious. If they made a mistake but it's a matter of mms then go with what the linesmen said. Fraction of mms isn't really giving anyone an advantage anyway.
Best thing to do would be to let linesmen decide and use VAR only if the error is clear and obvious. If they made a mistake but it's a matter of mms then go with what the linesmen said. Fraction of mms isn't really giving anyone an advantage anyway.
Can you imagine any of our defenders trying to play as a sweeper???
This is what I'm thinking too. Then again this is the governing body that thought introducing golden goals would make extra time more exciting.
They're due a silly rule change or 2.
Feck the manager checks but apart from that I like it
Where's his proposal of having all international breaks played in one month? I liked the idea of that
Yep, really really don't like this one. Actually think how it currently works is easier.
Agree with all.
The offside idea is masquerading as making decisions more accurate, but in reality would simply be a mandate for more goals. Which could then see a counter-reaction in the opposite direction. Either way it would significantly change the game for no good reason.
I would add that it may make it harder for the 99% of football that doesn't have VAR where the current system is fairly simple for the lino's eye.
The offside rule sounds really bad.
Exactly.
The 18 yard box should become the 12 yard box. How is it you can be facing away from goal on the edge of the 18 yard box, with zero chance of scoring, but someone clumsily bundles into the back of you and you get a spot kick from 12 yards?
It's mad that things need to be introduced all because of bad officiating. If time wasting was correctly handled in the first place then there'd be no need to stop the clock.
I'm also not against the offside change, but it doesn't get rid of the millimeters thing at all. It just moves where they will be measuring.
I'm also not against the offside change, but it doesn't get rid of the millimeters thing at all. It just moves where they will be measuring.
Awful idea tbf.
Im definitely in favour of the coach challenges. Basically means VAR are no longer re referring the entire game. It's basically on field decision unless challenged by the manager. You'll still get decisions you don't agree with but the amount of stoppages for silly checks will be way less.
Defending is absolutely not difficult enough as it is. For one, defenders and keepers can simply fall over and scream every time somebody comes near them and they’ll be awarded a freekick 100% of the time. The same standards are very rarely applied to attackers.
For another, the offside rule was never designed to result in carefully choreographed defensive lines, designed to trap attackers in technicalities rather than having defenders actual defend by playing proper football.
This idea that everyone is going to be playing stoneage, deep lying football because they can’t play an offside line as easily anymore is a nonsense as well. The high line and press is too important to the modern game.
Defenders will have to adapt, and might actually have to start playing some football again, but this is a good change - and what the law should’ve been all along.
There will surely still be extremely tight offside decisions with this new rule? It will just be thag someone was a millimetre all the way past the defender or not.
Still better this way though. Advantage should be given to the attacking team.
Should it? I think advantage should be given to someone who times their run well. Surely Mbappe doesn't need a head start to score?
Football has plenty of goals as is. It's just the whinging about tight margins since var was introduced that initiates this. And that won't change.