Refs & VAR 2020/2021 Discussion

[tomaldinho1]

Can they just make a rule that if they need to bring out the dotted line & close up/zoom - the goal can just stand.
Pointing is fine as well. Common sense will prevail it'll just take a while.

 

[Bale Bale Bale]

Can they just make a rule that if they need to bring out the dotted line & close up/zoom - the goal can just stand.
Pointing is fine as well. Common sense will prevail it'll just take a while.

Apparently that would lead to even worse decisions.

I'm sure there wasn't this much furore over offsides prior to VAR, even when outrageously blatant ones were missed.

 

[Mb194dc]

Nothing to do with the PL. It's the way offside works.

True though these other leagues haven't had the howling errors where the laws are not applied in other areas. Pickford reckless lunge and Lo Celso stamp as just a couple of examples.

The problem with the PL is, VAR make so many actual mistakes that even the correct decisions then come under huge scrutiny. Is it really a surprise fans have zero faith in VAR and the referees generally, especially when despite all the horrendous errors, Riley is still sitting pretty.

In the Bamford case the law itself is "wrong", goes against the spirit of the game and pretty certain it will be changed alongside hand ball at the end of this season.

IFAB need to start trialling law changes before they implement them, loads of untended consequences from the supposed "improvements" to the game they want to make,

 

[UncleBob]

True though these other leagues haven't had the howling errors where the laws are not applied in other areas. Pickford reckless lunge and Lo Celso stamp as just a couple of examples.

The problem with the PL is, VAR make so many actual mistakes that even the correct decisions then come under huge scrutiny. Is it really a surprise fans have zero faith in VAR and the referees generally, especially when despite all the horrendous errors, Riley is still sitting pretty.

In the Bamford case the law itself is "wrong", goes against the spirit of the game and pretty certain it will be changed alongside hand ball at the end of this season.

IFAB need to start trialling law changes before they implement them, loads of untended consequences from the supposed "improvements" to the game they want to make,

How so?

 

[Mb194dc]

How so?

He doesn't score with his arm, he's merely pointing where he wants the ball.

Football is meant to reward good attacking play, by stopping players pointing where they want the ball you punish them for it.

The point of offside is to stop goal hanging, not punish players 1cm off with anal precision. IFAB should change the law so if any part of the body is level it's onside. Would be loads more goals and would be great for the spectacle and the sport.

 

[sullydnl]

They should do away with the whole quantum physics line thing and just take a still frame like we've always had, if they can't tell from that then you go with the on-field decision. Yes it might technically be less consistent than the system in place currently but you won't have all of these ridiculous marginal calls that no one wants in the game, it's just the blatant wrong calls that needed eradicating.

Also Maguire pushed Pickford but would have been a pen otherwise.

The below offside calls were made by the linesmen. Seem pretty marginal to me. So marginal calls will still be made, just as they were before VAR ever came in and just as they will be until the offside law changes. They'll just be made with less accuracy if left to linesmen.

Spoiler

And as for VAR judging based on the naked eye, that can be hugely misleading depending on the camera angle. The below onside decision wasn't even particularly marginal, yet how many people would have got it right based on the naked eye? Posters on here certainly thought it was an obvious offside.

Spoiler

Plus we already know exactly how your suggestion would play out, because they tried it in other leagues. It resulted in incidents like the below, where offside was given by both the linesman and the var's naked eye, even though he was actually onside.

Spoiler

You'll note there's still a line in that picture. That's because broadcasters keep applying their own lines to such calls, gleefully highlighting each and every mistake made. Which then results in fans complaining about bias, corrupt refs, useless VAR and the league stupidly not letting VAR use lines like every other major league does. Which inevitably resulted in them adopting the same system the PL are using.

 

[cyberman]

The below offside calls were made by the linesmen. Seem pretty marginal to me. So marginal calls will still be made, just as they were before VAR ever came in and just as they will be until the offside law changes. They'll just be made with less accuracy if left to linesmen.

Spoiler

And as for VAR judging based on the naked eye, that can be hugely misleading depending on the camera angle. The below onside decision wasn't even particularly marginal, yet how many people would have got it right based on the naked eye? Posters on here certainly thought it was an obvious offside.

Spoiler

Plus we already know exactly how your suggestion would play out, because they tried it in other leagues. It resulted in incidents like the below, where offside was given by both the linesman and the var's naked eye, even though he was actually onside.

Spoiler

You'll note there's still a line in that picture. That's because broadcasters keep applying their own lines to such calls, gleefully highlighting each and every mistake made. Which then results in fans complaining about bias, corrupt refs, useless VAR and the league stupidly not letting VAR use lines like every other major league does. Which inevitably resulted in them adopting the same system the PL are using.

The Rashford offside is another example v RBL.
Good post.

 

[arnie_ni]

It wouldn't be a lot clearer, it'd just move the line somewhere else.

Im not talking about how close the calls are as such. Just this picking of random body parts. Theres no way a goal should be ruled out for offside because your shirt sleeve is closer to the goal than the defenders.

If its feet vs feet, fine, easy, everyone understands and it will be considerably clearer.

 

[arnie_ni]

Yes ! I thought this is obvious but seemingly not.

Read my post above. A goal shouldnt be chalked of because your shirt sleeve is closer to the goal. Feet vs feet removes all that ambiguity.

We'd still have close calls being debated, but at least everyone, refs, fans, players alike will know where they stand. Itl simplify the whole process.

 

[Bobski]

He doesn't score with his arm, he's merely pointing where he wants the ball.

Football is meant to reward good attacking play, by stopping players pointing where they want the ball you punish them for it.

The point of offside is to stop goal hanging, not punish players 1cm off with anal precision. IFAB should change the law so if any part of the body is level it's onside. Would be loads more goals and would be great for the spectacle and the sport.

Defenders perspective but loads more goals doesn't necessarily make the game a better spectacle. Most law changes benefit attacking play anyway, we can see the avalanche of pens across Europe with VAR, lots of scoring stats being run up, the obsession with them that the Ronaldo and Messi debate set off need sated.

 

[UncleBob]

He doesn't score with his arm, he's merely pointing where he wants the ball.

Football is meant to reward good attacking play, by stopping players pointing where they want the ball you punish them for it.

The point of offside is to stop goal hanging, not punish players 1cm off with anal precision. IFAB should change the law so if any part of the body is level it's onside. Would be loads more goals and would be great for the spectacle and the sport.

Why does it matter that he doesn't score with his arm?

 

[arnie_ni]

Why does it matter that he doesn't score with his arm?

I cant wrap my head around how anyone could defend this law.

Can you explain your thinking to me why your satisfied that goal should be ruled out because his shirt sleeve is closer to the goal than the defenders shoulder?

So I can try and get an opposing view point

 

[noodlehair]

I don't reallly have a problem with the offsides. If you start awarding the ones that are unclear, then you just end up with weekly controversy over at what exact point it becomes unclear. It's the nature of the beast, and linesmen are too good at getting obvious offsides wrong and deciding the title because they couldn't see Didier Drogba standing still 2 metres in an offside position, to go back to relying on them.

The much bigger problem is that VAR has exposed just how astoundingly useless our referees are, because unfortunately they are the ones who've been entrusted to use it. It's made it clear that when they make mistakes it often isn't because they didn't see it clearly enough to make the right decision, it's because they are too useless to even understand what the right decision is. They couldn't even figure out that the ball clearly going into the goal means that a goal should be awarded. They chouldn't figure out that a player throwing his full bodyweight mid air into an opponent is dangerous play, or that when two people slap each other slightly in the face it means they have both done the same thing.

It is at a level of bad where now you have them operating the video evidence, yo have to consider the possibility they are getting these things wrong on purpose, because it's either that or the are completely unfit to do their jobs through sheer incompetence. There are also frequent issues or events where we know they are getting things wrong on purpose out of sheer stubborness/arrogance. Like having an ENTIRE SEASON where they refused to use the pitch side monitoors despite it obviously being the correct thing to do, and instead refusing to overturn obviously wrong decisions in order to back each other up. Or the fad at the start of this season of just randomly incorrectly awarding penalties for handball and hiding behind VAR as an excuse.

The system is a ver good one but what it has done is instead of fixing the problems, exposed where the problems actually are. I still don't think its reasonable to expect every close decision that goes to VAR to be correct, but we're not seeing close decisions being given wrong,, we're seeing obviious ones being given wrong, in nearly every game.

 

[Bobski]

I don't reallly have a problem with the offsides. If you start awarding the ones that are unclear, then you just end up with weekly controversy over at what exact point it becomes unclear. It's the nature of the beast, and linesmen are too good at getting obvious offsides wrong and deciding the title because they couldn't see Didier Drogba standing still 2 metres in an offside position, to go back to relying on them.

The much bigger problem is that VAR has exposed just how astoundingly useless our referees are, because unfortunately they are the ones who've been entrusted to use it. It's made it clear that when they make mistakes it often isn't because they didn't see it clearly enough to make the right decision, it's because they are too useless to even understand what the right decision is. They couldn't even figure out that the ball clearly going into the goal means that a goal should be awarded. They chouldn't figure out that a player throwing his full bodyweight mid air into an opponent is dangerous play, or that when two people slap each other slightly in the face it means they have both done the same thing.

It is at a level of bad where now you have them operating the video evidence, yo have to consider the possibility they are getting these things wrong on purpose, because it's either that or the are completely unfit to do their jobs through sheer incompetence. There are also frequent issues or events where we know they are getting things wrong on purpose out of sheer stubborness/arrogance. Like having an ENTIRE SEASON where they refused to use the pitch side monitoors despite it obviously being the correct thing to do, and instead refusing to overturn obviously wrong decisions in order to back each other up. Or the fad at the start of this season of just randomly incorrectly awarding penalties for handball and hiding behind VAR as an excuse.

The system is a ver good one but what it has done is instead of fixing the problems, exposed where the problems actually are. I still don't think its reasonable to expect every close decision that goes to VAR to be correct, but we're not seeing close decisions being given wrong,, we're seeing obviious ones being given wrong, in nearly every game.

Which is why many thought that instead of full implementation of VAR, the focus should have been on training, retraining and other solutions, such as 2 refs on a pitch, tighter fitness requirements, team based officiating. VAR is just a tool after all, ultimately it is still people making the decisions.

 

[UncleBob]

Im not talking about how close the calls are as such. Just this picking of random body parts. Theres no way a goal should be ruled out for offside because your shirt sleeve is closer to the goal than the defenders.

If its feet vs feet, fine, easy, everyone understands and it will be considerably clearer.

They aren't picking random body parts

 

[Mb194dc]

Why does it matter that he doesn't score with his arm?

He's not gaining any advantage from a perspective of his position on the pitch.

The point of offside is to stop goal hanging, it restricts where players can be standing when the ball is played. His arm therefore shouldn't come into it. The law is wrong in my view and it should be changed.

If you want a game where what Bamford did is considered offside, good luck to you essentially...

 

[UncleBob]

He's not gaining any advantage from a perspective of his position on the pitch.

The point of offside is to stop goal hanging, it restricts where players can be standing when the ball is played. His arm therefore shouldn't come into it. The law is wrong in my view and it should be changed.

If you want a game where what Bamford did is considered offside, good luck to you essentially...

Does the offside rule say anything about gaining advantage?

 

[UncleBob]

I cant wrap my head around how anyone could defend this law.

Can you explain your thinking to me why your satisfied that goal should be ruled out because his shirt sleeve is closer to the goal than the defenders shoulder?

So I can try and get an opposing view point

Hardly said I was satisfied, did I?
I'm just stating the obvious, moving the goalposts doesn't get rid of them. The narrow decisions that people obsess over won't go away

 

[Mb194dc]

Does the offside rule say anything about gaining advantage?

The point isn't the law as written at the moment, it's deeper than that, it's the question:

Why is there an offside law in football? What are we trying to do with game by having it?

That is why everyone looks at the Bamford goal, and immediately thinks how it's been implemented with VAR is totally stupid...

In my view it'll be changed, because everyone including IFAB can see punishing good attacking play in this way does not fit with the reason why offside exists in the first place.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

I don't reallly have a problem with the offsides. If you start awarding the ones that are unclear, then you just end up with weekly controversy over at what exact point it becomes unclear. It's the nature of the beast, and linesmen are too good at getting obvious offsides wrong and deciding the title because they couldn't see Didier Drogba standing still 2 metres in an offside position, to go back to relying on them.

The much bigger problem is that VAR has exposed just how astoundingly useless our referees are, because unfortunately they are the ones who've been entrusted to use it. It's made it clear that when they make mistakes it often isn't because they didn't see it clearly enough to make the right decision, it's because they are too useless to even understand what the right decision is. They couldn't even figure out that the ball clearly going into the goal means that a goal should be awarded. They chouldn't figure out that a player throwing his full bodyweight mid air into an opponent is dangerous play, or that when two people slap each other slightly in the face it means they have both done the same thing.

It is at a level of bad where now you have them operating the video evidence, yo have to consider the possibility they are getting these things wrong on purpose, because it's either that or the are completely unfit to do their jobs through sheer incompetence. There are also frequent issues or events where we know they are getting things wrong on purpose out of sheer stubborness/arrogance. Like having an ENTIRE SEASON where they refused to use the pitch side monitoors despite it obviously being the correct thing to do, and instead refusing to overturn obviously wrong decisions in order to back each other up. Or the fad at the start of this season of just randomly incorrectly awarding penalties for handball and hiding behind VAR as an excuse.

The system is a ver good one but what it has done is instead of fixing the problems, exposed where the problems actually are. I still don't think its reasonable to expect every close decision that goes to VAR to be correct, but we're not seeing close decisions being given wrong,, we're seeing obviious ones being given wrong, in nearly every game.

You’re coming at this from the idea that every incident has an obvious correct answer, if only the referees were competent enough to recognise it. I strongly disagree. All you need to do is look at the umpteen threads on here about controversial decisions over the years. Or listen to tv pundits (including referees) discussing them.

There is often no obvious ‘correct’ opinion, even after watching loads of replays.

And what makes VAR so annoying/stupid is that we knew this already. So it was obviously going to continue to happen. And now we have an added sense of raging injustice after the referee on the pitch looks at videos and makes a decision that is different to some fans/pundits/other referees. Any reasonable fan could accept referees making errors in real time but it’s infinitely more annoying when they review video footage and still make a decision that is different to our own opinion.

 

[arnie_ni]

Hardly said I was satisfied, did I?
I'm just stating the obvious, moving the goalposts doesn't get rid of them. The narrow decisions that people obsess over won't go away

No one is aruging a narrow decision here. We're discussing the starting point.

Its clearly offside by the rules, its not that close either. Its the fact someones shirt sleeve is allowed to be offside we are all arguing today.

Maybe that's what you've misunderstood and why your disagreeing with everyone.

By the rule, its clearly offside, we're saying the rule is stupid and you shouldn't be offside by your shirt sleeve.

 

[arnie_ni]

They aren't picking random body parts

It is. You shouldnt be able to be offside by your shirt sleeve. Its completely stupid and a silly law

 

[UncleBob]

The point isn't the law as written at the moment, it's deeper than that, it's the question:

Why is there an offside law in football? What are we trying to do with game by having it?

That is why everyone looks at the Bamford goal, and immediately thinks how it's been implemented with VAR is totally stupid...

In my view it'll be changed, because everyone including IFAB can see punishing good attacking play in this way does not fit with the reason why offside exists in the first place.

You're suggesting an offside rule where every incident is open to interpretation, then factor in that referees have a tendency to not interpret identical situations the same way, good luck with that.

The offside rule is what it is, and it's been like that for quite some time, you're either onside or your offside and if you're offside then you're shit out of luck.

 

[UncleBob]

It is. You shouldnt be able to be offside by your shirt sleeve. Its completely stupid and a silly law

It isn't a random body part, it's a body part you're allowed to score with.

 

[arnie_ni]

It isn't a random body part, it's a body part you're allowed to score with.

And thats what we are arguing. Its quite silly your sleeve should be given offside.

Hence 3 or 4 posters calling for feet only so simplify it.

And yes we know there would still be close calls using feet.

 

[noodlehair]

You’re coming at this from the idea that every incident has an obvious correct answer, if only the referees were competent enough to recognise it. I strongly disagree. All you need to do is look at the umpteen threads on here about controversial decisions over the years. Or listen to tv pundits (including referees) discussing them.

There is often no obvious ‘correct’ opinion, even after watching loads of replays.

And what makes VAR so annoying/stupid is that we knew this already. So it was obviously going to continue to happen. And now we have an added sense of raging injustice after the referee on the pitch looks at videos and makes a decision that is different to some fans/pundits/other referees. Any reasonable fan could accept referees making errors in real time but it’s infinitely more annoying when they review video footage and still make a decision that is different to our own opinion.

I mean, I agree that there are always going to be decisions that are going to be controversial either way or unclear, but I'm not talking about those ones and I actually don''t think many people have been makking tooo much of a fuss over those types of incidents. What we are seeing though is obvious wrong decisions every single week

The Pickford challenge was an obvious red card. There was no room for debate and there'd have been no controversy if he'd been sent off. The Martial incident was either two red cards or no red cards...there could be a debate about which one but there was no one out there saying that it was correct to punish one player for an offence and punish the other one differently for the same offence, because again it's very clear and obvious that this isn't correct. The challenge on Maguire yesterday was a penalty. The rules say it's a foul so it is a foul. There was no margin for discussion about whether there was a foul committed.

Last season we had decisions everyone knew were wrong being allowed to stand purely because our referees didn't want to use VAR properly or how it was being used effectivelly elsewhere, and I don't even know where you go with that because that's beyond getting decisions wrong to actually actively not wanting to get them right in the first place. The handballl thing at the start of this season a similar example. There was no issue until the officials, out of thin air, invented an incorrect way to intepret a rule. The issue there isn't VAR but at that point VAR becomes a tool to make the issue more severe rather than help.

You don't see this in other sports, and, more tellingly, you also don't see it anywhere near as often in European games in the same sport, where the standard of refereeing and use of VAR is siignificanty better. It's a fad that is attached very noticably to our referees and officials.

 

[UncleBob]

And thats what we are arguing. Its quite silly your sleeve should be given offside.

Hence 3 or 4 posters calling for feet only so simplify it.

And yes we know there would still be close calls using feet.

"Oy, 3 or 4 users on Redcafe want you to change the offside rule to feet only"

Oh my god, get on it.

Because the kits are so baggy...

 

[UncleBob]

I mean, I agree that there are always going to be decisions that are going to be controversial either way or unclear, but I'm not talking about those ones and I actually don''t think many people have been makking tooo much of a fuss over those types of incidents. What we are seeing though is obvious wrong decisions every single week

The Pickford challenge was an obvious red card. There was no room for debate and there'd have been no controversy if he'd been sent off. The Martial incident was either two red cards or no red cards...there could be a debate about which one but there was no one out there saying that it was correct to punish one player for an offence and punish the other one differently for the same offence, because again it's very clear and obvious that this isn't correct. The challenge on Maguire yesterday was a penalty. The rules say it's a foul so it is a foul. There was no margin for discussion about whether there was a foul committed.

Last season we had decisions everyone knew were wrong being allowed to stand purely because our referees didn't want to use VAR properly or how it was being used effectivelly elsewhere, and I don't even know where you go with that because that's beyond getting decisions wrong to actually actively not wanting to get them right in the first place. The handballl thing at the start of this season a similar example. There was no issue until the officials, out of thin air, invented an incorrect way to intepret a rule. The issue there isn't VAR but at that point VAR becomes a tool to make the issue more severe rather than help.

You don't see this in other sports, and, more tellingly, you also don't see it anywhere near as often in European games in the same sport, where the standard of refereeing and use of VAR is siignificanty better. It's a fad that is attached very noticably to our referees and officials.

 

[noodlehair]

Which is why many thought that instead of full implementation of VAR, the focus should have been on training, retraining and other solutions, such as 2 refs on a pitch, tighter fitness requirements, team based officiating. VAR is just a tool after all, ultimately it is still people making the decisions.

I think personally the problem is more with the attitude/minset of officiating in the PL. Both in terms of the attitude officials and the attitude towards them.

I think it's quite a toxic vicious circle where it's seen as fair game to make the referee the excuse or target rather than look at your own failings, and as a result there's a bit of a siege mentallity with the officials where they are almost more interested in protecting themselves than accepting theiir own mistakes.

Think aboout why we couldn't have access to the microphone recordings like we do in other sports...it's for to reasons. Firstly,, because the complete lack of respect shown to the officials and lack of cntrol they have to do anything about it would become very clear, and secondly because they would have to explain/justify their own decisions and in a lot of cases genuinely wouldn't be able to within the applyig of the laws.

Remember Clattenberg's interview about the Chelsea vs Spurs game? If not go read it. It's as telling an insight as you'll get about how fecked up the officiating is. Basically him admitting he refereed the game to his own benefit instead of to the rules.

 

[arnie_ni]

"Oy, 3 or 4 users on Redcafe want you to change the offside rule to feet only"

Oh my god, get on it.

Because the kits are so baggy...

Thats clearly not what im saying. Your just being argumentative for the sake of it now.

We're trying to discuss the rule.

some of think its silly you can be offside with your sleeve.

You don't. Lets move on

 

[UncleBob]

Thats clearly not what im saying. Your just being argumentative for the sake of it now.

We're trying to discuss the rule.

some of think its silly you can be offside with your sleeve.

You don't. Lets move on

Why is it silly that the parts of your body you can score with are used to determine offside or onside?

 

[Offside]

Bamford one is the worst I’ve seen yet. I’m not all for these “it’s killing the game” dramatic statements but it genuinely is making it a worse game and if it doesn’t get sorted out football will be in a much worse place in a few years. It’s bad enough with the albeit temporary situation where no fans are in the stadium. Combined that with VAR and it currently feels a million miles away from the game we love.

 

[arnie_ni]

Why is it silly that the parts of your body you can score with are used to determine offside or onside?

Because he's just pointing where he wants the pass, Or it could be an attacker is looking down the line and his head is offside (only his head) for a pass across the 6 yard box on the ground, or many other types of examples.

Do you not see how pernickety that is? Its over officiated imo even though its by the law book.

It would be to complicated to make a rule, his upper body is offside but the pass is along the ground so no advantage is gained, which is what someone else argued for either.

So an easy solution in my mind is to just go feet vs feet.

 

[noodlehair]

This is funny why?

Compare the VAR use in our 3 CL games this year to our league games. It's fecking miles apart. In the CL games it's been used to spot things the ref missed and overturn incorrect decisions. In our Premier League games it's already mutiple times been used to create a wrong decision where there wasn't one, or completely ignore things that the ref might conceivably have missed.

 

[UncleBob]

Bamford one is the worst I’ve seen yet. I’m not all for these “it’s killing the game” dramatic statements but it genuinely is making it a worse game and if it doesn’t get sorted out football will be in a much worse place in a few years. It’s bad enough with the albeit temporary situation where no fans are in the stadium. Combined that with VAR and it currently feels a million miles away from the game we love.

How is it one of the worst when there's literally tens of offside situations because the tip of the boot or the heel was an inch offside.

 

[UncleBob]

This is funny why?

Compare the VAR use in our 3 CL games this year to our league games. It's fecking miles apart. In the CL games it's been used to spot things the ref missed and overturn incorrect decisions. In our Premier League games it's already mutiple times been used to create a wrong decision where there wasn't one, or completely ignore things that the ref might conceivably have missed.

Have you seen the handball situations in the champions league? Like the Chelsea penalty that ended up in a sending off for a second yellow card?

Fans complain just as much about the situation in Spain, Italy etc

 

[arnie_ni]

How is it one of the worst when there's literally tens of offside situations because the tip of the boot or the heel was an inch offside.

Because everyone can accept a boot being offside. This situation isnt how close or how far, its the fact its his shirt sleeve.

 

[ghaliboy]

You'll note there's still a line in that picture. That's because broadcasters keep applying their own lines to such calls, gleefully highlighting each and every mistake made. Which then results in fans complaining about bias, corrupt refs, useless VAR and the league stupidly not letting VAR use lines like every other major league does. Which inevitably resulted in them adopting the same system the PL are using.

I still can't believe I had to watch the rest of the game and extra time and penalties. Perth we're quite clearly the better team during the season and it sucks nuts having to play a playoff to just lose when you're clearly the best team. But we absolutely dominated them on their new stadium that was fast as feck because it is a cricket ground and we'd done loads of training on the SCG to prepare for it. Then for this stupid "offside" goal not to have stood was a joke, I was fuming at the time.

 

[diarm]

It is football. Yes you can score with other parts of your body but making a decision that offside is determined by players feet is easier to police and makes just as much sense as any of the other arbitrary rules we have. If a players armpit goes over the touchline while he's dribbling down the wing we don't blow up for a throw in.

The line needs to be drawn from the last defenders foot and if the back foot of the attacker is anywhere onside, then he is onside.

Once we need to start drawing questionable dotted lines and bringing armpits into the equation the game is fecked. Make it simple - technology can easily show a line across the pitch from the foot of the last defender that is closest to the goal, and can easily determine if the attacker has a foot behind that line.

We're here to watch good attackers attack and good defenders defend - not to watch visually impaired morons in a teched out caravan, drawing diagrams of right angles to determine who managed to synchronise a line better. Give attackers more benefit and make defenders get back to focusing on how to actually defend rather than tricking the system.

 

[48 hours]

Personally I think they could make it clearer by just measuring from the lead foot. Or ruling if you have to draw the lines then it isn’t clear and obvious so leave it as the ruling on the field