Refs & VAR 2020/2021 Discussion

[UncleBob]

Only a presentation mind, no plans to even trial it. So under those rule the below would be onside:

I think it would be a bad idea. It wouldn't impact the mm offsides that bother people so much at all, just move it to a different part of the body. And while it seems like the attacker would be given an advantage, I suspect there would inevitably be tactical adjustments that have the opposite effect. Playing a high-line probably wouldn't be viable any more, for example. Situations like free kicks on the edge of the box would be a mess as well, as defenders simply couldn't allow attacker to gain that much of an advantage on the defensive line. Plus it would make judging offsides much more difficult in games without VAR.

Just increase the fecking thickness of the line of the attacking player and state that if there's air between them it's ruled it out as offside.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Only a presentation mind, no plans to even trial it. So under those rule the below would be onside:

I think it would be a bad idea. It wouldn't impact the mm offsides that bother people so much at all, just move it to a different part of the body. And while it seems like the attacker would be given an advantage, I suspect there would inevitably be tactical adjustments that have the opposite effect. Playing a high-line probably wouldn't be viable any more, for example. Situations like free kicks on the edge of the box would be a mess as well, as defenders simply couldn't allow attacker to gain that much of an advantage on the defensive line. Plus it would make judging offsides much more difficult in games without VAR.

I still think my idea of only considering feet (the game is called football, after all!) in these decisions is the way forward. Drawing lines flat on the pitch will make it easier/more accurate to make the call and will remove all this ludicrous bollox about exactly which part of the arm could legally score a goal. No more armpit offsides. Surely a no-brainer?

I agree with your point about making games without VAR more difficult to for the linesmen. But that’s VAR for you. “Solving” problems by creating new ones. Sadly, it looks like we can’t put this genie back in the bottle (by far the best solution to all this feckery IMO)

 

[Annihilate Now!]

Only a presentation mind, no plans to even trial it. So under those rule the below would be onside:

I think it would be a bad idea. It wouldn't impact the mm offsides that bother people so much at all, just move it to a different part of the body. And while it seems like the attacker would be given an advantage, I suspect there would inevitably be tactical adjustments that have the opposite effect. Playing a high-line probably wouldn't be viable any more, for example. Situations like free kicks on the edge of the box would be a mess as well, as defenders simply couldn't allow attacker to gain that much of an advantage on the defensive line. Plus it would make judging offsides much more difficult in games without VAR.

That's too much of a radical change, especially for defenders... would totally feck up how they defend.

Just make it feet based, it's so feckin' simple... and then when it comes to VAR, either give them one line or no lines to work with.

 

[Thunderhead]

That's too much of a radical change, especially for defenders... would totally feck up how they defend.

Just make it feet based, it's so feckin' simple... and then when it comes to VAR, either give them one line or no lines to work with.

make it even simpler, if you've got to draw lines it's too tight to call so it's onside.

 

[Gio]

It's a stupid idea, and it's absolutely staggering that Wenger has been beating this drum for over a year without anyone telling him how fecking stupid it is.

It simply does not solve any of the issues with offsides and VAR, it simply moves the marginal, line drawing back to a different point whilst massively affecting the balance of the game. If it wasn't 'Le Professeur', but instead some other random ex-pro it would have been chucked in the dustbin where the idea belongs.

Aye, spot on. I'm glad we're recognising that it is likely to change how defenders line up - they're almost certain to go much deeper to offset the risk - which is bound to have a negative impact on the game itself.

 

[bosnian_red]

I don't like it. Human error is going to be part of any refereeing. Needs to be accepted, but minimized. Not introducing other margins of error that are impossible to call.

Give them a time limit, say 30 seconds to make any call for handball/offside/penalties/goals. If you need more than that to overturn something, it's probably too much of a marginal decision and just keep the on field decision. The refs will then have 2-3 replays basically to look at something, if you can't see a reason to change the on field decision in those 30 seconds then move on. Speeds up game, eliminates the dumb line drawing from random points on the arm, but will just be "looks off or looks on", and the ref will have a judgment call to make. Then afterwards have a referee review panel do the lines and in depth analysis and keep a tally of how each ref/var ref does, correct vs incorrect. This keeps a balance of eliminating blatantly wrong calls, gets rid of the dumb "too close to call" overturns, and let's the game carry on quickly.

 

[sullydnl]

With any offside change being proposed it's worth bearing in mind that they're planning for the semi-automated system to be in place for the 2022 World Cup:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fi...-demonstration-of-advanced-offside-technology

So issues with the lines and delays should in theory be irrelevant soon anyway (though we don't know what the new system will be like). Realistically that means they aren't going to change up the current system until then. It also means any changes to the actual law need to be compatible with whatever they're planning rtaher than the situation as it stands.

 

[Grinner]

make it even simpler, if you've got to draw lines it's too tight to call so it's onside.

Exactly this. The whole point of the offside rule was to stop blatant stuff like goal-hanging, not to rule out marginal calls. If a player is genuinely timing a run and is possibly millimetres offside then it's daft to call that cheating. They always used to say that level was on and to always give the benefit of the doubt to the attacking team. The game is meant to be about teams scoring, not to reward teams for pinpoint defending.

 

[golden_blunder]

Exactly this. The whole point of the offside rule was to stop blatant stuff like goal-hanging, not to rule out marginal calls. If a player is genuinely timing a run and is possibly millimetres offside then it's daft to call that cheating. They always used to say that level was on and to always give the benefit of the doubt to the attacking team. The game is meant to be about teams scoring, not to reward teams for pinpoint defending.

This. If it was down to me I’d scrap VAR completely, it’s ruining the game as we know it. Play to the whistle instead. Let refs and linesmen get on with it but introduce much better training abs support for them

 

[cjj]

This. If it was down to me I’d scrap VAR completely, it’s ruining the game as we know it. Play to the whistle instead. Let refs and linesmen get on with it but introduce much better training abs support for them

I don't think it's ruining the game - they just need greater transparency. It was supposed to eradicate subjective favourism (of sorts), but there's still too little accountability involved. Some wally who isn't even at the game can influence it on a whim, if he so feels like it.

 

[Wiltord02]

I believe Wenger said the new offside rule was going to be trialed in the lower Chinese leagues until November.

 

[saivet]

Is it just me who has next to no issue with VAR in relation to offsides? I think it can take too long but apart from that, no real issue with the law on offsides.

 

[arnie_ni]

I still think my idea of only considering feet (the game is called football, after all!) in these decisions is the way forward. Drawing lines flat on the pitch will make it easier/more accurate to make the call and will remove all this ludicrous bollox about exactly which part of the arm could legally score a goal. No more armpit offsides. Surely a no-brainer?

I agree with your point about making games without VAR more difficult to for the linesmen. But that’s VAR for you. “Solving” problems by creating new ones. Sadly, it looks like we can’t put this genie back in the bottle (by far the best solution to all this feckery IMO)

This this this. I've been beating the same drum in here.

No matter where your head is you won't score a goal if you don't move your feet between the pass and the ball arriving to you.

 

[golden_blunder]

I don't think it's ruining the game - they just need greater transparency. It was supposed to eradicate subjective favourism (of sorts), but there's still too little accountability involved. Some wally who isn't even at the game can influence it on a whim, if he so feels like it.

In my opinion it’s ruining the game. When was the last time you watched a game where it didn’t say “VAR is checking”, and you wait for the decision? The games flow better when you play t the referees whistle

 

[sullydnl]

Is it just me who has next to no issue with VAR in relation to offsides? I think it can take too long but apart from that, no real issue with the law on offsides.

My only issue is with the line being drawn from an imaginary part of the arms this season rather than the shoulder as before. Other than that I don't have a problem with it.

It's all the subjective calls that bother me.

 

[Zlatan 7]

I still think my idea of only considering feet (the game is called football, after all!) in these decisions is the way forward. Drawing lines flat on the pitch will make it easier/more accurate to make the call and will remove all this ludicrous bollox about exactly which part of the arm could legally score a goal. No more armpit offsides. Surely a no-brainer?

I agree with your point about making games without VAR more difficult to for the linesmen. But that’s VAR for you. “Solving” problems by creating new ones. Sadly, it looks like we can’t put this genie back in the bottle (by far the best solution to all this feckery IMO)

I think using feet is a great idea for VAR use but it’d be hard for grassroots and non var linesmen to be calling by looking at feet.

I think one of the issues of VAR is how it’s changing the game to suit but forgetting the millions of other games played without cameras.

 

[Mike Phelan's Former Tash]

Majority of goals are scored with the foot.

When was the last time someone scored with their shoulder/upper arm?

It's really simple.

If your feet are onside then you're onside. It is foot-ball after all.

 

[ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg]

This this this. I've been beating the same drum in here.

No matter where your head is you won't score a goal if you don't move your feet between the pass and the ball arriving to you.

In theory feet is the way to go.

it also helps with players looking across the line.

you could argue you might be offside by a couple of yards with a diving header... but aren’t we meant to encourage attacking players, and give the attackers the advantage?

If they are going to continue to be forensic about drawing lines, far rather it feet, than abloody armpit.

 

[arnie_ni]

In theory feet is the way to go.

it also helps with players looking across the line.

you could argue you might be offside by a couple of yards with a diving header... but aren’t we meant to encourage attacking players, and give the attackers the advantage?

If they are going to continue to be forensic about drawing lines, far rather it feet, than abloody armpit.

But even in that example you need your feet to push of show that's what gives you the advantage?

Either way It'd simplify it massively I think.

 

[ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg]

But even in that example you need your feet to push of show that's what gives you the advantage?

Either way It'd simplify it massively I think.

I agree with you, just highlighting a possible objection. I don’t think anyone really cares, just needs to be simple.

 

[darko]

This. If it was down to me I’d scrap VAR completely, it’s ruining the game as we know it. Play to the whistle instead. Let refs and linesmen get on with it but introduce much better training abs support for them

the Fulham one was a fecking joke.

Really think this shite will impact on gate numbers.

It's a poor rule but the right call.

Is it just me who has next to no issue with VAR in relation to offsides? I think it can take too long but apart from that, no real issue with the law on offsides.

It works for me.

 

[darko]

I have only two rule issues.

First one is handball and penalties. Too many cheap penalties which for says not all hand balls should result in a penalty shot.

Second one, jockeying a ball out while blocking the opposition. For me that should be obstruction.

I think that there are primarily three reasons for rules. They are to make the game fair, make the game better, to mitigate dangerous play (ie high boot).

 

[cjj]

In my opinion it’s ruining the game. When was the last time you watched a game where it didn’t say “VAR is checking”, and you wait for the decision? The games flow better when you play t the referees whistle

It almost adds a weird buzz of anticipation though. If you watch a game where there's a late goal conceded, there's a sort of cruel wait while you find out if it's really going to stand or not.

I feel the arguments of 'lost excitement for the goal' are simple balanced by the different emotions you get it your team has conceded. Just my 2p's worth though.

 

[Mb194dc]

Only a presentation mind, no plans to even trial it. So under those rule the below would be onside:

I think it would be a bad idea. It wouldn't impact the mm offsides that bother people so much at all, just move it to a different part of the body. And while it seems like the attacker would be given an advantage, I suspect there would inevitably be tactical adjustments that have the opposite effect. Playing a high-line probably wouldn't be viable any more, for example. Situations like free kicks on the edge of the box would be a mess as well, as defenders simply couldn't allow attacker to gain that much of an advantage on the defensive line. Plus it would make judging offsides much more difficult in games without VAR.

Like the old daylight rule.

It rewards attacking and for me would make football way more entertaining to watch. Lots more goals, sure it makes a high line more difficult and pace inbehind more valuable.

Sooner the better for me.

 

[arnie_ni]

In theory feet is the way to go.

it also helps with players looking across the line.

you could argue you might be offside by a couple of yards with a diving header... but aren’t we meant to encourage attacking players, and give the attackers the advantage?

If they are going to continue to be forensic about drawing lines, far rather it feet, than abloody armpit.

But even in that example you need your feet to push of show that's what gives you the advantage?

Either way It'd simplify it massively I think.

 

[sullydnl]

Like the old daylight rule.

It rewards attacking and for me would make football way more entertaining to watch. Lots more goals, sure it makes a high line more difficult and pace inbehind more valuable.

Sooner the better for me.

There was never a daylight rule but if there had been this would be notably different.

The issue is the bold. It does indeed make the high line more difficult, which means teams would likely abandon playing a high line. Which may then have a negative effect on the game generally and the number of goals scored. That's why any change to the offside law is a big deal, it will have huge knock-on effects for tactics and the way the game is played for decades to come and what those changes will be is very hard to predict. It's not like the handball rule, which gets tweaked regularly without impacting the actual nature of the game.

 

[TheMagicFoolBus]

This. If it was down to me I’d scrap VAR completely, it’s ruining the game as we know it. Play to the whistle instead. Let refs and linesmen get on with it but introduce much better training abs support for them

And again, just get rid off freeze frames and slow motion replays for VAR. If something is egregiously wrong to the point where it's visible at normal speed then yeah, have the VAR overturn it. Otherwise, let everyone get on with it.

 

[Mb194dc]

There was never a daylight rule but if there had been this would be notably different.

The issue is the bold. It does indeed make the high line more difficult, which means teams would likely abandon playing a high line. Which may then have a negative effect on the game generally and the number of goals scored. That's why any change to the offside law is a big deal, it will have huge knock-on effects for tactics and the way the game is played for decades to come and what those changes will be is very hard to predict. It's not like the handball rule, which gets tweaked regularly without impacting the actual nature of the game.

Daylight was never in the laws but it's how it was implemented in the premier league in the early 2000s as an instruction to the linesman.

Pretty certain teams would still play a high line even with this law change, it just gives a single stride advantage at best to the attacker.

All for it being trialled in a league or competition to confirm that is the case.

 

[sullydnl]

And again, just get rid off freeze frames and slow motion replays for VAR. If something is egregiously wrong to the point where it's visible at normal speed then yeah, have the VAR overturn it. Otherwise, let everyone get on with it.

David Ellary pointed out the issue with that sort of idea just today:

"If you were to tell the TV companies that they couldn't use offside lines, then we would be happy for the VAR not to use offside lines. To suggest that the VAR just does offside by his own eyes, that then will be contradicted immediately by TV. What we have to do is have better education (for fans). Wherever you draw the line, there will be marginal decisions for offside because it's a decision of fact."

You can stop VAR from going into detail to make the decision but you can't stop the broadcaster from then going into forensic detail to show it was the wrong decision, as they would gleefully do. At which point there will be fan outrage. It's not like it hasn't been attempted either, other leagues have tried using VAR without the lines and just using the naked eye but swapped to the current system as it worked better.

One of the key drivers for the introduction of VAR was to level the playing field between the information the referee had to make his decision and the information the viewers had via technology that allowed them to criticise that decision. They don't want a system where the ref continues to be at that disadvantage.

 

[TheMagicFoolBus]

David Ellary pointed out the issue with that sort of idea just today:

"If you were to tell the TV companies that they couldn't use offside lines, then we would be happy for the VAR not to use offside lines. To suggest that the VAR just does offside by his own eyes, that then will be contradicted immediately by TV. What we have to do is have better education (for fans). Wherever you draw the line, there will be marginal decisions for offside because it's a decision of fact."

You can stop VAR from going into detail to make the decision but you can't stop the broadcaster from then going into forensic detail to show it was the wrong decision, as they would gleefully do. At which point there will be fan outrage. It's not like it hasn't been attempted either, other leagues have tried using VAR without the lines and just using the naked eye but swapped to the current system as it worked better.

One of the key drivers for the introduction of VAR was to level the playing field between the information the referee had to make his decision and the information the viewers had via technology that allowed them to criticise that decision. They don't want a system where the ref continues to be at that disadvantage.

But that's always been the case! Especially now that we as fans have seen the bleak alternative where things are held up, players can't celebrate, and decisions are STILL arbitrary, I think there would be far more tolerance and understanding over human error.

I understand your point and it's an interesting one, but frankly I'd be far more understanding to a mistake due to the inherent limitations of what a human can perceive rather than one where the technology isn't actually definitive and certain events get scrutinized to mind-numbing extents. If broadcasters feel it's in their best interest to distract from the game so they can draw lines on a monitor (I find this dubious), then so be it - I'd rather ensure that match-going fans and players have a better experience.

 

[Xaviesta]

Is it just me who has next to no issue with VAR in relation to offsides? I think it can take too long but apart from that, no real issue with the law on offsides.

It's not just you. Offside is offside and I have no issue with that. Wenger's idea is just him trying to be popular.

 

[Zlatan 7]

It's not just you. Offside is offside and I have no issue with that. Wenger's idea is just him trying to be popular.

Offside is offside makes no sense when a lot of the time VAR is making a guess, even if a kind of educated guess of where to put the the line on the arm.

if we had a proper technology like goal line tech over not over then you could say offside is offside. I think that’s coming in I’ve read on here but untill then no I don’t think offside is offside

 

[Denis' cuff]

It's a poor rule but the right call.

It works for me.

dont be silly.

it wasn’t.

 

[cyberman]

Is it just me who has next to no issue with VAR in relation to offsides? I think it can take too long but apart from that, no real issue with the law on offsides.

Im with you. All of the goals and moves called off by unfair offside calls are gone and the only trade off is if youre offside then you're offside.

 

[NinjaFletch]

I don't think I've ever seen a more blatant penalty than the handball not given in the Arsenal game.

I have absolutely no idea what the laws are anymore.

 

[sullydnl]

The handball law is such a mess atm. Maybe they thought it was too close range? No idea.

 

[Norman Brownbutter]

Arm up and away from his body, VAR says no pen.

 

[hubbuh]

Well, VAR has just saved Burnley there.

 

[acnumber9]

Arm up and away from his body, VAR says no pen.

Blatantly making himself bigger to stop the player getting past him and arguably moves his hand to the ball. It’s everything they say in the laws makes a handball. Horrible decision.

 

[Annihilate Now!]

Blatantly making himself bigger to stop the player getting past him and arguably moves his hand to the ball. It’s everything they say in the laws makes a handball. Horrible decision.

Don't they take distance the ball has travelled into account though when the arm is below the shoulder?