Jump to content
IGNORED

Offside goal killer - disgrace


reddogkev

Recommended Posts

  • Admin
6 minutes ago, CotswoldRed said:

But then we'd be arguing over whether a millimetre, centimetre or an inch is clear daylight. 

Exactly the same problem, surely. 

Definitely heard on the radio that clear daylight was being considered as the new criteria, that should be better, if not perfect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm wrong and the rule's been changed, but I always thought that part of the offside rule was about the attacking player '...seeking to gain an advantage...'. 

Is that still the case? If so, how can Pukki be adjudged to be actively seeking an advantage by getting an inch of his shoulder further forward than a defender?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Maesknoll Red said:

Definitely heard on the radio that clear daylight was being considered as the new criteria, that should be better, if not perfect.

Not sure how this works, where's the daylight supposed to be? 

The problem IMO isn't where the line is, it's where the VAR is applied.  It should be down to the referee to ask to see it on screen if s/he thinks it was marginal and make their own mind up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Robbored said:

Sourness came up with the idea that it should be the players feet that determine whether he’s offside or not. 

The ridiculous hand/shoulder being offside pisses off every football fan out there............:disapointed2se:

What he has said is if a part of the body you can score with is onside then you are onside, much better than the current ruling and easier for them to judge

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
2 minutes ago, Nibor said:

Not sure how this works, where's the daylight supposed to be? 

The problem IMO isn't where the line is, it's where the VAR is applied.  It should be down to the referee to ask to see it on screen if s/he thinks it was marginal and make their own mind up.

From what I understood, the proposal is that the attacker has to be completely beyond the defender to be offside, that’s where the clear daylight comes from.  Any part of the body behind or inline, then onside.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, You Do The Dziekanowski said:

What he has said is if a part of the body you can score with is onside then you are onside, much better than the current ruling and easier for them to judge

I think that makes for more goals but it won't change accuracy of decisions and how unwatchable a VAR riddled game is as it just moves the line.

What we need is to be able to celebrate a goal knowing it is unlikely to be chalked off two or three minutes later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Maesknoll Red said:

From what I understood, the proposal is that the attacker has to be completely beyond the defender to be offside, that’s where the clear daylight comes from.  Any part of the body behind or inline, then onside.

It's tricky because you have outstretched limbs and so on so there can be daylight between them whilst they are still overlapping if you look at arms and legs.  All of their bodies or just the bits that can play the ball? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
Just now, Nibor said:

It's tricky because you have outstretched limbs and so on so there can be daylight between them whilst they are still overlapping if you look at arms and legs.  All of their bodies or just the bits that can play the ball? 

It was a little vague, I was listening to a reporter on R5, I’m sure it’s the whole body, limbs, fingers, whatever, hence the clear daylight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Nibor said:

I think that makes for more goals but it won't change accuracy of decisions and how unwatchable a VAR riddled game is as it just moves the line.

What we need is to be able to celebrate a goal knowing it is unlikely to be chalked off two or three minutes later.

Only allow VAR one look across the line. If it they can’t see a reason to not allow the goal it stands. Instead of actively looking to disallow the goal. No need for all these lines across the pitch and up to body parts, one camera along the line, if it isn’t ‘clear and obvious’ goal stands. Give some power back to the officials 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, You Do The Dziekanowski said:

Only allow VAR one look across the line. If it they can’t see a reason to not allow the goal it stands. Instead of actively looking to disallow the goal. No need for all these lines across the pitch and up to body parts, one camera along the line, if it isn’t ‘clear and obvious’ goal stands. Give some power back to the officials 

I think we just need VAR to **** off unless the ref asks for it, or there's some off the ball incident he's completely missed.  It would solve every problem really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A foot offside is not clear and obvious ,a couple of metres is clear and obvious . var should only be used once or twice a week  when the fourth officials are 100% certain at the time of the mistake all three of them must press the button and overrule there and then, when it is a clear and obvious mistake  by ref or lino not when they think the ref might be mistaken and they need to check.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Midred said:

Should VAR be allowed at any FA matches as the rules could be interpreted differently at a ground that doesn't have VAR? 

I certainly don’t like the fact that when a game is played at a Premiership ground there are decisions reviewed and goals given or not, and sending offs, whereas if the game was played at their opponents ground there isn’t any possibility of anything in a replay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Nibor said:

I think we just need VAR to **** off unless the ref asks for it, or there's some off the ball incident he's completely missed.  It would solve every problem really.

Exactly, ref let’s the game play on, if the linesman says I want to allow the goal but we need to check offside then you check. Like they do in rugby, if the Lino is confident of his original decision it stands. Same with every other goal, ref wants to give it, but if he’s not happy with something in the build up he can go back to it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why was it that VAR was used at Premier League grounds in the FA cup over the last few days but not at any other stadia? How is that equal and fair either way round? Surely it’s all or nothing in the cup - available at all grounds or none at all ... results would have/could have been so different - eg which game was it where it looked like the ball had gone out of play for a goal kick before a striker ‘kept it in’ and it led to a goal? Was it at PNE?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me and using the Pukki 'goal' as an example, if it's reviewed in slow motion and paused as the ball is played, if it looks on/offside with the naked eye then that should be enough. If they are going to surgically analyse everything frame by frame and work things out in mm using a geometry kit then just bin it off. If VAR is staying then discussions are needed at FIFA HQ about changing the offside rule.

Football is about scoring goals, denying that one in particular as they did just wasn't in the spirit of the game for me, it was a really good goal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

Why was it that VAR was used at Premier League grounds in the FA cup over the last few days but not at any other stadia? How is that equal and fair either way round? Surely it’s all or nothing in the cup - available at all grounds or none at all ... results would have/could have been so different - eg which game was it where it looked like the ball had gone out of play for a goal kick before a striker ‘kept it in’ and it led to a goal? Was it at PNE?

Agree 100% I always thought that if it wasn’t available at one ground in a competition then it couldn’t be used at any ground. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, reddogkev said:

Does anybody think it fair that so many goals are now being wiped off because of the slightest hint of offside?

It seems categorical that offside now applies to players in line with the last defender.  Nottm Forest had two good goals chalked off against Chelsea, when in both cases the forward's body was still in line with the defender.

I used to blame VAR for killing goals, but it is the offside change that is doing it.

I don't understand why this has happened.  I would guess the number of goals 'killed' like this must already be in the twenties or thirties this season.

Sad times, will it ever change?  Or is this new standard actually correct? 

What’s changed? It’s been this way for years, the difference is only that a video can give an accurate decision now rather than a linesman not giving it and then getting berated all weekend for getting the decision wrong?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, JoeAman08 said:

Yes one of the worst for me too. Also don’t like that most camera angles aren’t directly across the pitch. I am sure the tech makes it quite accurate even not looking across it but visually hard for me to accept. 
 

I have said a few times the part of the body that plays the ball first should be where the offside occurs. Meaning if your shoulder is offside but you score with your right foot which is onside it should count. Or if your head is slightly offside and you score with your head it is offside. Or if in the build up your right foot is a toe offside and you cross with your right foot it is offside etc. They’d probably find a way to muck that up too though.

Also in favour of if any part of the body you can score with is onside then it counts. Favour the attackers. Everyone likes goals find a way to boost those numbers. We won’t like that at first either but the moneymakers will. Scoring attracts fans in general. They have done this in plenty of American sports(I know most of you don’t like them but what I am most familiar with) where they have given advantages to offences/attacks. Their ratings are generally higher than ever. Plus most of those marginal ones are defences stepping up in an offside trap so penalised for being a bit too slow. 

What if that body part is 1mm offside? There’s still going to be a line and a definitive point to judge offside against and we’ll have the same argument about it being so close it’s unfair?

12 hours ago, Robbored said:

Sourness came up with the idea that it should be the players feet that determine whether he’s offside or not. 

The ridiculous hand/shoulder being offside pisses off every football fan out there............:disapointed2se:

Well the hand can’t be offside

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Port Said Red said:

This is my issue with it, how can it be clear and obvious if it takes 10 camera angles and 3 minutes of replays to check it? I think they should have some version of "umpires call" like in cricket. If it's that close, you go with the on field decision, this would also stop the system undermining the on field officials.

“Clear and obvious” has nothing to do with offsides, that’s for subjective referee decisions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, DT The Optimist said:

Heard read somewhere that must be clear and obvious offside, not a toe nail or finger tip. It’s being looked at by authorities this month. 
VAR  is good but got to apply common sense. Goals and things like that.  Handballs, pens etc

Always remember being in a bar in Turkey for World Cup match England v Germany and the frank Lampard goal. I was only Brit in bar  The jerries thought it hilarious when not given when I went into melt down . Still had a good night later with them. 

I heard the same thing, Fifa are apparently not happy with the way that VAR is being used in the prem for offside because when they are getting all these lines out and taking minutes to make a decision about if a players arm pit is onside or not, that doesn't comply with the Fifa directive that VAR should only be used in clear and obvious error situations. It simply cant be a clear and obvious error if they are taking minutes to decide, a clear and obvious error is surely when you first see a replay and instantly notice the ref has made a error?

I quite liked someones suggestion above that there should be a 30 second limit on VAR decisions, that's plenty enough time to tell if it's a clear and obvious error. Any longer than that and it's clearly not a clear and obvious error.

With offsides the question should always be asked if the linesman could have spotted and judged that someone was 1 mm onside or offside with his naked eye.

I found it interesting that in whatever game it was that the pitch side monitor was used for the first time in a FA governed game, I think the ref and the FA wanted to send out a message to the Premier League that they should be used.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, MarcusX said:

What if that body part is 1mm offside? There’s still going to be a line and a definitive point to judge offside against and we’ll have the same argument about it being so close it’s unfair?

Well the hand can’t be offside

I don’t think even now it is unfair just nonsensical. With this the first point of contact is offside which is easier to understand. The hard part is the chest/abdomen are. It would just be a guess of where the ball makes contact. So not perfect but not sure it ever will be by being used for offside

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This offside by an armpit is just nonsense, the rule should be simple, only feet can be offside, anything else is legal. VAR works well in most European countries but as always we make a cock up of it. Perhaps it should be taken away, evaluated and put back in next year, worked for cricket.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, RUSSEL85 said:

This offside by an armpit is just nonsense, the rule should be simple, only feet can be offside, anything else is legal. VAR works well in most European countries but as always we make a cock up of it. Perhaps it should be taken away, evaluated and put back in next year, worked for cricket.

How do other countries handle offside, i don’t watch much other football outside UK?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 06/01/2020 at 11:59, DT The Optimist said:

Heard read somewhere that must be clear and obvious offside, not a toe nail or finger tip. It’s being looked at by authorities this month. 
VAR  is good but got to apply common sense. Goals and things like that.  Handballs, pens etc

Always remember being in a bar in Turkey for World Cup match England v Germany and the frank Lampard goal. I was only Brit in bar  The jerries thought it hilarious when not given when I went into melt down . Still had a good night later with them. 

It's a ******* shambles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...