[Football] Right then. After that demonstration... VAR? Yes or No?

[GT49er]

Nonsense. No-one really celebrated that, certainly not the players. Most knew it was offside before it even went in, and within a millisecond did, as the linesman flagged it. A totally different thing to Trossard's goal. I presume you're just fishing here?

Damn good guess!

 

[darkwolf666]

It happens when the lino raises his flag several times each week. Go ahead and celebrate. Most goals are legit. If they aren't that happens too whether you have VAR or not.

Oh come on, that's not the same, goal is scored, you celebrate, you see flag up, you're disappointed - all in a matter of seconds - not minutes!!!

 

[Easy 10]

It happens when the lino raises his flag several times each week. Go ahead and celebrate. Most goals are legit. If they aren't that happens too whether you have VAR or not.

The fundamental difference is that you know INSTANTLY when the flag goes up that its no goal.

With VAR, you've sometimes got a 2 minute wait. And in the case of Trossards vs West Ham, we were actually celebrating for 1min 50 seconds before we were even informed they were reviewing it. The teams were lined up about to kick off for the restart.

You're ACTUALLY ok with that ?

 

[Albion my Albion]

Oh come on, that's not the same, goal is scored, you celebrate, you see flag up, you're disappointed - all in a matter of seconds - not minutes!!!

Oh my L.Ron!

Go urinate! Holy shite!

 

[Albion my Albion]

The fundamental difference is that you know INSTANTLY when the flag goes up that its no goal.

With VAR, you've sometimes got a 2 minute wait. And in the case of Trossards vs West Ham, we were actually celebrating for 1min 50 seconds before we were even informed they were reviewing it. The teams were lined up about to kick off for the restart.

You're ACTUALLY ok with that ?

Yes! Would you rather the opposition score on a non legit goal? Two minutes is worth it to get it correct. The feeling of disdain lasts much longer when you know the call goes uncorrected.

 

[darkwolf666]

Oh my L.Ron!

Go urinate! Holy shite!

Ok, if you can’t converse politely or sensibly, bye!

 

[Triggaaar]

Then we would be back in the situation where someone like Salah or other top 6 strikers get more of the benifit of the doubt than others.
Make it black and white and it is the same law for everyone.

No, there wouldn't be doubt, it would be millimetre perfect (or at least look that way) as it is now, but the rules would allow you to be a body width ahead of the defence.

 

[Triggaaar]

Or... Do away with offside completely!

Just an idea...

And not a new one (that's not a criticism). My concern with ditching it would be that some of what I like about the game, like neat passing, build up play, well timed runs and defence splitting passes, will be ditched in favour of lumping it over everyone to a unit up the other end to head it back to your poacher.

Not sure I want to argue with you on this one, but here goes.

In recent years referees assistants had been given a directive to give the benefit of doubt to the attacking side, so no this most likely wouldn't have been flagged.

VAR has clearly taken the opposite stance, to cancel out attacking moves, even if offside by a Gnats cock!

I'm not even sure that is arguing with me is it? What did I say that was different?

Once you get slide rules out and draw imaginary lines on the pitch then the moment, the joy and the game are gone, forever. VAR is shit...

Well yeah, I don't agree with that, but then I hadn't been making a point about that anyway.

 

[Easy 10]

Yes! Would you rather the opposition score on a non legit goal? Two minutes is worth it to get it correct. The feeling of disdain lasts much longer when you know the call goes uncorrected.

When that "non-legit goal" is being measured by the width of a gnats pube ? Nah, you can keep all that bollocks. Football is a game of chaos and passion, not pixels and sliderules.

It keeps the nerds happy I suppose, but it absolutely sucks the life out of the game as we know it. That adrenaline rush of scoring a goal has been massively diminished by the knowledge that someone is busily looking for a way to rule it out, and it may well be down to a RIDICULOUS margin, as per the Spurs one on Saturday, the Chelsea one yesterday, the Burn one v West Ham. Nobody wanted to see offsides being given if someones TOE is an inch in front of the defender - thats not even what that law was brought in for.

The game is supposed to be about goals, and all this does is keep taking them away.

 

[Easy 10]

I think people are abso-****ing-lutely ok with this! Are you seriously saying you prefer offside and goals that should not stand to be scored just so you can go "yayyy" a few times a season!?

Clear and obvious offside, for sure. But when its given by the margin of a couple of pixels then no. And I'm not even convinced they're getting that right, as the margins are down to such a forensic level I'm far from convinced they're freezing it the INSTANT the ball is played. And the benefit of the doubt ALWAYS goes to the defending side. Every. Single. Time.

I'm absolutely sick of it already. Its football for nerds. Nobody would have complained had that Spurs goal stood the other day, Son was patently level. But no, some over-enthusiastic scientist over in Heathrow draws his lines and thinks he might be a millimetre off, so bins the goal. Pathetic.

 

[GT49er]

Out of interest, has a goal the referee's disallowed for offside been over-ruled by VAR, and allowed to stand?

 

[Albion my Albion]

When that "non-legit goal" is being measured by the width of a gnats pube ? Nah, you can keep all that bollocks. Football is a game of chaos and passion, not pixels and sliderules.

It keeps the nerds happy I suppose, but it absolutely sucks the life out of the game as we know it. That adrenaline rush of scoring a goal has been massively diminished by the knowledge that someone is busily looking for a way to rule it out, and it may well be down to a RIDICULOUS margin, as per the Spurs one on Saturday, the Chelsea one yesterday, the Burn one v West Ham. Nobody wanted to see offsides being given if someones TOE is an inch in front of the defender - thats not even what that law was brought in for.

The game is supposed to be about goals, and all this does is keep taking them away.

A line must be drawn to have a "yes" or "no." Where do you draw the line? How far from the line is allowable?

Taking them away on a "wrong" call when they should be taken away. How do you know why the rules were "brought in for?"

 

[Deadly Danson]

I think people are abso-****ing-lutely ok with this! Are you seriously saying you prefer offside and goals that should not stand to be scored just so you can go "yayyy" a few times a season!?

Going yaayyy a few times a season is the reason we all do it surely otherwise what's the point?
And yes if it's a marginal offside I'd much rather take the win some/lose some philosophy than have this clinical nonsense.

 

[METALMICKY]

When that "non-legit goal" is being measured by the width of a gnats pube ? Nah, you can keep all that bollocks. Football is a game of chaos and passion, not pixels and sliderules.

It keeps the nerds happy I suppose, but it absolutely sucks the life out of the game as we know it. That adrenaline rush of scoring a goal has been massively diminished by the knowledge that someone is busily looking for a way to rule it out, and it may well be down to a RIDICULOUS margin, as per the Spurs one on Saturday, the Chelsea one yesterday, the Burn one v West Ham. Nobody wanted to see offsides being given if someones TOE is an inch in front of the defender - thats not even what that law was brought in for.

The game is supposed to be about goals, and all this does is keep taking them away.

Is the correct answer! Anything that seeks to diminish that moment of joy when you score is wrong.

 

[Deadly Danson]

Yeah because nothing was a bit fishy about trossards goal? As soon as burn got the ball most people paying attention were thinking "hmmm this looks suspicious". The fact we may have got away with it if it were not for VAR means it has imprived the game.

Not true. Most people down the other end of the ground could have no idea there was anything wrong with the goal because the sodding lino didn't put his flag up and the goal was given and everyone was ready to start again. If it was so suspicious why the f*** didnt they disallow the goal immediately.

 

[Hugo Rune]

Well then you have issue with the offside law NOT the use of VAR.
Also answer me this: where are you drawing the line for offside?

I suspect the poster has another line they are interested in; namely, when the ball leaves contact with the boot. Have you seen this line? It’s just a rough guess at the moment with VAR isn’t it. Certainly not down to the millimetre!

 

[Bold Seagull]

Well then you have issue with the offside law NOT the use of VAR.
Also answer me this: where are you drawing the line for offside?

Where are you drawing it?

 

[Acker79]

Out of interest, has a goal the referee's disallowed for offside been over-ruled by VAR, and allowed to stand?

No. It won't be, either. Offside on its own is not a reviewable decision. If the ref rules offside, that's it, play stops and it doesn't matter if the ball subsequently goes in the goal - you can't score if the ball isn't in play. It's why officials have been advised not to flag tight decisions, and why seemingly obvious offsides are not flagged - it's 'safer' to let a goal be scored and chalked off than to flag offside and find you got it wrong.

A similar thing to look at would be the Villa goal discussed earlier in the thread - Grealish got a nudge in the back, kept running and taking his time to fall and as he went to ground, he poked the ball through to a team mate, the ref blew for a dive, and the teammate put the ball in the goal - if the ref rules a dive, it can't be reviewed by VAR, so even though replays showed he got a nudge in the back there's nothing the VAR can do.

 

[drew]

So, offside debate apart, what did people think of Aubameyang's goal and whether it should have stood?

 

[GT49er]

No. It won't be, either. Offside on its own is not a reviewable decision. If the ref rules offside, that's it, play stops and it doesn't matter if the ball subsequently goes in the goal - you can't score if the ball isn't in play. It's why officials have been advised not to flag tight decisions, and why seemingly obvious offsides are not flagged - it's 'safer' to let a goal be scored and chalked off than to flag offside and find you got it wrong.

It depends on the speed, surely? - if the ball hits the back of the net before the referee has stopped the game, the ref can still disallow it for offside. So VAR could review.