Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
Agree. Pundits and people on here saying ‘it was offside’ - not really grasping the limitations of the technology.
[Football] FA Cup semi finals
- Thread starter Flounce
- Start date
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
But if it were Utd scoring that goal everyone would be happy the correct decision was made, but the technology available.
pasty
A different kind of pasty
Correction. If it were United everyone would be pissing themselves laughing.
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
Doesn’t change the limitations of the technology. Use it in a way appropriate to its accuracy.
Dunk's goal at Goodison shouldn't have been disallowed for the same reason.
It might be shite, ruining football, used incorrectly and downright wrong...
...but at least it's consistent
This.
- Nov 15, 2006
- 4,245
- Thread starter
- #407
I wonder if the penalty Coventry got to equalise in normal time would have been given if it had happened a minute before the end of extra time giving Coventry the win. The cynic in me says it would have been over ruled by VAR 
I seem to have mislaid my tinfoil hat
I seem to have mislaid my tinfoil hat
Iggle Piggle
Well-known member
- Sep 3, 2010
- 5,948
One of the lads I coach cricket to was used as the "young upset Cov fan by the TV" when the goal was disallowed.
He supports Liverpool.
He supports Liverpool.
- Mar 23, 2023
- 2,122
I think it is time the FA got creative - what they should do is let each team have one “ask the audience” where if the teams aren’t happy with the var decision they can get everyone to push a button for decision good/bad.
If this isn’t implemented then I’m afraid PBOBE out.
If this isn’t implemented then I’m afraid PBOBE out.
So how far offside does someone need to be before they should be flagged offside? At some point there will be a point under your definition where they change from being okay to goal hanging. What is it?
Ah I see everyone’s still furious about a correct decision then?
Seasider78
Well-known member
- Nov 14, 2004
- 6,011
The problem is not just the use of technology it’s also the over-engineering of the rules around them. Offside could be simply if any part of the defenders body is in line with the attacker he is onside and we would instantly have a better game. Handball could resort to deliberate use of arm and we would lose the nonsense about sleeves and unnatural body shapes.
What all of this tells us is the people running officiating at the highest level don’t understand the game and as each year passes the simplicity of the game gets eroded by a bunch of officials who have taken centre stage.
Would support any move to bin off VAR and simplify rules to make officiating easier.
What all of this tells us is the people running officiating at the highest level don’t understand the game and as each year passes the simplicity of the game gets eroded by a bunch of officials who have taken centre stage.
Would support any move to bin off VAR and simplify rules to make officiating easier.
Wouldn’t be too hard to introduce a suitable margin that takes account of the current inaccuracies in determining when the ball left the players foot and - as should be the case imo - slightly favours the attacking side. Simply making the onside line a bit wider when they check could do it, or something more radical like needing be the whole boot, or as Wenger proposed has to be clear daylight between attacker and defender for it to be off.
Milano
Well-known member
Offside should be the same as all other VAR calls - clear and obvious. Do away with the lines, technology should only be used in sport if it’s infallible, currently for offside decisions in football it isn’t.
If VAR has to stay then I’d like to see 2 changes:
1. Retired refs as the VAR
2. 30 seconds to overturn a decision or it stays with the on pitch decision.
BTW a far worse VAR decision yesterday was the 3rd for Forest, that is 100% a penalty and it’s that type of incident that VAR was actually supposed to fix!
If VAR has to stay then I’d like to see 2 changes:
1. Retired refs as the VAR
2. 30 seconds to overturn a decision or it stays with the on pitch decision.
BTW a far worse VAR decision yesterday was the 3rd for Forest, that is 100% a penalty and it’s that type of incident that VAR was actually supposed to fix!
GloryDays
Well-known member
It was offside. If you know football you know it’s offside during the build up. Ppl reading way too much / making too much of this. That’s an offside and has been offside since the “daylight” ambiguity of the 90’s was over ruled. The unfair thing is letting it play on. A decent lino knows to flag. They’re told to keep them down now, but really it makes more of a drama out of it than it is. I’m surprised the players celebrated it so much knowing there was a very high chance of being ruled out.
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
I kind of like cricket's answer to this conundrum - how much of a cricket ball needs to be shown to be hitting the stumps that the technology can reliably overturn the on-field decision.
What we have lost with VAR that other sports have retained is the sanctity of the on-field official's decision.
The question isn't 'how far does someone need to be?', the question should be how accurate is the system we're using and how should that be used to correct an on-field decision.
Cricket umpires have statistically improved their decision making with technology.