[Albion] Offside?

[Guinness Boy]

Interesting stat

We had three offsides given against us yesterday (none for Everton).

That takes the total number of offsides (for both teams) in our last five games to a grand total of 8.

• 3 v Everton
• 1 v Fulham
• 1 v Ajax
• 3 v Man City
• 1 v Liverpool

Murray used to get 8 in one match!

Elvis Manu was basically never onside!

 

[GT49er]

My 'nonsense' wasn't directed at your process, but at the idea that fans will be happy with it.

Fairy nuff.

My position isn't that VAR works or is perfect as it is, or that your suggestion for VAR is bad. My position is that fans will never all be happy. That what is perfect for you won't be for other fans, who will still complain. Ask five people how VAR should be used and you will get five different processes, and each will version upset a different section of the football community.

Fans will always argue decisions that don't go their way are wrong, and if we just tweak VAR a bit more, it would make everyone happy.

It won't. Nothing will make everyone happy because there are so many varied ideas of what football is or should be, how referee should be done, how VAR should be implemented. Even if you get 'the majority' happy, the minority will be loud and be catered to by outrage driven media (both traditional and online).

Everyone happy all the time? Agree, not a chance; an impossible objective - as is getting every single off-side decision 100% right. However, getting the majority happy with the way VAR works IMHO would be a satisfactory outcome - and a vast improvement on where we are at the moment!

 

[dazzer6666]

I don't get why so much authority has effectively been taken away from the onfield ref - it's clearly hammered their confidence in making a decision. They should be asked to review anything subjective and remain in charge of decisions, not 'told' by someone watching countless replays (and who may have a different view anyway) what the decision should be. The Toon goal was a case in point - ref should have been asked to look again at the (non) foul (the subjective decision out of the three) and confirm it was as he initially saw it or different with the benefit of another look (as happens in rugby with the TMO). Only the clear 'factual' stuff should be decided by VAR/AI/goal-line tech etc.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

It was offside. They got there in the end. A huge shame because it was a great goal.

I cannot fathom how or why it took over 2 minutes to get to a decision. It's the clubs' fault of course. Would've been clear as day if they'd bothered, like all other European leagues, to put semi-automated offsides in place for this season. Utterly bizarre to vote against something that at the very least, gives clarity to everyone on a tight decision.

It took 4 minutes. Double the time you've said. That is not acceptable.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I don't get why so much authority has effectively been taken away from the onfield ref - it's clearly hammered their confidence in making a decision. They should be asked to review anything subjective and remain in charge of decisions, not 'told' by someone watching countless replays (and who may have a different view anyway) what the decision should be. The Toon goal was a case in point - ref should have been asked to look again at the (non) foul (the subjective decision out of the three) and confirm it was as he initially saw it or different with the benefit of another look (as happens in rugby with the TMO). Only the clear 'factual' stuff should be decided by VAR/AI/goal-line tech etc.

Little use is made of the ref going to the pitchside monitor. It does happen but less frequently than bods sitting in a room surrounded by monitors.

 

[dazzer6666]

Little use is made of the ref going to the pitchside monitor. It does happen but less frequently than bods sitting in a room surrounded by monitors.

Exactly - rather than the remote ref making the decision, the onfield ref should be taking another look and (importantly) making the decision. They have massively reduced authority as things stand - which means they're almost afraid to make decisions

 

[METALMICKY]

Elvis Manu was basically never onside!

Alas I think poor Elvis was born offside!

 

[Greg Bobkin]

So much of the argument around VAR is on how to improve it.

The argument needs to be on how to remove it.

It’s a shitty, flawed system supported by mega pedants and the media (and the ex refs they’ve paid to defend it, on the hour, every hour) and it causes more arguments than when it was just the officials.

It’s killing the fan experience in grounds while boosting the income of blagards from Murdoch’s talksport to these nouveau twitter account bellends.

Getting rid of it WOULD improve it. No chance of anyone using it making a mistake, then!

I would honestly rather have honest mistakes made by humans on the field – and retaining goalline technology – than the shitshow that we (as football fans, not just the Albion) have to endure pretty much every game.

 

[Blues Guitarist]

It was offside.

Can you please share the image that shows it was offside? Prefereably an image taken before the kick was taken, and not so heavily pixelated you can't differentiatied an arse from an elbow. Thanks.

 

[One Love]

The Ex players one is often used, they barely know the laws of the game as it is, just because they know the game does not mean the decisions would be correct, just subjective to the players POV.

Ex-players can be taught the laws of the game but refs can't be given the years of experience playing.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

Is the issue our expectations?

In the pre VAR days, you'd get a howler from time to time, but after initial anger settles down, you can kind of rationalise it that reffing is a tough job and some things are going to get missed, or the ref might have had a bad view or something.

With VAR in place, the expectations of the fans and media etc is to get all the decisions right. In a way that's not unreasonable because they do have lots of time, lots of camera angles and lots of officials, so the number of patently wrong decisions is unfathomable.

Had Dunky's goal been ruled out with a No VAR, you accept it was marginal, same with MacAllister's screamer last season, even Estupinan at Palace, in a match with no VAR, you don't like getting those, but you accept it as the slings and arrows of football.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

Getting rid of it WOULD improve it. No chance of anyone using it making a mistake, then!

I would honestly rather have honest mistakes made by humans on the field – and retaining goalline technology – than the shitshow that we (as football fans, not just the Albion) have to endure pretty much every game.

Yes mate. Totally agree.

Let's re-empower the ref and get paying fans home at a decent time

 

[Greg Bobkin]

Gets a mention on MOTD2 – right at the end of this.

 

[Beanstalk]

Can you please share the image that shows it was offside? Prefereably an image taken before the kick was taken, and not so heavily pixelated you can't differentiatied an arse from an elbow. Thanks.

Whilst I would've loved it to have been onside, it's clear that the line is drawn from Dunk's sleeve, as is Tarkowski's, the frame they chose is with Gross' foot touching the ball (at the moment the ball is played - as per law 11, Why would an image before the ball was touched matter at all?).

There is overwhelming evidence that it is offside. Look it was a great finish, and a joy to watch live, but for me, there are hundreds of more subjective issues to do with refereeing rather than rubbishing this one. It's just a shame because it's so tight and such a quality strike.

Taking all of this into account, why did it take 4 minutes (2 from when the VAR check screen went up in ground), to get to what is ultimately an objective decision, aided by technology?

 

[Beanstalk]

It took 4 minutes. Double the time you've said. That is not acceptable.

Agree, it was two minutes from the VAR Check coming up on the big screens in the ground at least.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Agree, it was two minutes from the VAR Check coming up on the big screens in the ground at least.

I was watching Soccer Saturday and Michael Dawson was watching our game. He was incredulous it took so long.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

View attachment 169244
Whilst I would've loved it to have been onside, it's clear that the line is drawn from Dunk's sleeve, as is Tarkowski's, the frame they chose is with Gross' foot touching the ball (at the moment the ball is played - as per law 11, Why would an image before the ball was touched matter at all?).

There is overwhelming evidence that it is offside. Look it was a great finish, and a joy to watch live, but for me, there are hundreds of more subjective issues to do with refereeing rather than rubbishing this one. It's just a shame because it's so tight and such a quality strike.

Taking all of this into account, why did it take 4 minutes (2 from when the VAR check screen went up in ground), to get to what is ultimately an objective decision, aided by technology?

The ball is already in motion when this still was taken. That's why it is a blurred motion image. A player scores with his feet, not his sleeve.

 

[pb21]

...it's clear that the line is drawn from Dunk's sleeve, as is Tarkowski's...

That's anything but clear.

 

[Beanstalk]

The ball is already in motion when this still was taken. That's why it is a blurred motion image.

His foot is still touching the ball though. If we accept that this was the best frame that VAR could come up with, we're arguing that in a fiftieth of a second that line will have changed dramatically enough for it to no longer be offside. Those lines aren't touching.

I get the frustration but with all the evidence we are able to see, the likelihood of it being offside is higher than it not.

 

[cheshunt seagull]

Is the issue our expectations?

In the pre VAR days, you'd get a howler from time to time, but after initial anger settles down, you can kind of rationalise it that reffing is a tough job and some things are going to get missed, or the ref might have had a bad view or something.

With VAR in place, the expectations of the fans and media etc is to get all the decisions right. In a way that's not unreasonable because they do have lots of time, lots of camera angles and lots of officials, so the number of patently wrong decisions is unfathomable.

Had Dunky's goal been ruled out with a No VAR, you accept it was marginal, same with MacAllister's screamer last season, even Estupinan at Palace, in a match with no VAR, you don't like getting those, but you accept it as the slings and arrows of football.

In the past I accepted that human error on the part of refs and linos was part of the game. It only became an issue when a pattern of bias seemed to be involved. That doesn’t mean that I didn’t get annoyed but the sense of grievance didn’t linger and things did seem to balance out over a season.

With VAR not only have we lost much of the surge of excitement when a goal is scored and we have to put up with long delays but these aren’t balanced off with a sense of justice as decisions seem worse than ever.