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

[Triggaaar]

This obsession with 'daylight' is very odd. It's never been a rule or directive of any kind, but there seems to be a generally held belief that in the olden days it used to be 'daylight' etc etc.

I realise that isn't your point, but what would be the advantage in moving the frame of reference to 'torso', 'daylight', 'feet' or anything else? It doesn't make any difference!

No indeed that wasn't my point, I'm not referring to the olden days. It does make a difference, because people are clearly irritated that offside is being given when players are practically level, whereas before there was the idea that the benefit of doubt was with the attacker. It would be given offside if the linesman was confident they were offside, not if they were about level.

Wherever you draw the line, there will be a point that is 1mm past that line - and that will be offside. You therefore still have a situation where the player is 1mm offside.

Which is exactly what I said: "We'd still have just as tight calls (whether it's 1mm offside or not), but maybe the fans would be happier with it being more lenient for the attacking side."

 

[darkwolf666]

Actually, they would. Not because they can see that it's a millimetre offside, but because they make their best guesses, and sometimes that means giving someone offside even when they're clearly onside. We've had a couple of goals like that disallowed by a linesman, when replays have clearly shown they were onside.

That's what we're missing this season. There have been goals allowed, where it's been really close, which would have been incorrectly disallowed in previous seasons. That's a great improvement, but no one notices.

Goals disallowed for being a mm offside is annoying most fans, so perhaps the offside rule should be relaxed a little. For example, it could be on the closest part of the torso (ignoring legs altogether, as in a running race), and they could say that daylight (between attacker and defender) is needed for it to be offside.

We'd still have just as tight calls (whether it's 1mm offside or not), but maybe the fans would be happier with it being more lenient for the attacking side.

Or... Do away with offside completely!

Just an idea...

 

[darkwolf666]

Point to me in the law of the game, where the offside rule is defined, and show where it states the linesman has to be able to see it.
If you are a ANY distance behind the 2nd last defender than you are offside. That is how the law is written. VAR confirmed the offside by the letter of the law. You are basically arguing for a new law.

I'm not arguing it's wrong, or the laws need changing, just that VAR hasn't improved football as a spectacle!

 

[darkwolf666]

Actually, they would. Not because they can see that it's a millimetre offside, but because they make their best guesses, and sometimes that means giving someone offside even when they're clearly onside. We've had a couple of goals like that disallowed by a linesman, when replays have clearly shown they were onside.

That's what we're missing this season. There have been goals allowed, where it's been really close, which would have been incorrectly disallowed in previous seasons. That's a great improvement, but no one notices.

Goals disallowed for being a mm offside is annoying most fans, so perhaps the offside rule should be relaxed a little. For example, it could be on the closest part of the torso (ignoring legs altogether, as in a running race), and they could say that daylight (between attacker and defender) is needed for it to be offside.

We'd still have just as tight calls (whether it's 1mm offside or not), but maybe the fans would be happier with it being more lenient for the attacking side.

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!

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...

 

[Sorrel]

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.

One improvement then would be to give the same instruction to the video referees, so at least both sets of officials have the same instructions.

I still think the whole thing is misconceived, though. The referee has more or less got nothing to do now during an attack in the penalty area. Any decision they make will be referred back, so they are better off just ignoring play until the ball leaves the area.

 

[Bold Seagull]

It's clear that most of you that don't like VAR have simply hated some of the decisions that have come from VAR more often. It's fine when the decision goes in your favour.

Clear as VAR maybe.

 

[darkwolf666]

Utter bullshit. It has barely had any impact on watching the game or the spectacle of it. In fact it has improved it demonstratably! What you are saying is you prefer football when "big" players and clubs get the rub of the green in tight offside calls. This no longer happens and that makes it better.

So you’re happy to celebrate a “goal”, only to then stand and wait for the referee via a link to VAR to disallow it. What happened to the spontaneity, the unbridled joy of celebrating a goal - it’s all but gone and hasn’t improved football at all.

As an aside I would love to see the statistics that prove the big clubs get the rub of the green when it comes to offside decisions. I rather think it may be overstated, and that the top teams have the best players, who consequently don’t have to hang on the last man as much as some others, I.e. Murray, so aren’t caught offside as often. I will be delighted to be proved wrong though!

 

[Easy 10]

I told you it would be shit.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Utter bullshit. It has barely had any impact on watching the game or the spectacle of it. In fact it has improved it demonstratably! What you are saying is you prefer football when "big" players and clubs get the rub of the green in tight offside calls. This no longer happens and that makes it better.

How has it 'improved' the spectacle? What, through delays and not knowing what's going on?

 

[symyjym]

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!

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...

Agree, especially the vertical line to the armpit. VAR in principle is much welcome but what we have is an over engineered beast that cannot actually identify exactly the moment the ball has left the foot of a player who is passing or crossing it.

VAR was supposed to help with the clear off or onside that the linesman missed, not the undetectable by the human eye in real time.

They should scrap these imaginary lines and let the ref look at the unadulterated footage because the 18 yard line plus the grass cut lines should give enough indication to determine an offside or not for anyone with a sense of perspective. If the ref cannot make up his mind within 10 seconds of looking at a freeze frame it has to be onside.

 

[gripper stebson]

Get rid. You're offside when the linesman sticks his flag up. We managed for 100 years and it was fine.

 

[Easy 10]

Utter bullshit. It has barely had any impact on watching the game or the spectacle of it. In fact it has improved it demonstratably! What you are saying is you prefer football when "big" players and clubs get the rub of the green in tight offside calls. This no longer happens and that makes it better.

What a ridiculous statement. We're now in a position whereby when a goal is scored, we have to hold back to wait to see if its legit. Did you enjoy that 1min 50 that elapsed from Trossard putting the ball in the net against West Ham before they THEN said it was being reviewed ? Yeah, that improved the spectacle immeasurably.

As for big clubs no longer getting the rub of the green - did you see that Socratis handball for Arsenal yesterday ? You shouldn't even need a VAR review to give that as a pen, but because they're so reluctant to overrule the on-field call by the ref, it went unpunished.

Its
A
MESS

 

[Deadly Danson]

Utter bullshit. It has barely had any impact on watching the game or the spectacle of it. In fact it has improved it demonstratably! What you are saying is you prefer football when "big" players and clubs get the rub of the green in tight offside calls. This no longer happens and that makes it better.

You must be in the tiny minority of fans attending games in the country who thinks VAR hasn't had any impact on the spectacle. There is an argument for VAR certainly but I simply don't understand how anyone who celebrates a goal with gusto hasn't had that moment lessened forever. It may perhaps improve things for some less discerning armchair viewers but, at the ground, absolutely no way. That moment of scoring a goal is part of the drug of going to games - I hate that that has been diminished.

 

[gripper stebson]

Martin Tyler put it nicely when he said

'It certainly makes the referees sleep easier at night but football is not about referees. It's about fans and players. VAR takes away more than it gives.'

 

[Bodian]

Oh come off it. Its the same as when Alzate "scored" at the weekend: it was offside and should not have stood.

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?

 

[Bold Seagull]

There are less goals being awarded that should not have been via officiating errors. That improves the game.

You said it demonstrably improved the 'spectacle'. That isn't really an example of how the spectacle is improved.

 

[Mayonaise]

That moment of scoring a goal is part of the drug of going to games - I hate that that has been diminished.

In a nutshell!

 

[darkwolf666]

There are less goals being awarded that should not have been via officiating errors. That improves the game.

Oh for goodness sake, I doubt before VAR was invented that there would have been one single Leicester fan shouting that Son was offside. The game has been ruined as a spectacle and the time delay between "scoring" and a decision has taken away the spontaneous outpourings of joy at a goal.

While the technology may be getting the decisions "right", I don't think we ever needed this level of accuracy!

Goal line technology was the original call, which worked perfectly for Connolly's attempt on Saturday, but VAR for gnats cock decisions is all wrong!

 

[Easy 10]

Oh come off it. Its the same as when Alzate "scored" at the weekend: it was offside and should not have stood.

Its not the same at all. Yes it was offside, and it was ruled out by a lino's flag, not a VAR review.

Other than that though, great point.

 

[Albion my Albion]

So you’re happy to celebrate a “goal”, only to then stand and wait for the referee via a link to VAR to disallow it. What happened to the spontaneity, the unbridled joy of celebrating a goal - it’s all but gone and hasn’t improved football at all.

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.