• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on. Normal posting/reading should now be possible.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

VARguments

DonaldDownTheWing said:
An arm can’t play someone onside though?
Click to expand...

I wasn't aware of this !

The Law is quite clear about this. Any part of the body that can LEGALLY play the ball is considered when the referee looks for offside. That excludes the hands and arms, as they cannot legally play the ball. The same is true of the hands and arms of the opposing players.

Good decision then . Well done VAR

Another VARgument sorted
 

Daks said:
I wasn't aware of this !

The Law is quite clear about this. Any part of the body that can LEGALLY play the ball is considered when the referee looks for offside. That excludes the hands and arms, as they cannot legally play the ball. The same is true of the hands and arms of the opposing players.

Good decision then . Well done VAR

Another VARgument sorted
Click to expand...
keep up at the back!!! I only found out a arm could not keep you onside about 8hrs ago
 
Daks said:
I wasn't aware of this !

The Law is quite clear about this. Any part of the body that can LEGALLY play the ball is considered when the referee looks for offside. That excludes the hands and arms, as they cannot legally play the ball. The same is true of the hands and arms of the opposing players.

Good decision then . Well done VAR

Another VARgument sorted
Click to expand...
No such word
 
IMO VAR should be used when the ref doesn't have visibility of an incident.

If something is a marginal call, eg someone's little toe is offside, or the ball is almost fully over the line, then I think that should be benefit of the doubt given to attacking team. If anything to promote attacking play and eliminate unnecessary stoppages. If we keep going down this path we're on it'll be like the NFL. Probably have ads during the VAR reviews!
 
Adrian Durham had a good point for once, he said that the offside rule was brought in to stop "goal-hanging" - not to disallow goals such as the one last night, which even with camera stills we still cant agree on.
People who are banging on about the main thing is the right decision has been made are missing the point totally, if there had been no VAR and the goal had been given, who would have complained? How could anyone with the naked eye tell in real time? - for all the world he looked in line. Even the Southampton defenders didn't complain. Football isn't about "getting it right every time". Posters on here who say that they are willing to wait up to 2 mins to celebrate a goal if it means the correct decision is made just don't understand football - they really can't go to matches, or if they do they can't have any real emotional involvement in what they are watching.

Voice of fair play said:
Tribal element is that good? Over just a game?
Click to expand...

It's what makes football. Without the tribal element it's just a bit shit.
 
bernardbresslaw said:
Adrian Durham had a good point for once, he said that the offside rule was brought in to stop "goal-hanging" - not to disallow goals such as the one last night, which even with camera stills we still cant agree on.
People who are banging on about the main thing is the right decision has been made are missing the point totally, if there had been no VAR and the goal had been given, who would have complained? How could anyone with the naked eye tell in real time? - for all the world he looked in line. Even the Southampton defenders didn't complain. Football isn't about "getting it right every time". Posters on here who say that they are willing to wait up to 2 mins to celebrate a goal if it means the correct decision is made just don't understand football - they really can't go to matches, or if they do they can't have any real emotional involvement in what they are watching.



It's what makes football. Without the tribal element it's just a bit shit.
Click to expand...

Again that's just a matter of opinion and personal choice surely?

That doesn't make football for me at all and I am been serious, I don't need that to enjoy football.

Just a thought but maybe it's the skill on offer and entertainment, isn't that why people enjoy watching Brazil over Norway for example
 
bernardbresslaw said:
Adrian Durham had a good point for once, he said that the offside rule was brought in to stop "goal-hanging" - not to disallow goals such as the one last night, which even with camera stills we still cant agree on.
People who are banging on about the main thing is the right decision has been made are missing the point totally, if there had been no VAR and the goal had been given, who would have complained? How could anyone with the naked eye tell in real time? - for all the world he looked in line. Even the Southampton defenders didn't complain. Football isn't about "getting it right every time". Posters on here who say that they are willing to wait up to 2 mins to celebrate a goal if it means the correct decision is made just don't understand football - they really can't go to matches, or if they do they can't have any real emotional involvement in what they are watching.



It's what makes football. Without the tribal element it's just a bit shit.
Click to expand...


Also on your first point if the naked eye can't tell in real time, then why do linesman get stick?
 
Daks said:
I wasn't aware of this !

The Law is quite clear about this. Any part of the body that can LEGALLY play the ball is considered when the referee looks for offside. That excludes the hands and arms, as they cannot legally play the ball. The same is true of the hands and arms of the opposing players.

Good decision then . Well done VAR

Another VARgument sorted
Click to expand...
How does that work in the penalty area if the goalkeeper is the 2nd to last defender? His arm can legally play the ball
 
Vicham said:
With the increasing amount of cameras each match, everybody can now be a ref. And this is turning the game into one pursuing to make an exact science of the rules. Which naturally is impossible.
Click to expand...

That's probably the best point on the thread it is impossible to be exact, it will always be down to perception in real time which will always mean inconsistent decisions.
 
Voice of fair play said:
Again that's just a matter of opinion and personal choice surely?

That doesn't make football for me at all and I am been serious, I don't need that to enjoy football.

Just a thought but maybe it's the skill on offer and entertainment, isn't that why people enjoy watching Brazil over Norway for example
Click to expand...

Nope, I'd rather watch Sunderland over Brazil, as would 99% of the people on here so that puts that argument to bed.
The other 1% are just weird.
 
OzzyMac said:
How does that work in the penalty area if the goalkeeper is the 2nd to last defender? His arm can legally play the ball
Click to expand...
  • The hands and arms of all players, including the goalkeepers, are not considered.
They can play the ball but it’s score a goal with no play with
 
bernardbresslaw said:
Nope, I'd rather watch Sunderland over Brazil, as would 99% of the people on here so that puts that argument to bed.
The other 1% are just weird.
Click to expand...

Of course most of us on here would agree with that, never said anything else, I said Brazil over Norway didn't I.

What you basically saying is if you neutral and don't have that tribual element because in you words that what makes football, you can't enjoy football which surely is complete bollocks.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top