viccarlton
Striker
Who measures the 25cm
-
The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
New user registrations are currently disabled.
Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.
VARguments
- Thread starter bernardbresslaw
- Start date
onestepbeyond
Goalkeeper
How has Man U just been given that vs our decision yesterday?,,
Dick Fitzwell
Striker
It was outside the box too
ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK
Winger
Cunha was held back by the defender's hand hooked over his shoulder
The defender stupidly kept hold of Cunha into the box
Dick Fitzwell
Striker
Always thought it was where the offence started
Grumpy Old Man
Striker
Because the ref wasn't Jared Gillett
Sure but they’d be visibly on or offside, that’s the point.
We’ve redefined what offside is and therefore ruling out goals which aren’t / weren’t the problem.
We haven’t redefined what offside is. It’s been “nearer to the goal line than the second last opponent” since the 1990s. What’s changed is how accurately we can measure nearer. As you say, back in the day, it would’ve been “visibly” nearer. Now it’s nearer according to the triangulated position of 16 100 frame per second cameras. It just feels technical overkill
The thing is, exactly the same thing has happened with goal line technology. It used to be judged by eye at full speed and need to be “visibly” over the line. Now it can be given to the millimetre. But we’re all fine with that.
ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK
Winger
Really it was last changed 100 years ago when it was changed from 3 players to 2 defenders.
Pre 1990, an attacker being behind a defender is still only a few mms less than the 1990 change so no huge change at the end of the day.
I’m going to disagree a little here. It was always about the ball being over the line and completely over being the rule. It was hard to be precise especially at the pace required, but the rule was the rule and, let’s face it, it’s rare for technology to be needed - certainly less than offsides.
Offside was he had to be in front of the player but being in line was ok and that was a known ruling even if I don’t have the wording in front of me. Mate, in line, doesn’t really exist. One player is always ahead or behind another - at the atomic level it’s almost impossible to exactly in line. So common sense takes over and a ref has 3 buckets to choose from : onside, in line (therefore onside) and offside. Now there are 2 options on and off and the grey area known as “in line” has disappeared whilst we check the molecules. That’s what I mean about redefining - more people are now being judged as being offside because in line has effectively disappeared.
ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK
Winger
The molecules you're talking about aren't where they should be as the attacker gets a small advantage with VAR.
There is no inline offside any more as the advantage means that the current offside rule is better than it's ever been as it allows the attacker to be 5cm ahead of the last player. That's why goals like Leeds against Villa or the Mags against Man City have had fans saying they were offside. They were but the advantage actually played them on.
The problem is that the vast majority of fans don't know it exists or just how much it is and why I waffled on so much in post #1875 to explain it in simple terms and hoyed the images up to show it's there and always has been. That is the grey area you're saying doesn't exist and it's all for the advantage of the attacker also.
This is what the premier League do, stop swing the view around so you can't see along the line.
You must be logged on to see media items
This is what a 3D VAR video would look like if the VAR offside video went all the way around for the Premier League. The top is comparing defender to attacker and #8's foot is just offside. The bottom half is defender to attacker plus this thick line advantage (the grey area) so now playing him onside. It's only the Premier League that use this thicker line advantage as UEFA and FIFA use the top image in the World Cup, Champions League etc. That's why the Premier League 3D video clip showing onside/offside doesn't rotate so it's looking directly across as people would see the attacker is actually offside.
Logon or register to see this image
The advantage was there with the old red and blue lines also and possibly an even bigger advantage than SAOT. Again, the majority of fans didn't realise it's not just 1 offside line but how 2 lines from the players being checked against each other.
VARguments
The rule is wrong. Advantage should be given to the attacker. Should be a foot or a **** hair at least. Not a toenail. What happens when it's toenail either way of that foot? As for advantage, see th2 posts as it's been in place 3 seasons now You must be logged on to see this You must be...
www.readytogo.net
I even created an example graphic to show it and how that if the blue line of defender didn't overlap the red line of the attacker then it was offside. If it did overlap, even by a tiny margin then it was classed as onside. That's part of the problem, that fans don't know what the advantage is or how it works and not everyone reads the SMB
Logon or register to see this image
Last edited:
dsr-burnley
Central Defender
Whether we have redesigned what offside is, is a moot point. We have certainly redesigned how it is applied.
Ten years ago, the Flemming goal would have been a totally uncontroversial good goal because the players were level. Changing the rule so that level was onside was one of the few universally approved law changes, because it reduced offside and brought about more goals.
Then along comes some bright spark who says that if we (1) introduce delays of game of up to five minutes; and (2) ensure that linesmen can't judge offside so play has to go on even if it's all for nothing; (3) ensure that goal celebrations will be either muted or wasted because people won't know until the following kick-off whether a goal has been scored; then we will be able to disallow some of these goals that people enjoy.
How is that good for the game of football? People who like football, like goals, like celebrating are all disadvantages. People who like watching a blank screen for 8 minutes in a game are pleased. Why is that good?
ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK
Winger
(1) Yes it's daft how sometimes it can take so long as the semi automated stuff should really speed it up so it should be a quick decision yet this season it hasn't been working as quick as expected.
(2) Playing on means goals can now be scored and officials can argue the toss about the offside after. In the past the linesman flagging instantly would first wind the crowd up by stopping a potential goal from being scored, more so when it was shown to be clearly onside. Who knows how many goals or class moves have been stopped prematurely. It's happened a few times now when a linesman has flagged offside after a goal is scored, only for it to be shown onside.
Even after a goal, there's less offsides then flagged by the linesman. They do this as they don't want to kill the celebration incorrectly when it's not a clear offside as the human eye simply can't get it right all the time when it's close. By the linesman not flagging, it also takes away the vitriol of the crowd as it's then directed at VAR and the offside lines tech for ruling a goal out. It also takes away the doubt of any 'favouritism' with mistakes as the margin of error is a few inches now, it's never a foot or a yard error like the past.
(3) This is a myth IMO as fans still go mental in all games when a goal is scored no matter what. They groan when VAR appears but then get to cheer again when confirmed or if not then the opposition get to celebrate instead. Think Sheff Utd's 2nd goal in the playoffs for example.
If people accepted that there is a small margin of error with offside as it's impossible to freeze that trillisecond in time the ball is player, butt they knew about the advantage given to the attacker adding a grey area in their favour then what is the problem if offsides that are shown are within the laws of the game? Certain fans moaned when a Leeds player was given onside, even though it looked offside, as they did with the Bruno goal against Man City (usually opposition fans) and they moan when it's the other way around as some of it is down to bias and it's to be expected.
Offside using VAR is never going away because of the variation and larger margin of error in the past when using humans only. They're trialling the daylight rule in Canada in April but IMO that won't work and won't be brought in. It will end up a farce with attackers with their upper body goal side of a defender can simply block the defender from defending, all while the attacker has a trailing leg keeping him onside. They did actually look at torso only but there was opposition to it.
Before the Ifab meeting it was expected that the trials of "daylight" offside would be ditched in favour of "torso" offside, which ignores arms and feet when making a judgement. However, there was opposition to this idea and it is now unlikely to go to trials.
What they could do is allow a slightly bigger advantage to the attacker, rather than the current 5cm or so that it is. That means an attacker can't stand goal side like they could with the daylight rule but when it's a close decision he'll always get a decent advantage.
dsr-burnley
Central Defender
It's all about what constitutes "level", basically. The laws have always been framed so that level is quite a significant margin based on human eye judgement, and the linesman will usually be right and sometimes wrong in that judgement. That margin is what was used in 1990 when they changed the law from level-offside to level=onside, specifically to give attackers and advantage and to create more goals.
The powers that be could have chosen to use VAR to correct the times when the linseman is wrong. (Or at least some of them. The farce of "play on and we will check later" hadn't been invented.)
But they chose not to; they took the chance of extending the use of VAR to reduce the margin of error, the degree of "what is level", to almost nothing (2 inches apparently), and to extend offside to all parts of the body apart from the arms. The idea behind this is to reverse the effect of the 1990 law change and disallow half the extra goals created by the new "level=onside" law.
Whether disallowing these goals is a good idea or not in itself is dubious. I don't see the advantage myself. But even if we take the principle of disallowing previously good goals as being a desirable aim, this is not how to do it. It has to be quicker. Really, it should be instant (like goalline technology) and take away the linesman's responsibility altogether, but if they can't do that, 15 seconds max. Three minutes is absurd - I cannot see why anyone believes that a 3 minute delay to see if a man's shoulder is 4 inches offside is a good thing.
I would also argue that having de facto different rules in the PL than in other matches should be discouraged.
Are we even gonna get a mention on ref watch the knars
Whoops wrong thread
Whoops wrong thread
Last edited:
ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK
Winger
You're talking about the old margin of error as if it was big. Everyone used to moan when goals were allowed when it was shown on a freeze frame that an attacker was just offside. Or more if a goal was disallowed even though the attacker was just onside.
You're also mentioning them bringing legs etc into it, but with the offside trial they mentioned using torso only but there was opposition against it.
Pre VAR the margin was small from freeze frames when TV was good enough to free frame it and everyone would moan about it being the wrong decision even though it was inches in it. Though the main issue was the reality of the decisions being wrong as many times it was a lot more than a few inches for the more obvious ones/
You can say that the Premier League can't have different rules but it can. That's because the games are worth millions. A ref making a decision about a foul is subjective but offside player's position is subjective within a very small margin of error. There's no way they would ever go back to what it was and have linesman call it.
That's why it's pointless moaning about it, saying but "He's off by a toenail" etc. it's either got to be onside or offside, it can't be "Well maybe it is, maybe it isn't". That's why they have the thicker lines to take away the thin line and have a grey area which is for the advantage of the attacker. If more people knew about this then they probably wouldn't moan about toenails or a forehead being offside. I would still make the lines a bit thicker to remove more doubt and having a bigger grey area but at least it's to the advantage of the attacker.
These are the total goals a season in the Premier League from the last 5 seasons. It's higher than previous seasons so all these 'offside' goals aren't having any effect on that. The reason behind that is the offside flag not being raised all the time as linesman isn't sure and goals can be scored. Sometime he may not even flag after a goal as I said as it kills celebrations so why flag something if he's not sure. If he does and he's wrong then any goals are flagged offside by linesman then they're corrected by VAR. This is why more are given off by VAR as the linesman leaves the ones he's not sure about to them.
2024/25 1,115 2.93
2023/24 1,246 3.28
2022/23 1,084 2.85
2021/22 1,071 2.82
2020/21 1,024 2.69
2019/20 1,034 2.72
For all the doomsday prophecies of VAR killing the game, for all the howls of anguish from supporters when what seemed a perfectly good goal is disallowed, there is no doubt that football is as popular as ever and that every single stadium in the Premier League is full to bursting point every fortnight. Of course, it is beyond any doubt whatsover that the gods in the VAR control room are certainly capable of a quick decision. Of course there is little point in a referee looking at the monitor when the gods above him have effectively removed his authority. The Premier League is a multi-billion pound business. It thrives on controversy and free publicity. What better way to achieve this then the stage managed drama of VAR, which has the added bonus of guaranteeing games a lengthy amount of time added on. The dithering and delay of the gods above might not ryhme with the spectators who have parted with their hard earned cash, but it does with SKY.
soapster
Striker
which foul do you penalize. yesterdays game was a real disgrace but it is they players / coaches that are doing itAnother howler not giving Chelsea a penalty. Rice giving the Chelsea attacker a cuddle and handballing it in the process
mentioned on ref watch this morning, saying it was virtually impossible for the to do anything as there was that much going on.
