Tweak the offside rule?

I was at Hoffenheim v Hertha last Sunday in the away end. Hoffenheim scored but the flag went up which resulted in the Berlin fans taking the piss.
There was then around a 5 minute delay when me and another SAFC fan had no idea that a VAR review was going on. There were no on screen replays, nowt.
Subsequently, a goal was given. Hoffenheim fans clapped a bit and the game restarted. Total shite and something I don’t look forward to when it rolls into league football over here.
 


Confucius said:
The problem I had with it is that Eriksen plays it back and Bernardo doesn’t play the ball, he tries to block it. It isn’t a deliberate play.
Click to expand...

This. Silva doesn’t make a controlled effort to play the ball, it’s a deflection.

Goal should have stood for me.
 
If you’re half a step in front of the defender you’ve gained an advantage therefore the offside rule is fine the way it is thank you.
 
For offsides I think its great as 99.9% of offsides are pretty clear cut when you can free frame and zoom in etc. They got the decision spot on. He was in an offside position when it his Silva, so the goal was correctly ruled out.

Its the VAR checks for 'fouls' or handballs that are spoiling it. Its supposed to be a clear and obvious error, not marginal calls. Im all for trying it though
 
Moneyball said:
This. Silva doesn’t make a controlled effort to play the ball, it’s a deflection.

Goal should have stood for me.
Click to expand...

He sticks his leg out to cut off/intercept the pass. He couldn't control it and it went to Kun who was then offside. If a defender slices an attempted clearance to an attacker, that attacker is likewise offside regardless of the intention of defender to put it in row-Z.

Silva made an active attempt - and in fact did, just badly - to play the ball.
 
TheBalkan said:
He sticks his leg out to cut off/intercept the pass. He couldn't control it and it went to Kun who was then offside. If a defender slices an attempted clearance to an attacker, that attacker is likewise offside regardless of the intention of defender to put it in row-Z.

Silva made an active attempt - and in fact did, just badly - to play the ball.
Click to expand...

It’s semantics, Silva didn’t make a controlled effort to pass the ball to Aguero - he may have dangled a leg but he had no control of where the ball would end up.

It’s not an error in technique - it’s a 100% pure luck the ball ricocheted into Aguero’s path.

For me it’s similar to the unending deliberate handball debate that will never be solved.

Deliberate is such a subjective word.

VAR just doesn't sit well with me - football is a game of flaws, human error. For me that includes the officials.

We’ll get to a point where goals aren’t celebrate spontaneously but are mutedly cheered when the scoreboard flashes after 5 minutes. Killing the game.

Tongey said:
Can only be offside with a part of the body you can score with, so anything other than arms can be offside
Click to expand...

Llorente would disagree.
 
Confucius said:
Because he doesn’t deliberately play the ball, it hits off his shin. That’s how I can.
Click to expand...

Moneyball said:
It’s semantics, Silva didn’t make a controlled effort to pass the ball to Aguero - he may have dangled a leg but he had no control of where the ball would end up.

It’s not an error in technique - it’s a 100% pure luck the ball ricocheted into Aguero’s path.

For me it’s similar to the unending deliberate handball debate that will never be solved.

Deliberate is such a subjective word.

...
Click to expand...

He did though. He tries to trap it/intercept it. He deliberately played the ball. That the closing speed between him and the ball was so fast that he wasn't able to play it exactly as he wished is neither here nor there.

Not that it's relevant but it is an 'error' in technique. Had he better reactions, sounder technique he might had trapped the ball cleanly.

Yes, it is like handball. There is no situation in which an outfield player intentionally hits the ball with his hand, succeeds regardless of where it then goes and it's not considered handball.

It's like arguing a batsman trying to lash a ball through extra cover and edging it to 2nd slip isn't out because the ball was too fast, his technique is generally sound and besides it came off the bat splice not out the middle.
 
I hate VAR, the best thing in football is when you score and for a moment you lose your senses hugging random strangers, now, lets wait 3 minutes and now celebrate, the moment has gone.
 
Mirzam said:
I hate VAR, the best thing in football is when you score and for a moment you lose your senses hugging random strangers, now, lets wait 3 minutes and now celebrate, the moment has gone.
Click to expand...
Totally caters for the armchair wallers who ate not really arsed about the game, in the far East there will likely be betting on decisions changed by VAR
 
Kid Galahad said:
Anyone with any soul can't have watched tonight and not felt a bit sorry for City, such a tight decision where there was no intention to 'cheat' being chalked off and
under the current rules rightly so but why not just bring it in that if any part of your body is onside you are onside? Gives the advantage to the attacking team and would mean more goals and less ambiguity for a lot of decisions? Thought the powers that be were going in the right direction with the unofficial 'daylight' rule but seem to have gone in the opposite direction and it isn't for the good of the game imo, thoughts?
Click to expand...

Does the PF want to see more goals. Half of them took it as such an affront that we conceded 5, I suspect they’d have much preferred 0-1 to 4-5.
 

Back
Top