Offside

[nnfox 1,247]

VAR isn't the problem. The offside rule is the problem.  They brought the rule in a few years ago that said a player is in an offside position if a part of the attacker's body that is capable of scoring a goal (i.e. not the hand) is ahead of the defender.  It gave assistant referees opportunity to have an acceptable degree of human error.  Calling offsides, especially in tight, high speed scenarios is exceptionally difficult.

 

That rule might have been ok in the past but for football played in the VAR age and the scrutiny it brings it makes a joke of it.  The problem is that the laws of the game are universal and VAR is only used in a tiny proportion of leagues worldwide.

 

That said, the offside rule is overly complicated. It needs simplifying or even completely rewriting. 

 

Take the measure from the feet.  Have it so it's only offside if there is clear daylight between attack and defender. Draw another line on the pitch 30 yards from goal and make it so you can't be offside there.  Scrap it altogether. Do something!

 

VAR isn't the problem.  The rule is.

[Kuredufox 78]

Like I said and others have agreed clear daylight between attackers and defenders is a clear advantage and should be deemed offside

[oxford blue 274]

Hamza may need a haircut...

[KrefelderFox666 1,232]

2 hours ago, nnfox said:

VAR isn't the problem. The offside rule is the problem.  They brought the rule in a few years ago that said a player is in an offside position if a part of the attacker's body that is capable of scoring a goal (i.e. not the hand) is ahead of the defender.  It gave assistant referees opportunity to have an acceptable degree of human error.  Calling offsides, especially in tight, high speed scenarios is exceptionally difficult.

 

That rule might have been ok in the past but for football played in the VAR age and the scrutiny it brings it makes a joke of it.  The problem is that the laws of the game are universal and VAR is only used in a tiny proportion of leagues worldwide.

 

That said, the offside rule is overly complicated. It needs simplifying or even completely rewriting. 

 

Take the measure from the feet.  Have it so it's only offside if there is clear daylight between attack and defender. Draw another line on the pitch 30 yards from goal and make it so you can't be offside there.  Scrap it altogether. Do something!

 

VAR isn't the problem.  The rule is.

Exactly this.

 

Two problems:

 

1. VAR try to be too exact even though they cannot know perfectly when the ball was played. Other than that, they are simply applying the laws of the game (see point 2).

2. As many people have mentioned, the law is cr4p. Make a player offside by the position of the feet not body lean etc. This will give attackers that slight advantage.

[Desabafar 126]

4 hours ago, Ashley said:

Lucky to know someone who helped implement VAR. 

 

Said person works for FIFA, he said FIFA are furious with the Premier League because they arent using it properly. 

 

I have to agree, it's not being used correctly. The PL have every camera angle available to them in the Ground however they dont use all of them... currently. 

 

Fifa have asked the PL to let the refs talk to the Stadium, guess what. They've denied it too. 

 

You only have to look at other Leagues and see how well it's worked. Shame it hasnt for us.. yet. 

But on the offside matter the PL enforces it and uses the same methods as everyone else but also makes the pictures available to broadcasters which they dont do elsewhere. The offside issue is nothing to do with Premier League but VAR and the rule in general.

 

People will still have a problem if they change the rule to the foot because you still get millimetre decisions and close calls. The debate should be about whether people really want VAR in its current form. I'm personally in favour of it but hope they work towards a system that could be instant, maybe through GPS?

[Phube 2,005]

7 minutes ago, Desabafar said:

But on the offside matter the PL enforces it and uses the same methods as everyone else but also makes the pictures available to broadcasters which they dont do elsewhere. The offside issue is nothing to do with Premier League but VAR and the rule in general.

 

People will still have a problem if they change the rule to the foot because you still get millimetre decisions and close calls. The debate should be about whether people really want VAR in its current form. I'm personally in favour of it but hope they work towards a system that could be instant, maybe through GPS?

Sadly unless you get US military grade GPS the accuracy is only ~ 3-10m. Not good for offside!

[Stadt 13,182]

I'd prefer refs/linos getting it wrong semi-frequently than VAR intervening and ruling out goals arbitrarily whilst stopping the game for ages

[PAULCFC 433]

 I'd like to see the bigger picture,,,,,,when the ball was played,not when recieved....that's the defination of offside in my book!

[TK95 2,310]

One gripe I have with the marginal calls is they base it on the quality of the footage they have. When they zoom in, the image becomes pixelated. So the lines they draw up are measured against what could be the extended outline of a player created from the poor resolution. 

 

There's got to be a clearer margin. If it can't be obvious with the naked eye on several replays then surely the benefit should go to the on field decision.

[Fktf 654]

19 minutes ago, Stadt said:

I'd prefer refs/linos getting it wrong semi-frequently than VAR intervening and ruling out goals arbitrarily whilst stopping the game for ages

I'm the exact opposite. God knows we need to improve it, but it has to be good for the game if we can allow things like the kelechi goal at Everton to stand, and disallow goals that are obviously offside. 

[Deeg67 2,993]

49 minutes ago, Stadt said:

I'd prefer refs/linos getting it wrong semi-frequently than VAR intervening and ruling out goals arbitrarily whilst stopping the game for ages

I wouldn't.

[Tom12345 1,303]

12 hours ago, Kuredufox said:

Whats your thoughts. So fed up with all these stupid VAR decisions on offside, isit an armpit, toenail. Surely the benefit should go to the attacker as we go to see goals. The defenders always try to play offside or squeeze the play up but they should always bear in mind the postion of the attacker. The defender should always try to be goalside. If by good movement the attacker gains a half man advantage all the good. If however there is clear air between the two he would be offside. I was a defender but we go to see goals so surely the advantage should go with the attacker. These VAR decisions are ruining our game.

I tend to agree. In the old days, advantage was given in favour of the attacking when in doubt - but this has been reversed in the last 5-10 years even before VAR. Now with VAR it has gone to ridiculous level - should we question the accuracy of the technology and the visual? It we are talking about a toenail, are we sure about that? Should we not count from the center of gravity? I think this needs to be looked at in the off season. I rather more goals than goals ruled out for toenail offside.  The rule was originally set to prevent attackers hanging abouts in the opposition goal, not to prevent players being toenail offside. Defenders play offside to that margin at their own risk in my opinion.

 

But for the record I think VAR is a positive development. The offsite rule just has to be adapted now with VAR.

Edited 30 December 2019 by Tom12345

[WigstonWanderer 2,386]

11 hours ago, Captain... said:

Clear and obvious error has been the most inconsistently applied aspect of VAR. 

 

Are you happy with goal line technology giving or not giving a goal by a matter of millimetres? 

 

I know the big difference is the speed at which goal line technology works and there are fewer variables, but nobody is arguing that there should be a grey area for goal line technology. Offside is offside whether it is a millimetre or a mile. 

No technology will ever be accurate to this degree, there are just too many uncertainties.

 

- At what point should the frame be frozen? Is it at the instant the ball is struck or as it leaves the player’s foot? As Hoddle pointed out, there should be similar scrutiny applied to which frame to use as for the position of the potentially offside player.

 

- A player’s foot can move 10cm or more between frames. Are they interpolating positions? I don’t know the answer.

 

- Because there is rarely a camera directly in line with play, lines have to be drawn both across the pitch and vertically from the player’s leading extremity. There are bound to be errors in this process.

 

Finally, in the old days the benefit of doubt was always supposed to be given to the attacker. Surely in the light of an error ridden process for determining the exact positions of players and ball, a similar commonsense approach would be preferable. If the attacking player is not clearly offside, the goal should stand.

 

As things stand VAR is making itself a laughing stock.

Edited 30 December 2019 by WigstonWanderer

[TrentFox 2,918]

Anyone looking for a 100%, watertight way to determine decisions in a fast-paced game with multiple fast-moving parts is probably going to be disappointed! Offside is offside. It doesn’t matter where you draw a line, there will always be millimetres in decisions 🤷‍♂️  Some days you will benefit. Some

days you won’t. No different to decisions being made exclusively by referees, really. But perhaps a higher accuracy overall? Is that accuracy improvement worth the undeniable slowing down of the game? Not sure. 

[RonnieTodger 3,689]

That Wolves one yesterday  

 

I still can’t tell what was offside and they zoomed it in so much that it was PS1 pixelation, are they really using that? To give offside against Wolves there is borderline match fixing. 

[lcfcsnow 1,505]

16 hours ago, Plastik Man said:

That's ridiculous. You're just suggesting a random maximum distance.

Its not as ridiculous as giving offsides like that Pukki one which to the human eye he looks well onside and not even up for debate, yet they go and get the lines out to find a way to disallow it.

 

All that emotion after the Wolves goal and they just chalk it off, and yet Liverpool handball it (Van Dijk not Lallana) in the build up to theirs but thats ok. If there is leniency in that then there has to be some sort of leniency in offside. When its time to kick off following the goal if they've not worked out whether it's offside or not then the goal should stand as its not clear and obvious.

[st albans fox 8,524]

The offsides are all correctly given - if anyone wants to look back through the original VAR thread you will see that I mused that VAR would make the striker being level element of the law as being redundant .... there is no such thing as level any more ..... this changes the game back to how it was at the end of the eighties and few of us like it .....so the law needs changing .....sourness’  suggestion of any part of the attacker being onside means he is onside will still lead to lines being drawn (possibly still from armpits) and the delays this brings ....even a shaded margin of error area still requires lines to be drawn ....are they in/out of the area ??  Just go with the lino’s call and if a quick look at the replay doesn’t reveal an obvious error without resorting to lines then move on ......that would mean aurier’s goal stands and kekechi’s doesn’t ......(plus wilfs would remain ruled our after var review) ........ are we ok with that ??.

[fox in the sox 92]

If you let a toe go one week, do you let a slightly bigger toe go the next week? At some point you have got to rule goals out and then a fuss will start up all over again. If they use VAR it can only be done the way it is and we have to accept what the technology is telling us.

[Hollyfox 927]

I'd love to see it used to punish players that deliberately cheat, play act or con the ref rather than gain an advantage through an elbow etc

[Kopfkino 4,277]

11 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

The offsides are all correctly given - if anyone wants to look back through the original VAR thread you will see that I mused that VAR would make the striker being level element of the law as being redundant .... there is no such thing as level any more ..... this changes the game back to how it was at the end of the eighties and few of us like it .....so the law needs changing .....sourness’  suggestion of any part of the attacker being onside means he is onside will still lead to lines being drawn (possibly still from armpits) and the delays this brings ....even a shaded margin of error area still requires lines to be drawn ....are they in/out of the area ??  Just go with the lino’s call and if a quick look at the replay doesn’t reveal an obvious error without resorting to lines then move on ......that would mean aurier’s goal stands and kekechi’s doesn’t ......(plus wilfs would remain ruled our after var review) ........ are we ok with that ??.

And then Sky and MOTD will put a line on and show it was clearly on/offside and we end up back with similar discussions about what we need to do with offside. 

 

I don't think the using specific parts of the body works, the rule will be harder for the linos and given that nearly all of football is played without VAR it would seem stupid to make it hard for linos for the sake of VAR. Which really leaves the only solution as an area for margin of error which I'm sure Hawkeye will be able to work with the data they now have. But it will still produce marginal calls, just at a different margin and probably will lead to some being judged onside when they look offside. So it needs acceptance and buy in and not just be a different thing to whinge about.

 

Either that or you bin it off altogether which is attractive to some. But in a couple of years pricks like Lineker and co will be back to scrutiising every little thing and saying refs need help. Rinse and repeat.

[st albans fox 8,524]

6 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

And then Sky and MOTD will put a line on and show it was clearly on/offside and we end up back with similar discussions about what we need to do with offside. 

 

I don't think the using specific parts of the body works, the rule will be harder for the linos and given that nearly all of football is played without VAR it would seem stupid to make it hard for linos for the sake of VAR. Which really leaves the only solution as an area for margin of error which I'm sure Hawkeye will be able to work with the data they now have. But it will still produce marginal calls, just at a different margin and probably will lead to some being judged onside when they look offside. So it needs acceptance and buy in and not just be a different thing to whinge about.

 

Either that or you bin it off altogether which is attractive to some. But in a couple of years pricks like Lineker and co will be back to scrutiising every little thing and saying refs need help. Rinse and repeat.

Many would accept binning it but then what about wilfs goal v spurs or arsenals goal at yanited .....these are easily seen as being huge errors and we must find a way for these to be corrected .......where do you draw the line ? (Sorry .......) 

[TheUltimateWinner 6,684]

This is worth a read: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2019/12/30/lawmakers-issue-guidance-var-should-overrule-clear-obvious-offside/

 

It suggests the lawmakers themselves aren’t happy with how we’re using VAR for offsides. Who would’ve thought eh? After we went against what everyone else was doing  

[Phube 2,005]

1 hour ago, TheUltimateWinner said:

This is worth a read: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2019/12/30/lawmakers-issue-guidance-var-should-overrule-clear-obvious-offside/

 

It suggests the lawmakers themselves aren’t happy with how we’re using VAR for offsides. Who would’ve thought eh? After we went against what everyone else was doing  

 

You can't 'Clear and Obvious' a fact! You either are, or are not offside. The decision is right or wrong, not degrees of maybe... 

[WigstonWanderer 2,386]

2 hours ago, Phube said:

 

You can't 'Clear and Obvious' a fact! You either are, or are not offside. The decision is right or wrong, not degrees of maybe... 

You have to take account of the inherent margin of error of the measuring system. In this sense facts are not facts.

[Finn Claw II 219]

Give each team say 2 VAR calls which the Manager can choose to use when he believes a call is wrong.

 

bit like tennis / cricket

 

Also if the ref blows, then the game stops there.