V.A.R. - Good for Purpose??

[Deutsch Wolf]

Gets my vote.

 

[WolfmanOz]

So simple and should be easy to implement - except for that f**king twat Riley !

 

[Monstrum]

This will make it even more confusing, they will start implementing 3d anatomy scans to see if that bodypart that was 0.5mm offside according to some blurry line at an untermined "pass" position, could be considered the arm or the chest.

If its not a clear and you have to review with with slow motion and count milimeters its not offside, I think thats a pretty simple rule to follow.

 

[AndyWolves]

I'm not sure, for me, this won't stop the lengthy delays and we'll still have goals celebrated which will be chalked off.

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

But the advantage is back in favour of the attacking side, which will do for me. Sure Stockley Park will still have their crappy lines but the margin in favour of the forward should help greatly.

 

[Kenny]

But the advantage is back in favour of the attacking side, which will do for me. Sure Stockley Park will still have their crappy lines but the margin in favour of the forward should help greatly.

The lines should also be binned though. The IFAB have been pretty vocal about that and there will be another warning heading their way next week.

The current rules + correct use of VAR would be fine but our lot have made it an issue that needs looking at.

 

[YoungWolf]

https://twitter.com/jason_keen/status/1230048075965751297?s=21

The tweet in the thread with the Sterling offside - would you be happy if this was allowed against us?

I think this is still a preferable option to the current situation for definite

 

[MARKakaJIM]

There's nothing wrong with the current rule, it's as fair as it's ever been, but VAR tries to enforce it with too great a degree of accuracy. Changing the wording to make different body parts just moves the focus of the VAR investigation to a different set of incidents.

Think I'm right in thinking that the current wording is the same as it was last year before VAR added excessive scrutiny? Worked fine then so just tell VAR to ease up and we're back to normal.

 

[Sniffer]

https://twitter.com/jason_keen/status/1230048075965751297?s=21

The tweet in the thread with the Sterling offside - would you be happy if this was allowed against us?

I think this is still a preferable option to the current situation for definite

I wouldn't be happy with that one. Freeze the picture and ensure that the angle is correct. Then it should be a common sense, naked eye test. Neto, Jonny, Pukki, Giorud - all fine. Sterling - No chance.

 

[The Bear]

https://twitter.com/jason_keen/status/1230048075965751297?s=21

The tweet in the thread with the Sterling offside - would you be happy if this was allowed against us?

I think this is still a preferable option to the current situation for definite

No I wouldn't like it, it looks offside, it's offside. But as you say, it's better than the forensic shite we have now and at least will see more goals scored.

Makes life a lot harder for defenders though. They have to choose whether to completely try and get out of the way or defend as normally and likely play someone on.

 

[Deleted Cyber]

No I wouldn't like it, it looks offside, it's offside. But as you say, it's better than the forensic shite we have now and at least will see more goals scored.

Makes life a lot harder for defenders though. They have to choose whether to completely try and get out of the way or defend as normally and likely play someone on.

But at least that will stop some negative football. It brings back the benefit going for the attacker which is what we want and removes the negativity of a goal being chalked poff. Its now more likely if this was introduced that more goals would be given. Bloody headache for the poor lino!

 

[Tony Towner]

Why do they choose to fix a problem by creating a new one? Imbeciles, desperate to have a finite answer which isn't going to be for the betterment of the game or the fan experience.

 

[Tyrannosaurus Dan]

The offside rule doesn't need changing. It is the Premier League's implementation of VAR that is the problem.

Use it properly for clear and obvious errors like they do in every other competition that has VAR and offside is not an issue. It's Mike Riley and the PGMOL that need to change, not the rules.

 

[nimrod]

if you’re going to be ultra forensic about it then you’re better to do it using the centre of each player’s body. That way you’d eliminate offsides due to the natural leaning forward of a defender away from goal and striker towards goal, as well as the ridiculous scenarios of a toe or a pubic hair of a striker resulting in a goal being ruled out. Have a leeway of half a body width to give a striker a ‘first mover’ advantage.

But I think most fans don’t see the need to be ultra forensic when we’re supposedly correcting clear offsides, which Sterling’s example is. If you were calling offside fairly, in a school playground, and you were essentially level with a forward but he got his toe to the ball first, you’d say good goal and play on. If a video were available you wouldn’t stop the game in that instance so that a couple of non-playing fools could argue for 5 minutes or longer whether the toe was offside or not using their slide rules. That’s a principle the refs don’t seem to get.

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

There's nothing wrong with the current rule, it's as fair as it's ever been, but VAR tries to enforce it with too great a degree of accuracy. Changing the wording to make different body parts just moves the focus of the VAR investigation to a different set of incidents.

I agree.

Also, Wenger's idea will actually lead to less goals as teams will defend a lot deeper to accommodate the fact that an attacker could be as much as 1.5.-2m ahead of the last defender, but still be onside because of a trailing heal!

 

[Walnut]

Off subject a little, but did anyone watch the Chelsea v Man Utd game? When I saw the tackle by Maguire on the Chelsea player, I thought its a red card.
The guy on VAR deemed it not. How in Gods name did he come to that decision. I saw that it was Kavanagh at Stockley Park, well he should never be allowed to referee a game again, absolutely disgraceful. Its no wonder no Premier League referees were not officiating at the World Cup.

 

[Tony Towner]

Its no wonder no Premier League referees were not officiating at the World Cup.

Clattenburg was our representative at the World Cup, he quit beforehand. Nothing to do with the standard of our refereeing

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

However we did send two refs to UEFA q school for Champions League and Europa and they both failed.

 

[Deleted Cyber]

Mike Riley has come across as an obnoxious , pedantic, self important little twat throughout his entire career so its absolutely no surprise he and his stockley park minions are interpreting VAR and the rules in exactly the same fashion.

But this does throw up a whole new debate for football that is harder to answer and that is with current technology what do the game/fans/authorities want. Perfect decisions made by slide rule mathematics but right according to the current laws, or some element of doubt which then makes rules , guidelines which is not right. The rule is fine. Its the rigid interpretation thats not. Its working fine everywhere else its just Riley and his numpties who are causing the chaos to make themselves an empire.

If we go down the slide rule route we dont need officials at the game anymore. Ref by robot cam! The ref can sit in the box and make the decisions there. They can be as fat as they like, they cant be abused and every decision will be correct. FFS.

 

[PuntsWolf]

Are people stupid?

If you go with the the Wenger rule you may as well get rid of offside altogether.

It’s really simple. Keep the rule the same, look with your eyes.