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

[PuntsWolf]

The Souness rule is stupid too. I’m a defender and if I know the guy is the wrong side of me then I leave him and he’s offside. If he’s then given onside because 1mm of his heel is level with 1mm of my heel then that’s just as shit as the Current rule just the other way round. Just use common sense rather than science (particularly when the science isn’t good enough or conclusive). If he looks like he’s offside then he is, if he doesn’t look like he is then he’s not. We never argued about the marginals before, we accepted them. They all looked onside. No one looks at Jonny and thinks he’s offside, Only the lines say he is.

No one looks at Pukki and thinks he’s offside. The Dan burn one is tight but he looked offside, so is rightly given.

 

[sycophantia]

I was in favour of var, still am providing the officials get it right.
However it appears the technology just isn't up to scratch, vvd looked handball to me but apparently it was inconclusive ( if the ref said it was too far back, thats a mistake by him).
I don't think you can tell when the ball is released by Moutinho in relation to the position of Jonny's big toe/defenders kneecap so again the tech isn't fit for purpose.
VAR needs parking until the equipment catches up to what they're trying to achieve with it, plus of course there needs to be a time limit to define 'clear and obvious'

 

[Carrotdude]

To me it just needs a margin of error, if the stupid lines down conclusively prove anything then stay with the on field decision. I’d change it to feet only personally too.

I don’t think it’s a terrible idea to have it as a challenge system for managers, at least then only when someone actually looks offside will they look at it, no one would have challenged any of the ones over the weekend.

 

[Johnny75]

The Souness rule is stupid too. I’m a defender and if I know the guy is the wrong side of me then I leave him and he’s offside. If he’s then given onside because 1mm of his heel is level with 1mm of my heel then that’s just as shit as the Current rule just the other way round. Just use common sense rather than science (particularly when the science isn’t good enough or conclusive). If he looks like he’s offside then he is, if he doesn’t look like he is then he’s not. We never argued about the marginals before, we accepted them. They all looked onside. No one looks at Jonny and thinks he’s offside, Only the lines say he is.

No one looks at Pukki and thinks he’s offside. The Dan burn one is tight but he looked offside, so is rightly given.

See above, the linesman didn't get it right and it shouldn't be accepted as such and the Souness rule gives us goals back and there's hardly a person who watches football who doesn't want goals.

And for every person who wants to go back, if you moan at the referee or linesman for getting it wrong, just have a long hard look at yourself and see if the hypocrisy stands out much.

 

[The Bear]

I agree with a suggestion I read the other day. No margin for error is not built into the system. So that's what needs to happen.

You widen both lines that you use for each player, to incorporate that margin of error. Let's say each line is 5cm wide. The VAR official lines them up the same way they do now with stick thin lines and crosshairs, then once he's happy they are as accurate as possible he presses a button, which fixes them both and then automatically widens them the agreed upon margin of error. In this case 5cm each.

The attackers line would go forwards 5cm from where the line was drawn, and the defender's line would go back 5cm. If the two lines connect or overlap the goal stands as it's too close to overrule. Only if there's any gap between the lines is it offside.

That way you have a margin of error for if the guy doesn't quite line everything up 100% perfectly and any that are so marginal they'd never have been spotted with the human eye, get given still.

 

[jdrodrigues]

I agree with a suggestion I read the other day. The margin for error is not built into the system. So that's what needs to happen.

You widen both lines that you use for each player, to incorporate that margin of error. Let's say each line is 5cm wide. The VAR official lines them up the same way they do now with a stick thin lines and crosshair, then once he's happy they are as accurate as possible he presses a button, which fixes them both and then automatically widens them the agreed upon margin of error. In this case 5cm each.

The attackers line would go forwards 5cm from where the line was drawn, and the defender's line would go back 5cm. If the two lines connect or overlap the goal stands as it's too close to overrule. Only if there's any gap between the lines is it offside.

And the next day a goal comes in and it's 5.5 cm offside. What then?

It is hard to define these things. Tbh, I'd rather not have anything like error-margin but have an investment in educating the officials.

 

[The Bear]

What do you mean, what then?

If it's still offside then at least there will be a reasonable enough gap between the two body parts for people to say "yep he's clearly offside there"

I'm not saying it should be exactly 5cm. They'd have to decide what was a reasonable amount based on previous footage of offside decisions.

 

[The Bear]

The main point is, the lines should be wider, so if they still overlap its a goal.

 

[StuardoWulf]

How do they know the exact time the ball is kicked forward? genuine question because manipulation is possible

If I was at Stockley park and looking at a Wolves decision I would look for what point the opponent is offside and see if I could get away with, that moment would be judged to be when the ball is kicked. (because I'm a cheat LOL)

I've been going to football since the early seventies and the feeling this is creating on the terraces is getting reminiscent of those awful days for football.

 

[PuntsWolf]

See above, the linesman didn't get it right and it shouldn't be accepted as such and the Souness rule gives us goals back and there's hardly a person who watches football who doesn't want goals.

And for every person who wants to go back, if you moan at the referee or linesman for getting it wrong, just have a long hard look at yourself and see if the hypocrisy stands out much.

I don’t know what your getting at. I want more goals but I don’t want to rip up the coaching manuals / art of defending

If The strikers goalside of the defender but is then onside because there is some tiny overlap of body parts then you may as well scrap the offside rule fullstop as you simply cannot play offside as a defender.

You’d just get strikers standing behind the defensive line and then just as ball is about to be played sticking their leg back. They’d already have a 2 yard head start getting an unfair advantage.

 

[Johnny75]

I don’t know what your getting at. I want more goals but I don’t want to rip up the coaching manuals / art of defending

If The strikers goalside of the defender but is then onside because there is some tiny overlap of body parts then you may as well scrap the offside rule fullstop as you simply cannot play offside as a defender.

You’d just get strikers standing behind the defensive line and then just as ball is about to be played sticking their leg back. They’d already have a 2 yard head start getting an unfair advantage.

Players stand offside and move back inside to disrupt play, defenders cope with that fine now, particularly on set plays. Raul bends his runs all the time from offside-onside-run onto ball. It isn't new.

Also attackers won't just be offside and step backwards as that prevents them running onto any pass as they'd have to change direction.

 

[The Bear]

How do they know the exact time the ball is kicked forward? genuine question because manipulation is possible

If I was at Stockley park and looking at a Wolves decision I would look for what point the opponent is offside and see if I could get away with, that moment would be judged to be when the ball is kicked. (because I'm a cheat LOL)
.

It's on the Premier Lesgue website.

The cameras are 50fps. They choose the first frame where the ball comes into contact with the passer's foot. Not when it leaves it.

So that should be pretty consistent given that level. Still can be abused though if they happen to go and extra frame or two further forward "by mistake".

 

[Tredman]

Balls and players can move a much longer distance than Jonny’s toe in 0.02s. It’s an utter nonsense, taking the joy and excitement out of the game.

 

[PuntsWolf]

Players stand offside and move back inside to disrupt play, defenders cope with that fine now, particularly on set plays. Raul bends his runs all the time from offside-onside-run onto ball. It isn't new.

Also attackers won't just be offside and step backwards as that prevents them running onto any pass as they'd have to change direction.

Yes, they start offside and move completely onside, not just enough to have overlap but a massive 2 yard advantage.

You’ve made my point for me. Raul bends his run but imagine his back leg is inline with the last defenders toe/heel. To every man and his dog he’s two yards offside and it’s bloody obvious. But because there was “some overlap” it’s onside. That is a load of bollocks. It’s an unfair advantage. Exactly what offside is designed to stop.

 

[Johnny75]

Yes, they start offside and move completely onside, not just enough to have overlap but a massive 2 yard advantage.

You’ve made my point for me. Raul bends his run but imagine his back leg is inline with the last defenders toe/heel. To every man and his dog he’s two yards offside and it’s bloody obvious. But because there was “some overlap” it’s onside. That is a load of bollocks. It’s an unfair advantage. Exactly what offside is designed to stop.

That's some revisionist thinking right there. Players have alaeays had an element of themselves offside it's just that if they were in the most part level they would be allowed this leeway.

Jonny, Pukki and Mousset offsides would never have been given under the old rules.

 

[PuntsWolf]

That's some revisionist thinking right there. Players have alaeays had an element of themselves offside it's just that if they were in the most part level they would be allowed this leeway.

Jonny, Pukki and Mousset offsides would never have been given under the old rules.

It really isn’t. I’ll try again though, bored at work and all that.

They would have been given under the Old rules because it’s based on a man with a flag who can’t possibly make that call. I’ve got nothing wrong with that.

Put all those players Two yards forward. There’s still going to be overlap so by your rules you’d want that called onside?

 

[nimrod]

It really isn’t. I’ll try again though, bored at work and all that.

They would have been given under the Old rules because it’s based on a man with a flag who can’t possibly make that call. I’ve got nothing wrong with that.

Put all those players Two yards forward. There’s still going to be overlap so by your rules you’d want that called onside?

you could differentiate between a player moving from an offside position to an offside position versus a player running through. that's just a case of setting the rules. so for instance, a player staring from an offside position having to play himself back "on" before he can be considered onside. a small overlap in that instance could be considered not to qualify.

it's easy to highlight over and over again just how little the officiators seemed to have thought about any of this.

 

[nimrod]

Balls and players can move a much longer distance than Jonny’s toe in 0.02s. It’s an utter nonsense, taking the joy and excitement out of the game.

anyone thinking jonny or pukki were legitimately offside shouldn't be anywhere near officiating a football game imo.

 

[PuntsWolf]

anyone thinking jonny or pukki were legitimately offside shouldn't be anywhere near officiating a football game imo.

Precisely. Because they looked onside, and that’s how it should be (how it looks not getting the geometry set out). The linesman is going by how it looks too.

Changing the position of the lines is just changing the problem.

 

[The Bear]

If you just change the thickness of the lines, then you are simply adding in some leeway/doubt. Which means these fractional decisions by mm would disappear.