That's a crazy situation mate and if you think it through you'll see how thoroughly ridiculous it would be to only judge an offside on the part of the body which was ahead of the last defender. The ways people have found to be upset by VAR are quite remarkable.
I know you are trying to make a point babbs but I don’t think it’s fair to compare goal line technology (which hasn’t been controversial and doesn’t interrupt the flow of the game) to marginal offside VAR decisions in the build up to a goal that nobody even saw. You are totally correct though that var for offsides is only correctly implementing the laws of the game which refs and linesman weren’t doing for a hundred plus years. One thing is clear to me though, there does seem to be a groundswell of opinion that they will change something about VARs use in offsides (eg only use it if/when the goal scorer is offside) or change the offside law itself.
With all due respect @SUPERFAN it's not about what you think the rules regarding offside should be,its about what they are and under the rules if you're offside by any part of your body that can score a goal then that goal is as illegal as the one the ref might give without goal line technology that hasn't fully crossed the line. Everything else is a different argument. If people don't want it because of the time it takes,that's a logical argument. If people think VAR shouldn't be used for offside because the frame rates mean it's not 100% accurate,again that is imo a rational argument. Everything else is just as stupid as me wanting to allow goals that haven't crossed the line by only milimitres.
You're probably right mate but changing the law will just move the line somewhere else and it will still come down to millimetres which is what peoples main problem with the current situation is. That plum from the IFAB is advocating making it less accurate and subjective which would take away the consistency of the one consistent aspect of VAR.
yeah fair enough but I just don't trust them lines and i'm sure many others are the same. take the lines out of those 2 goals in the last page and I doubt anyone would complain if both goals were allowed. i'm finding myself getting upset by VAR decisions that are going in Liverpool's favour, hard to believe but it's true.
https://www.sportbible.com/football...-five-new-ways-for-pl-to-improve-var-20191231 I actually agree with so much of this, give the managers 2 appeals per game and give the offsides back to the linesman to decide...
The 2 appeals part is farcical Will stop the games even more than currently If you dont use your appeals can you carry them over to the following week like fantasy football transfers
I think those thick lines need to be binned or at least the way they are presented. They look like FIFA 95 graphics at a 45 degree angle Rugger avoid this on the forward pass by just looking at a few replays and making a naked eye judgement of them. Would eliminate the nonsense of that Wolves goal against us being ruled out when no one even questioned it And the rule on attackers not being allowed a completely accidental handball in the lead up to a goal should be changed to the final touch cant be even an accidental handball or perhaps just the scorer cant do an accidental one even if not final touch
I think that's a good point on the rugby, let the VAR guys watch it back and unless it's obviously offside just leave it off, I never had an issue with an offside that's down to millimeters but there's been plenty which have been a metre or more that are very easy to call back, ours against West Ham last year for instance. I don't think the game needs to be perfect but just get rid of the very obvious mistakes, they've let this thing turn to a farce now in some ways.
Listened to a fair few podcasts over the break and I’d say at least 15 minutes of everyone of them was talking about VAR. I know prior to VAR, ref decisions were always a bit talking point however it’s getting beyond a joke at this stage. Watched the Old Firm and a few Championship matches with no VAR and you can see the difference in how fans react to goals.
His main point is it was not intended to destroy games with microscopes and calculators. The rugby situation @Stevie S has described is the solution. Go back to the naked eye but with the help of video replays, one or 2 looks and decide. Centre forwards like Pukki for example have spent 15 years positioning themselves onside by the naked eye, the reason I choose him is he has an almost Olympic sprinters starting position, his body is down low so he will always be done with the current set-up when he hasn't really done anything wrong. Another thing they should do is only look at penalty incidents if the ref directs them too and only overrule the ref in situations that he has obviously missed. Its annoying when they stop when you can see clearly no offence has been committed, if they can't find anything by the time the corner or goal kick is ready to go then it didn't happen.
Those pictures everyone keeps reverting back to is a perfect example of why it would be mental to use the naked eye on a ropey camera angle to make offside decisions. Everyone is convinced Firmino wasnt beyond the last man when he definitely is. Use VAR or dont but the idea that you can fix a problem like that with even more wrong decisions is ludicrous. You make something better or you leave it the same. The camera will almost never be in line with the last man but that's the angle we're going to use to decide tight offsides? The idea that what's happening at the moment is in some way unfair to attackers baffles the fuck out of me too. Defenders spent years learning how to tackle and then laws came in that made how a lot of them were doing it obsolete,it was adapt or die. It was miles worse than the couple of millimetres Pukki and players like him are losing,not that he's judging his runs by anything close to that margin. Those margins came down to pure luck before VAR and they're down to pure luck afterwards,the only difference is luck was on his side more often beforehand.
What part of the debate around technology in football Bob has convinced you how other sports have reacted to it would be a good indicator of how football will react to it? Somebody put up an article on here showing the inaccuracies of the current system due to minuscule frame rates but Conor Coady sees another decision go against his team based on a system far more inaccurate,far more inconsistent and often down to pure guesswork and hes just going to take it on the chin? Pep Guardiola and the Man City fans who are convinced the league are trying to hand us the league wont come up with more conspiracy theories after a subjective offside call based on a dodgy camera angle? Gary Lineker wont go bananas when a great goal is disallowed from Jamie Vardy or Richard Keys won't be calling for Mike Riley to be sacked because of the unavoidable inconsistency? Copying an inaccurate and inconsistent method from Rugby and handing even more subjective decisions to inept football officials will cause far more problems than it solves.
The point is there is no appetite in football to spend 3 minutes looking at those lines where there is only millimetres in it. Not 1 person would have questioned Wolves' goal last weekend. Firmino looks onside so would have stood. Same with Pukki It is the current most contentious issue and is a way of addressing it. Whatever your quote from Rob Gutman was about people wanting VAR to come to decisions that feel right applies here for me. VAR is not doing what the majority want it to do
Fundamentally I think I'm coming at this from a different angle than you. I'm comfortable with mistakes, I think they're part of the game. You appear to think because it's possible to get 1mm decisions correct than that's what the aim should be. Offside was brought in to stop Dixie Dean from hatching, it was never intended to punish attackers. I've accepted it's probably here to stay but it needs remembering why it was introduced. Its purpose was to stop injustices on the pitch, every week we see 4 or 5 goals rules out that lets be honest if the screen said goal then no one would argue. I don't watch massive amounts of rugby but when I do I have never seen anyone question the VAR after the decision is made and they are using the naked eye to make these calls. It may mean the odd the goal is scored from 10mm offside but the really terrible ones will be rectified and that's the whole point of VAR.
You have my take on this wrong Bob. I've always been ok with honest mistakes and if this argument shows anything it's that refs aren't honest because lots of people dont want the laws of the game implemented but as I said,either keep the current system or go back to the old one. It's the absurdity of replacing a highly accurate and wholly consistent system of calibrating offside with one that's way less accurate and even less fair that I think is ridiculous. The delays are an issue but while I understand the mentality that getting as many decisions correct as possible shouldn't come at any price,I'll never pretend to understand a mentality that doesn't think the aim should be to get as many decisions as correct as possible. Only football could think that a)being too accurate is a problem and b)that the solution is to arrive at more wrong and less fair decisions while people who think that's absurd are looked at with suspicion.
Maybe mob rule isn't the best way to dictate how football works though? The majority dont want delays to the game to calibrate offside which is fair enough but the majority dont understand how the current system works so maybe we shouldn't really be making changes to placate that majority,especially when the solution being put forward will make just as many people unhappy. Somebody will eventually point out how inaccurate the naked eye judging a dodgy camera angle is,and the goalposts will move again because if you remember the initial issue with VAR offside was it wasnt 100% accurate. I thought Pukki looked offside by the way.
The Connor Wickham one is probably a better example as he looked miles off to the naked eye but VAR actually adjudged him to be onside. Tyrone Mings scored one at Old Trafford and he looked miles off, he didn't even celebrate, he was onside.
Well this is the reality of what the majority want for football from what I can see. Some sports benefit more from technology than others cos they lend themselves better to it. Tennis needs the accuracy of hitting the lines Some sports dont use it at all and are happy out. Golf, basketball, boxing... I assume the people that matter were consulted but I had no idea the levels offsides would be scrutinised. Predictable nightmare