How to fix VAR “offsides”?

[Lentwood]

I know we have a “get rid of VAR” thread and a thread for VAR decisions but I thought it would be interesting to have a thread purely to discuss ideas for how we can fix VAR offsides, since it’s been such a hot topic recently

In my opinion, the offside calls have been by far the most controversial and have had the biggest impact. The trouble is, we’re being asked to trust that the technology is capable of measuring fractions of inches in real-time and we’re seeing seemingly “good” goals ruled out on a regular basis.

Take the Pukki goal for Norwich against Spurs yesterday - it’s seems wholly unsatisfactory to see a “goal” like that ruled out. Both of Pukki’s feet were shown to be about a foot onside, but his momentum meant his armpit/head was ruled offside by a fraction.

One of the big issues football has had for a while, in my opinion, is that it’s too hard to score a goal anyway. Players have got fitter, tactics and coaching have evolved, goalkeepers are much bigger - and now on top of all of this we have introduced technology which rules goals out but doesn’t actually contribute any “new goals”.

So, I’ve actually been thinking about this for a while and I’ve come up with two options I think would allow for consistent decision making and generally increase the amount of goals scored, plus ensuring good centre forward/attacking play is justly rewarded.

Opt.1 - Bring back the “daylight” rule

Some of the older posters will remember this. The rule was basically that there had to be “daylight” between the attacker and the defender for the goal to be ruled out. This was eventually changed, with officials citing the fact it was impossible to judge “daylight” in real-time. With VAR, they wouldn’t have to, since the technology could do this for them.

Pro’s - we would definitely see more goals. Dan Burn and Teemu Pukki’s foals from yesterday would both have counted, for example.

Con’s - we would still have to trust the technology can measure in millimetres

Opt. 2 - make the “defenders line” 2/3 times thicker than the forwards line

I actually prefer this option. When the blue and red lines are drawn, just apply the rule across the board that the defenders line is always 2 or 3 times thicker than the attackers and call this the “margin of error”.

I have taken inspiration from cricket for this idea, where they use the “umpires call” as its accepted the technology can’t be 100% accurate, albeit my suggestion is different as I’m not suggesting we have an on-field/off-field call.

This idea would mean that the technology was used in exactly the same way it was designed but there would be a built in margin of error and a built in (small) advantage for the attacker. This method would again mean that goals like Pukki’s vs Spurs would be ruled onside, would be consistent across the board and with the current rules of football and I think it general it would be far more satisfactory for fans as we wouldn’t see “good” goals ruled a millimetre offside.

Pro’s - consistent with the existing rules, allows a defined/consistent margin of error, more goals scored, gives a marginal advantage to the attacker.

Con’s - can’t actually think of one! Wouldn’t solve some of the wider issues with VAR (communication to fans in the stadium) but seems to solve the debate about the marginal offsides.

What do with think Caf? Good ideas/bad ideas? Any other suggestions?

NOTE: Please don’t just put “scrap VAR” or debate specific decisions as we have threads for those and it’s not the point of this thread. Likewise, this thread is to discuss methods for improving offside decisions only, so please don’t discuss penalties/cards etc....

 

[DBT85]

My suggestion for some time is quite simple.

You give the VAR the freeze frame. If he can't tell within 20 seconds and be 100% sure then its allowed to stand. No lines, no pissing around.

If you can't tell by eye from a freeze frame and be 100% sure, then its too fecking close.

Nobody sohuld be able to be an armpit, nostril, big toe or nipple offside. It's a joke and the PL need to do something about it.

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

Until they have a camera that can fly about a player's foot at the exact moment he/she passes the ball, they simply need to sack of the millimetre offside calls and only have clear offsides judged by VAR.

Similar to the what the above poster said really.

 

[Andy_Cole]

I want more goals. So would support the daylight rule.
We need to go back and think why offside was brought in. It was effectively to stop goal hanging. That’s why this millimetre of offside is against the spirit of the game.

 

[Lentwood]

@Regulus Arcturus Black @DBT85

I don’t disagree with the sentiments but how do you ensure it’s consistent? Wouldn’t we get managers complaining since we’re still leaving decisions to the interpretation of the officials? We could have one VAR official happy with an inch as a margin of error and one who calls anything close as onside/offside

 

[POF]

Option 2 is a very good one. Disallowing goals for offside by such miniscule margins assumes the technology is perfect. It simply cannot be. There has to be a margin for error, however it is implemented.

Disallowing these goals is also completely against the spirit of what the offside rule is supposed to represent.

 

[Lentwood]

I want more goals. So would support the daylight rule.
We need to go back and think why offside was brought in. It was effectively to stop goal hanging. That’s why this millimetre of offside is against the spirit of the game.

Agree 100% - I try and explain this to my rugby/cricket playing friends. Footballs rules where never really intended to be measured in millimetres, offsides (as you say) were to prevent goal-hanging and encroachment (for example) is to stop players being three feet inside the box, not half a step

 

[DBT85]

@Regulus Arcturus Black @DBT85

I don’t disagree with the sentiments but how do you ensure it’s consistent? Wouldn’t we get managers complaining since we’re still leaving decisions to the interpretation of the officials? We could have one VAR official happy with an inch as a margin of error and one who calls anything close as onside/offside

All people are never going to be happy and that's something that needs to be accepted.

Allowing the game to flow without ruling goals out for ridiculously fine margins is better for the sport than the shitshow currently on display.

If you have to get a bloody ruler out to measure then its too close.

It works for goal line tech becase the ball is easy to calculate. Flailing legs and loose nipples are not.

 

[Varun]

Like option 2. I don't trust the tech to be 100% accurate in which case option 2 is a great idea. You have the tech making an impact and at the same time not fecking up stupid things.

 

[montpelier]

Yeah, the thicker line idea is the best suggestion so far I think. Keeps the tech as being the tech and is automatically the margin of error people seem to want.

 

[Pexbo]

Three’s things for me:

Firstly, the technology isn’t actually there yet. They need to have much higher FPS cameras as things are happening so quickly that it’s often a missing frame which decides the call. If they can’t afford to do this then they can use AI to predict the missing frames and still have a much more accurate call.

Secondly, it needs to be clearly defined that the pass is made when the players foot first touches the ball, not when the ball is leaving the foot. This is the only scenario possible to work with properly as it allows you to bring in a second technology to report the exact moment contact is made, either acoustically or player’s boots could be enhanced with tiny fragments of a material which react to sensors on the ball.

Thirdly, linesman should no longer be involved in offside calls. They’re really just not that good at it and it becomes pointless depending on them. Play should carry on and VAR should be used to review a decision while the game continues and if a player is ruled offside then that free kick is only awarded after the attacking phase and only if the defending team does not have an advantage. That way the game will be quicker and counter attacking football encouraged.

 

[NotoriousISSY]

I like the idea of time limit.

Clear and obvious shouldn't take 3 minutes.

Nobody wanted VAR to be this pedantic.

 

[SqueakyWeasel]

I like the idea of a time limit to find the "obvious" offside but I think it has to be a "fixed" rule, not an interpreted one, if it is to stop the frustration that the fans feel.

Pin-pointing the exact moment the infringement is deemed to have happened is just as import in my opinion. They quickly determine the moment the ball is kicked and then measure the offence further up the pitch in millimetres. If they get the first thing wrong then surely the second is immaterial.

I would also suggest that a shoulder (for example) should only be judged offside if it is used in the scoring of the goal in question. Or a head, or either foot in the case of feet etc.

 

[montpelier]

It can't go too fair though because it ends up being unfair to defenders on the actual pitch.

Offside is offside, you can't just disallow goals because you don't like that. Attackers can take margin of error out of it by staying

I like the idea of a time limit to find the "obvious" offside but I think it has to be a "fixed" rule, not an interpreted one, if it is to stop the frustration that the fans feel.

Pin-pointing the exact moment the infringement is deemed to have happened is just as import in my opinion. They quickly determine the moment the ball is kicked and then measure the offence further up the pitch in millimetres. If they get the first thing wrong then surely the second is immaterial.

I would also suggest that a shoulder (for example) should only be judged offside if it is used in the scoring of the goal in question. Or a head, or either foot in the case of feet etc.

So 10 seconds after your feet are offside, you can score with other onside body parts when the cross comes in.

 

[Pughnichi]

The line to be drawn from feet. Happy to see goals called offside if a players foot is offside by mm, but arms ears and elbows is just ridiculous.

 

[Lentwood]

A time limit would be great for fouls/penalties but I’m not sure it works for offsides

We have the means to deliver a consistent decision every time that we’re all happy with so we just need to find the right way of using it

 

[montpelier]

What about dividing the pitch into 10 000 squares and having a sensor under the turf in each square.

VAR officials are only allowed 15 seconds to decide though.

If anything goes wrong, each team is awarded 2pts.

 

[FiftChoice]

I know we have a “get rid of VAR” thread and a thread for VAR decisions but I thought it would be interesting to have a thread purely to discuss ideas for how we can fix VAR offsides, since it’s been such a hot topic recently

In my opinion, the offside calls have been by far the most controversial and have had the biggest impact. The trouble is, we’re being asked to trust that the technology is capable of measuring fractions of inches in real-time and we’re seeing seemingly “good” goals ruled out on a regular basis.

Take the Pukki goal for Norwich against Spurs yesterday - it’s seems wholly unsatisfactory to see a “goal” like that ruled out. Both of Pukki’s feet were shown to be about a foot onside, but his momentum meant his armpit/head was ruled offside by a fraction.

One of the big issues football has had for a while, in my opinion, is that it’s too hard to score a goal anyway. Players have got fitter, tactics and coaching have evolved, goalkeepers are much bigger - and now on top of all of this we have introduced technology which rules goals out but doesn’t actually contribute any “new goals”.

So, I’ve actually been thinking about this for a while and I’ve come up with two options I think would allow for consistent decision making and generally increase the amount of goals scored, plus ensuring good centre forward/attacking play is justly rewarded.

Opt.1 - Bring back the “daylight” rule

Some of the older posters will remember this. The rule was basically that there had to be “daylight” between the attacker and the defender for the goal to be ruled out. This was eventually changed, with officials citing the fact it was impossible to judge “daylight” in real-time. With VAR, they wouldn’t have to, since the technology could do this for them.

Pro’s - we would definitely see more goals. Dan Burn and Teemu Pukki’s foals from yesterday would both have counted, for example.

Con’s - we would still have to trust the technology can measure in millimetres

Opt. 2 - make the “defenders line” 2/3 times thicker than the forwards line

I actually prefer this option. When the blue and red lines are drawn, just apply the rule across the board that the defenders line is always 2 or 3 times thicker than the attackers and call this the “margin of error”.

I have taken inspiration from cricket for this idea, where they use the “umpires call” as its accepted the technology can’t be 100% accurate, albeit my suggestion is different as I’m not suggesting we have an on-field/off-field call.

This idea would mean that the technology was used in exactly the same way it was designed but there would be a built in margin of error and a built in (small) advantage for the attacker. This method would again mean that goals like Pukki’s vs Spurs would be ruled onside, would be consistent across the board and with the current rules of football and I think it general it would be far more satisfactory for fans as we wouldn’t see “good” goals ruled a millimetre offside.

Pro’s - consistent with the existing rules, allows a defined/consistent margin of error, more goals scored, gives a marginal advantage to the attacker.

Con’s - can’t actually think of one! Wouldn’t solve some of the wider issues with VAR (communication to fans in the stadium) but seems to solve the debate about the marginal offsides.

What do with think Caf? Good ideas/bad ideas? Any other suggestions?

NOTE: Please don’t just put “scrap VAR” or debate specific decisions as we have threads for those and it’s not the point of this thread. Likewise, this thread is to discuss methods for improving offside decisions only, so please don’t discuss penalties/cards etc....

The daylight rule is still a very marginal call, and it will depend heavily on angles of camera vs players. Also, i feel it allows too much advantage to the attacker.

Your second option however I think is a great idea. As you say, a margin of error will give a consistent frame of reference and at the same time allow for those very marginal offsides to favour the attacker. I would be on board with this!

 

[Josep Dowling]

The thing I don’t get about VAR is 9/10 at the World Cup it worked perfectly on all matters.

Then the Premier League take it over and decide to use it completely differently. Why were they allowed to do this? Surely every single country should implement VAR under FIFA regulations.

As usual Premier League refs thinks they know best even though a British referee was not used at the recent World Cup.

I would suggest removing all lines on the frame. If it can’t be spotted in less than 10 seconds and 5 replays it’s onside or the referees original decision.

Offside was meant to stop goal hanging not catching people offside by mm’s.

 

[giorno]

By getting people to learn how the tech works, how accurate it is, and how the testing was done and how they got to those conclusions

And then remember that it's football fans, so honestly, let 'em complain

 

[DBT85]

What about dividing the pitch into 10 000 squares and having a sensor under the turf in each square.

VAR officials are only allowed 15 seconds to decide though.

If anything goes wrong, each team is awarded 2pts.

That MIGHT be a little expensive.

 

[SqueakyWeasel]

It can't go too fair though because it ends up being unfair to defenders on the actual pitch.

Offside is offside, you can't just disallow goals because you don't like that. Attackers can take margin of error out of it by staying
So 10 seconds after your feet are offside, you can score with other onside body parts when the cross comes in.

I was trying to think of a way stop situations like yesterday when a perfectly good goal was disallowed for an imperceptual shoulder being offside.

If you think a player bombing on to a pass at full speed knows what body part is offside at any given micro-second so he can just mess with the rules by scoring with another, then … yes

 

[montpelier]

Michael Oliver does them all from a

The thing I don’t get about VAR is 9/10 at the World Cup it worked perfectly on all matters.

Then the Premier League take it over and decide to use it completely differently. Why were they allowed to do this? Surely every single country should implement VAR under FIFA regulations.

As usual Premier League refs thinks they know best even though a British referee was not used at the recent World Cup.

I would suggest removing all lines on the frame. If it can’t be spotted in less than 10 seconds and 5 replays it’s onside or the referees original decision.

Offside was meant to stop goal hanging not catching people offside by mm’s.

Yes, much as I'm taking the piss here. A 2nd eyes only look seems pretty reasonable too.

If they can't tell or PROVE the offside they let the goal stand?

 

[youmeletsfly]

Hand should not count as long as bodies are on the same line.
Only parts of the body that can hit the ball/influence play should.be considered.

 

[Pexbo]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Absolutely zero surprise that Owen doesn’t understand the limitations of the technology or the nuances of making a call when the only angle you can see the moment the pass was made is also an angle that is impossible to determine if a player is offside.

This gives me another idea actually. Replays should be perfectly synced to the millisecond so the VAR team can determine the exact moment the pass happens and then check the same frame from all other available angles regardless of whether the ball is in shot or not.

 

[UpWithRivers]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Absolutely zero surprise that Owen doesn’t understand the limitations of the technology or the nuances of making a call when the only angle you can see the moment the pass was made is also an angle that is impossible to determine if a player is offside.

This gives me another idea actually. Replays should be perfectly synced to the millisecond so the VAR team can determine the exact moment the pass happens and then check the same frame from all other available angles regardless of whether the ball is in shot or not.

I actually agree with Owen. Its either offside or not. What happens in a world cup final and a team score the winning goal from a just offside position. What happens when the ball is a fraction not over the line for a goal. It needs to be either or. I agree its painful. They need to improve the speed of decisions. I guess that will take a while but if the technology gave instant decisions then the attacker wont score and there wont be all this discussions. The main problem with Var is the time taken for decisions. It just interrupts the game. Maybe they just let the game flow and at half time and at full time they adjust the score for marginal decisions. Yes there is lots of pros and cons like a even if a teams goal is removed at half time they still had the advantage psychologically plus the other team may need to change their tactics etc. But it could be interesting.

 

[Nickelodeon]

Since it is used in a very objective manner with millimeters being factored, the solution has to be objective.

An error %, (say 5% or whatever number) to be factored through a trial and error method and picking used cases such as the Pukki one and the Dan Burn one where the objective decision seemed unjust and those margins need to be defined in the favor of the attacker. It shouldn't be difficult to implement in the technology plus if beyond that error a body part of the attacker is offside, it would be visible in a normal replay as well.

It would ensure that people are not paying the price for being millimeters offside yet the rule would remain objective enough.

 

[Mb194dc]

Law needs to be changed for VAR games, should be daylight. Will be loads for more goals like that.

Secondly they need to use VAR consistently, they're only throrougly checking offsides sometimes, in some games VAR doesn't bother.

It's almost like there's an agenda behind it sometimes, plus I think they don't want slow down the big TV games.

Probably simpler to just scrap VAR in the premier League. It's worth than nothing and I don't see it improving.

 

[Florida Man]

Daylight rule because it actually addresses the point of having offsides in the first place. And since players are most likely running forward, you can almost always measure by the attacker’s last foot.

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

By getting people to learn how the tech works, how accurate it is, and how the testing was done and how they got to those conclusions

And then remember that it's football fans, so honestly, let 'em complain

@giorno, when we're talking in millimetres, how does the tech decide exactly when the ball left the passing player's foot?

I have the answer for you, and it has absolutely nothing to do with technology nor accuracy.

 

[GhastlyHun]

That MIGHT be a little expensive.

Everybody wearing some sort of signal transmitter strapped to their chest could be feasible though. Then only take the relative positions of these transmitters and forget about toes and hairtips to determine an offside situation.

 

[DickDastardly]

Just measure the feet.

It's called football ffs.

Yes, you can score with your head,chest,etc...but you can only run with your legs.

If the attackers feet are behind but his body is in advanced position regarding the defenders, it only means he timed the run perfectly - kudos to you!

It makes iz more simple - faster - and it benefits the attackers - aka, more goals, and that's what we want.

 

[giorno]

@giorno, when we're talking in millimetres, how does the tech decide exactly when the ball left the passing player's foot?

I have the answer for you, and it has absolutely nothing to do with technology nor accuracy.

It doesn't, because it's irrelevant. Offside is taken at the moment the ball is first touched, not when it leaves the foot

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

It doesn't, because it's irrelevant. Offside is taken at the moment the ball is first touched, not when it leaves the foot

So same question there then, how is that decided (the moment the ball is first touched)?

 

[giorno]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Absolutely zero surprise that Owen doesn’t understand the limitations of the technology or the nuances of making a call when the only angle you can see the moment the pass was made is also an angle that is impossible to determine if a player is offside.

This gives me another idea actually. Replays should be perfectly synced to the millisecond so the VAR team can determine the exact moment the pass happens and then check the same frame from all other available angles regardless of whether the ball is in shot or not.

How do you know this isn't already the case?

 

[giorno]

So same question there then, how is that decided (the moment the ball is first touched)?

Same story: how do you know they aren't able to determine that with 100% accuracy right now?

 

[Lentwood]

I actually agree with Owen. Its either offside or not. What happens in a world cup final and a team score the winning goal from a just offside position. What happens when the ball is a fraction not over the line for a goal. It needs to be either or. I agree its painful. They need to improve the speed of decisions. I guess that will take a while but if the technology gave instant decisions then the attacker wont score and there wont be all this discussions. The main problem with Var is the time taken for decisions. It just interrupts the game. Maybe they just let the game flow and at half time and at full time they adjust the score for marginal decisions. Yes there is lots of pros and cons like a even if a teams goal is removed at half time they still had the advantage psychologically plus the other team may need to change their tactics etc. But it could be interesting.

Offside is still offside with both my suggestions. It’s the same for every team in every game - it’s just that in option two you have a built in margin of error for ultra close calls

Bear in mind, having a “defensive” line which is twice as thick as the “attacking” line would still only account for a split second or a few millimetres. It’s giving the benefit of any doubt to the attacker, which was the accepted rule in football for a long time

You either try to implement a technology which is perfect or you allow for a margin of error and I feel the latter is better for the game in general

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

Same story: how do you know they aren't able to determine that with 100% accuracy right now?

I watched the VAR vids, and they simply cannot, all focus is on the offside player and last defender as it is simply impossible without a camera following overhead to determine with 100% precision the moment the passing player struck the ball.

That is the flawed part, the offside player and defender is perfect tech but when we're talking in millimetres, which we often are, it's not ok for the initial part of the rule to not be 100% precise.

 

[Fosu-Mens]

Black and white, computer vision/photogrammetry techniques to automate it, and the refs(people who have worked with photo analyzing) to control it.
Refs to hold off on calling offside unless it is obvious. Computer vision(or whatever you know it as) would speed up the process to meer seconds and the delay from situations to ref blowing the whistle would be 5-10 seconds.

 

[Lentwood]

I’m convinced there isn’t a problem with the “technology” here, it’s how we are currently interpreting/using the technology

Therefore, I personally would be against any suggestions that mean changing the technology or rely on “improving” the technology....because I don’t think that solves the underlying problem