Thats not correct at all. If you are referring to the offisde rule in icehockey.
How to fix VAR “offsides”?
- Thread starter Lentwood
- Start date
And the PL needs to check on the goalies's position for encroachment as well. It's beyond stupid that they don't.
Surely you'd need a thicker line to allow for a larger margin of error?
The thinner the line then you'd get even more decisions decided by a mm or two.
What is the rule then?
How will a "thicker" line make the decisions more correct? Think this through before you answer. You are just moving the goalposts.
The problem will be exactly the same if you put the "thicker line " at 1 meter or something stupid". It still will be the the inherent thing with the offside-rule:
Its an exact rule and it has to be applied as what it is by the best technology we have.
Or we dont use VAR at all.
The offside rule in icehockey is not relevant to football to begin with since it refers to a fixed (blue) line which you cant pass before the puck does. It has nothing to do with the opposition players position on the pitch at all as well. Its a dumb comparison, thats all.
Agree.
Ffs
Tis though.
Remove VAR from the equation and rewrite the rule to stipulate that offside is now whenever the linesman believes there to be a visible space between players. Assuming that each linesman is always acting in good faith, no offside decision would ever be "wrong" 
.
They could also consider employing a system where certain conditions had to be met in order for offside to become a consideration. Perhaps a balance is possible which would eliminate "goal hanging" whilst reducing the frequency of borderline calls.
.They could also consider employing a system where certain conditions had to be met in order for offside to become a consideration. Perhaps a balance is possible which would eliminate "goal hanging" whilst reducing the frequency of borderline calls.
So it turns out the system is not to be used on super tight offsides after all and the premier league are using it arseways...
Premier League Using VAR Wrong Shocker!
Its clear and obvious offsides just like ref decisions and things shouldn't be analysed to the 1mm. The decisions aren't meant to be as tight as the league makes them and half the goals given offside shouldn't be ruled out at all.
The key quote: "If something is not clear on the first sight, then it's not obvious and it shouldn't be considered. Looking at one camera angle is one thing but looking at 15, trying to find something that was potentially not even there, this was not the idea of the VAR principle. It should be clear and obvious."
Premier League Using VAR Wrong Shocker!
Its clear and obvious offsides just like ref decisions and things shouldn't be analysed to the 1mm. The decisions aren't meant to be as tight as the league makes them and half the goals given offside shouldn't be ruled out at all.
The key quote: "If something is not clear on the first sight, then it's not obvious and it shouldn't be considered. Looking at one camera angle is one thing but looking at 15, trying to find something that was potentially not even there, this was not the idea of the VAR principle. It should be clear and obvious."
Last edited:
The Premier League didn't want to be followers, they wanted to pioneer something once they went ahead with implementing a form of VAR. Well these arrogant idiots running our game have certainly pioneered turning the very successful and lucrative Premier League into an international laughing stock.
They've made it very clear that "clear and obvious" doesn't apply to offside decisions, and the VAR fanatics on this very forum continuously point this out gleefully whenever the rest of us bemoan another ludicrous use of VAR to overturn a goal.
This mess has got so bad now that Ifab are trying to wash their hands of what the Premier League has chosen to do. But Ifab are fooling nobody, they have been aware of what has been going on here ALL SEASON, it's just the reaction from fans is becoming so vocal that the heat is now on everyone involved.
No I think the opposite, the thinner the line, the more of a body part is sticking out. The thicker the line, the less room there is for a body part to stick out because it's being covered by the thicker line.
Should be judged on the centre of a player's body rather than a forehead, shoulder or knee, I've absolutely no idea why they are judging it based on any part of the body you can score a goal with; it's ridiculous and almost punishes good, quick thinking attacking movement.
Ok, how do you know someone is a fraction of an inch offside?
Oh you can’t, it’s not possible. You keep thinking you’re clever though
IFAB shot themselves in the foot with this though. They said that VAR was to be used for clear and obvious mistakes as well as factual errors. Offside is classed as fact as in, the player either is or isn't offside. Due to the current wording of the law, VAR had no choice but to implement the lines that we all hate and see if the player is even a tiny bit offside.
It looks like IFAB are going to amend the rules regarding VAR and make it clear and obvious for offside as well now though which will be so much better than the current system
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/0/var-premier-league-explained-does-work-decisions-can-changed/
"The concept of 'clear and obvious' errors does not apply to offsides. A player is either onside or offside - you cannot be a little bit pregnant. So even if a player is offside by a matter of inches, the goal will be ruled out, which is exactly what happened with Manchester City's third-goal-that-never-was at West Ham."
Last edited:
That is so dumb. "Offside is offside, unless we don't like it, in which case offside is not offside afterall"
Just improve the technology, or include a margin for error in the offside rule itself(and then get better tech)
Just improve the technology, or include a margin for error in the offside rule itself(and then get better tech)
Getting 'level' brought back as a thing but making it about 5 yards wide in area, seems like the new idea then?
New exciting VARball - the rules are mad, but there's always something happening that our crack officials will need to rewatch.
New exciting VARball - the rules are mad, but there's always something happening that our crack officials will need to rewatch.
You check VAR.
Fact is, to the letter of the law, if you're offside then you're offside.
VAR allows us to remove the emotion from it and act like machines for a bit and apply the rule of law and we don't like it because we're not used to it and we're normally used to getting away with offsides as par for the course.
Every single one of the ones that have been ruled out over a slight part of a body being further forward has been correct.
VAR allows us to remove the emotion from it and act like machines for a bit and apply the rule of law and we don't like it because we're not used to it and we're normally used to getting away with offsides as par for the course.
Every single one of the ones that have been ruled out over a slight part of a body being further forward has been correct.
But the problem as I've learned both from this thread and reading a bit elsewhere is VAR is not accurate and can be out by up to 3-4 inches in some cases because of framerate.
Simple things for simple minds I suppose
They’ve only been correct based on the image chosen, and due to frame rate and other things such as judging when a ball is technically “played” by the passer it is quite possible that the image chosen to make that decision is an incorrect one, often without a better alternative available.
Bring back the clear daylight rule, judging a player offside for having their head, foot or knee a few millimetres in front of the defender is ludicrous.
In my opinion if your body (or most of it) is in line with the last defender then you should be judged onside.
In my opinion if your body (or most of it) is in line with the last defender then you should be judged onside.
There's no way it's accurate. Who calibrates the exact positions of the cameras? Why do the lines not line up with the mower lines sometimes? Who drags the lines across the screen like we've seen? Then like you say there's the reference points on the 2 players. Then you've the fact that 3D scanning isn't that accurate, particularly at long distance on a moving target, it's all absolute nonsense pseudo science to solve an unscientific problem that doesn't really need solving anyway. I guarantee there's dodgy money riding on some of these decisions.
Even Pukki?
I think that offside should only be judged by the position of the feet and the whole foot has to be offside. How you can be offside with your armpit, I just don't understand.
The thing about it being the whole foot is it shows a true advantage and you can easily see if one foot is ahead of the other as they are on roughly the same plane (close to the floor). The other thing is that having a toe a millimetre offside is offside if you can forensically determine when the ball was played, so the whole foot allows a margin of error.
The thing about it being the whole foot is it shows a true advantage and you can easily see if one foot is ahead of the other as they are on roughly the same plane (close to the floor). The other thing is that having a toe a millimetre offside is offside if you can forensically determine when the ball was played, so the whole foot allows a margin of error.
Aye, I've been having this discussion all season with mates. Short of some kind of game-changing tech that can pinpoint the exact location of every part of a footballer's body in timespace the PL have to swallow their pride, admit they fecked up unleashing VAR on the tightest offsides and increase the leeway before they overrule a goal in favour of the attacker.
Allow tolerances. They're using these lines to show millimeters offside but they're placing them manually, not accounting for human error on that side of things. Idiotic.
If you allow tolerances you will have the exact same problem with the set limit of tolerance. Same problem, you just moved the goalposts.
Christ, I'd have assumed the margin of error to be in millimetres, not several bloody inches.
I really dont understand the argument that VAR is and can never be 100% correct; and that should mean what?. Of course it cant. It will never.
It will never be possible to get an offside call exact. Live with it.
How is that an argument for not using VAR to its full extent? Its still the closest thing to the "truth" we will get.
To use some bloated out version of it will just make it worse.
Then you dont use it at all IMO.
Then also: how is changing the offside rule in itself going to help anything? Its the same argument, you are just moving the goalposts. Feet, armpit, whatever. Just draw a line and execute the rule as good as possible with the technology at hand.
I really think this discussion will go away in a year or so when people have gotten used to it.
1) The lines at the women's world cup were calibrated before each match by the technology provider, with the tools VAR use having been validated by an independent third party using survey grade equipment. I have no idea what the case in the PL is but one would imagine it is something similar.
2) The lines should almost never line up with the mower lines (or indeed lines like the goalline) due to the camera perspective.
What does "survey grade equipment" mean? Sounds like marketing rubbish.
Couldn't tell ya, I ain't a surveyor. That quote came directly from FIFA.
Are you also an idiot who thinks the mown lines on the pitch are perfectly straight?
No I'm an idiot who thinks marketing bollocks is marketing bollocks. And I'd far more trust a GPS controlled mower than a shitty FIFA box of tricks.
I really wish FA would come out already and describe the process in huge detail to the public.
I really hope that image is not completely correct, that 50 fps camera line in particular.
So you trust GPS controlled mowers, which by the way aren't used. Human operated mowers are.
But then claim the science of surveying, which dates back to the beginning of recorded history, is purely a marketing scheme inventend by FIFA. And label physics as pseudo science.
Did you ever go to school? The schooling system has severely failed you if so.
Yes, FIFA use the power of pure physics you fecking numpty.