I don't particularly have a problem with that VAR call. I have a problem with VAR. The point still stands if you replace the Ecuador call with the Lautaro call while reading the paragraphs.
Refs and VAR at the World Cup
- Thread starter Lyricist
- Start date
In my opinion the point about the Ecuador call is senseless. Offside is fact based not emotion based and also no longer even perception based after VAR. Offside being fact based makes complete sense. It is a yes or no situation.
I agree though, the Lautaro Martinez goal and such incredibly close offside calls are tough to take. But that simply is the regulation right now. I'd much rather have goals called off for offside than having offside goals not being called in decisive situations.
Offside was designed to stop players deliberately staying behind defenders to gain an advantage. What we have now is offsides to the shoulder. That’s a change to the way the rule is supposed to work. And it’s only because of VAR.
I keep seeing this but is there any proof this wasn’t how it was meant to work? Is it me who just saw Linesmen make tight call after tight call pre VAR?
I agree in essence, ie that nobody likes toenail offsides, but all those arguments about allowing a foot, two or even three ultimately boil down to "what if it's a foot/two feet/three feet plus a toenail offside?" etc, ad nauseam.
Same with sentences such as "if allowed to stand, would be genuinely unfair". Where's the line between slightly unfair, unfair and genuinely unfair? And if a team can see that it's offside, they're rightly going to be aggrieved if they know that the referees see that too but don't act upon it. Everyone says that it evens out in the end, but it doesn't over games and definitely not during a game where a team is under siege for 90 minutes and heroically defending a draw. How are they expected to get enough chances to even the decisions out?
If I were to change the law myself I'd have it so that a player isn't called offside if he returns to an onside position and plays the ball from an onside position, which means that his offside position hasn't denied the defending team the chance to reset and challenge the player. However, I'm fully aware that that introduces new problems such as players staying offside to be on the defenders' blind side. Changing the law as per my suggestion would eliminate some offsides that are ridiculous (like Aguero being offside v Spurs because his heel was off, but once he received the ball he was five yards from the defenders in an onside position, or that Newcastle offside where a player's running backwards on the wing and his toenail's offside before he gets the ball, defence is reset and he crosses the ball for a goal), but it would introduce new problems with attackers blindsiding defenders and using this law.
The only pragmatic solution that works in all situations where another element of subjective judgment isn't introduced is "offside is offside, end of".
Last edited:
I hate VAR with a passion but I actually have no issue for how it's used in offsides.
If you're off by 0.1mm you're still off. It's very simple. This for me is like goal line tech and I've no issue.
Some of the VAR calls this world cup have been absolutely dreadful though. The Maguire non penalty V the Iran Penalty etc. Absolute shockers.
If you're off by 0.1mm you're still off. It's very simple. This for me is like goal line tech and I've no issue.
Some of the VAR calls this world cup have been absolutely dreadful though. The Maguire non penalty V the Iran Penalty etc. Absolute shockers.
The issue isn't with the how offsides are currently measured (which is pretty good imo) but that the rule itself is idiotic. The point of laws in sports or life are to encourage a certain kind of behaviour, or disincentivise another.
Offside was created to stop goal-hanging. It was not originally designed as a defensive tool. It's purpose is to prevent matches becoming long-ball affairs hoofing it at a striker who just sits around the penalty spot.
These calls made because a player is a inch offside imo totally misses that point. As does the specious argument that if not an inch, why not a foot, or a meter or the whole damn pitch? That's just idiocy.
If we want football to be about scoring goals, then the offside rule should be ammended to give the advantage back to the attacker. Whether that's with a 'daylight' clause, or a 'judgement' from the linesman or VAR I'm fine with it.
Almost every other onfield infringement is done at the referee's judgement. Was that little shirt pull a foul? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. That clip on the foot? Ditto. Offsides should be reserved for when a player is obviously gaining an advantage by being WELL offside.
Offside was created to stop goal-hanging. It was not originally designed as a defensive tool. It's purpose is to prevent matches becoming long-ball affairs hoofing it at a striker who just sits around the penalty spot.
These calls made because a player is a inch offside imo totally misses that point. As does the specious argument that if not an inch, why not a foot, or a meter or the whole damn pitch? That's just idiocy.
If we want football to be about scoring goals, then the offside rule should be ammended to give the advantage back to the attacker. Whether that's with a 'daylight' clause, or a 'judgement' from the linesman or VAR I'm fine with it.
Almost every other onfield infringement is done at the referee's judgement. Was that little shirt pull a foul? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. That clip on the foot? Ditto. Offsides should be reserved for when a player is obviously gaining an advantage by being WELL offside.
Good example of why VAR was brought in in the first place in Wales Iran. Blatant red for 2 different reasons! And the ref gives a yellow. Fortunately this time someone was awake in the TV room.
I think VAR in current form is not good, but what was there before was terrible too.
I think VAR in current form is not good, but what was there before was terrible too.
I keep seeing this but is there any proof that the rules were written this way back in offside free for all pre VAR?
The linesman have always literally looked for an inch offside, it’s just fact.
Edit feck me so it is bollox
The 1863 version of the offside rule was far stricter than the one in practice today.
The rules regarded a player as being in an offside position anytime they were in front of the ball when another player on their team played it. A player could only receive a pass if they were level or behind, the player making the pass when they kicked the ball.
This is actually hilarious. Haven't seen the clip but from that still that's as easy a pen as you'll see“a bit”?
I forgot how literally everyone takes things here.....ugh.
No...VAR isn't overruling anything. Thanks for clearing that up...sigh
VAR is far from perfect as a system, but shouldn't everyone's annoyance be aimed at the people using it? Decisions in football have always been very subjective and therefore different people can have wildly differing opinions on the exact same matter.
That's to be expected from fans, and isn't a big deal since we don't affect the outcome of any given game. Refs, on the other hand, need to be consistent in their application/interpretation, which should hold up under close scrutiny.
What VAR has done is highlight those inconsistencies in their decision making, but instead of most of us realizing that, we seem to jump to the conclusion that the system is rubbish and must be scrapped, since it's application varies from one official to another.
Do I wish that VAR worked better? Absolutely. But let's place the blame squarely where it belongs; with the people using the tool that's been availed to assist them, in a very subjective and inconsistent manner.
That's to be expected from fans, and isn't a big deal since we don't affect the outcome of any given game. Refs, on the other hand, need to be consistent in their application/interpretation, which should hold up under close scrutiny.
What VAR has done is highlight those inconsistencies in their decision making, but instead of most of us realizing that, we seem to jump to the conclusion that the system is rubbish and must be scrapped, since it's application varies from one official to another.
Do I wish that VAR worked better? Absolutely. But let's place the blame squarely where it belongs; with the people using the tool that's been availed to assist them, in a very subjective and inconsistent manner.
Qatar robbed as well. That was a definite pen for them, the ref should have been told to go and look at it.
Have no issue with the marginal offsides once it's accurate and quick enough. If you're offside you're offside. People will complain at someone being off by a cm but whatever, at least it's the same marginal standard applied consistently. And if you gave players leeway by a 1cm, 1 inch or 1 foot you'd immediately have people complaining when someone is offside by 1.1cm, 1.1 inch or 1.1 foot. Wherever the line is, someone will be fractionally ahead of it. And if you make "daylight" the standard it gets even worse because that doesn't actually mean anything.
Subjective calls have always been the real problem for VAR, because the tech getting better doesn't help.
Subjective calls have always been the real problem for VAR, because the tech getting better doesn't help.
Yeah. It's like blaming the brush when the painting looks crap. It doesn't make sense.
With VAR, then you can say any crap decision is solely on the ref decision, not on ref physical limitation (event was too fast, etc.)
Last edited:
The referee has the right to reject and call it the way he see it. Even the red card against Wales he in theory could have stayed with the yellow. But it's the end of his career I guess. But you never know it's Iran after all and he could get a promotion.
So many tight offside decisions. Wonder how many more goals we might have had were it not for VAR and the offside tech.
Does anyone know how many ‘goals’ have been disallowed thus far?
Does anyone know how many ‘goals’ have been disallowed thus far?
Last edited:
It's not as easy as that. Without var the linos need to make a decision so still might call offside
For sure, but I think it’s fair to say VAR results in fewer goals. More unusual for a goal to be given because of the tech.
Germany’s header against Spain was a good example. Not sure the linesman would have caught that one.
It’s only disallowed after the fact when the linesman have to keep their flag down when it isn’t obvious. We have no idea what would be allowed or not if they had to make a decision
Is that what you'd prefer?
That’s an interesting question. I’ve often advocated for VAR and think it can be good when used efficiently, which isn’t always the case, especially in the Premier League.
A lot of rule changes over the years were designed to improve the sport from an entertainment perspective - give the attacker the benefit of the doubt.
The change is ultimately still hard to adjust to. I want decisions to be correct, yet in a weird way the unjust decisions of yesteryear didn’t half add to the spectacle. Does VAR make the sport more accurate and consistent? That’s the hope, and that is the direction football needs to take, but does VAR also take something away from a sport that was always so quick and spontaneous? Perhaps.
the replays shown to the on-field official are so heavily weighed towards getting him to change his decision. it's like they find the most incriminating angle and just show multiple versions of that.
He only falling because Bruno does him. He’s not making a challenge at the point. You can see his instant reaction to the ball going through his legs and the arm comes straight out.
As they should. Why show the ref the angles where there's doubt if you can show the necessary angle to reach the right conclusion?
What else are they supposed to do ? Why bother calling him if there is no little to have him change his mind ?
Does the whole “ball hitting an arm which is breaking your fall is not a pen” guidance only apply in the PL?
No its pretty much considered a universal rule. Ref just had a shocker.
Wording was removed from IFAB for 21/22 specifically about supporting arm.
https://www.theifab.com/law-changes/2021-22/
Law 12, 12.1 on the link you can see delete text.
Didn't Walton say that's no longer a thing? Or did I read or imagine that
Christ the way they change the rule every 3 days is just preposterous
Thanks.
I’d really like to know why the feck they feel the need to constantly change their guidance?! Could they not just adopt a position and stick with it?
Although I suspect the answer is a three letter acronym, starting with V and ending in R.
Regardless it's a positive change that. Intent and benefit should both be deciding factors. Whilst it may have been unintentional there was a massive benefit to it.
Besides, isn't it unnatural to fall like that in the first place? I feel most people would just rotate the body instead of relying on their hand to catch the fall.
Besides, isn't it unnatural to fall like that in the first place? I feel most people would just rotate the body instead of relying on their hand to catch the fall.
Bruno 1 v 1 with the keeper. I know it's not deliberate and it may not be the rule but that has to be a penalty
Not really. Because the laws of the game have always allowed for an accidental touch with your hand to not get penalised. Removing that concept and giving a pen any time it could be argued the defender gains an advantage is a huge change.
If I remember it’s slightly different outside of England after the Martinez penalty was explained away.
You could say by diving in he tried to make himself bigger so his arm comes into the equation? My thoughts are nobody really falls that way, you see defenders arms go out. It looks like he reacts to the nutmeg by instinctively trying to go down on it (if that makes sense)
His arm just looks awkward to me
If the laws say that's a penalty they need changing. Really harsh to give that.
I don't want to try and turn it into a universal thing, but in this particular instance, Bruno absolutely done him with the megs and was 1v1, it just felt like it had to be a penalty. I'd totally understand if it wasn't given mind you.
It doesn't say it was a penalty, but the wording was modified so the referee could exercise judgement. I guess they thought the falling action and hand/arm placement wasn't normal. Learning to fall through judo I cringed so badly at that arm placement, but I really don't think he fell that way intentionally. Footballers just have no idea how to fall.
Quick edit: the examples in the IFAB guide are more what you consider typical arm placement in a slide, out to the side then ball hits it. Not dropping the arm straight down into the path of the ball.