VAR and Refs | General Discussion | May 15: Premier League clubs to vote on proposal to scrap VAR from next season

[CoopersDream]

It absolutely is, by the current rules.



https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-11---offside

Nah, he isn't physically in the way and that's what that part of the rule you're quoting deals with. It's true that Leno can't move until the ball is past him, but that doesn't mean it's offisde (now again, it should mean he's offside, it just doesn't by the current rules). If he stood on the goal line and the Leno jumped into him, it would have been offside considering he was actually physically interfeering with him trying to reach the ball.

If he tried to play the ball he would have been offside, but to me it's quite clear he is doing the best not to touch the ball. That's probably what VAR determined as well.

To me this isn't nearly as controversial as the non offside call on Rashford last season at Old Trafford.

 

[Name Changed]

Nah, he isn't physically in the way and that's what that part of the rule you're quoting deals with. It's true that Leno can't move until the ball is past him, but that doesn't mean it's offisde (now again, it should mean he's offside, it just doesn't by the current rules). If he stood on the goal line and the Leno jumped into him, it would have been offside considering he was actually physically interfeering with him trying to reach the ball.

If he tried to play the ball he would have been offside, but to me it's quite clear he is doing the best not to touch the ball. That's probably what VAR determined as well.

To me this isn't nearly as controversial as the non offside call on Rashford last season at Old Trafford.

I think he tried to flick the ball. He jumped over it, and then there was a flick towards the ball, he just missed it!

It's a ridiculous rule.

 

[M16Red]

Nah, he isn't physically in the way and that's what that part of the rule you're quoting deals with. It's true that Leno can't move until the ball is past him, but that doesn't mean it's offisde (now again, it should mean he's offside, it just doesn't by the current rules). If he stood on the goal line and the Leno jumped into him, it would have been offside considering he was actually physically interfeering with him trying to reach the ball.

If he tried to play the ball he would have been offside, but to me it's quite clear he is doing the best not to touch the ball. That's probably what VAR determined as well.

To me this isn't nearly as controversial as the non offside call on Rashford last season at Old Trafford.

Making him interfering with play

Edit: Also remember the goalie had no idea if he was offside.

 

[CoopersDream]

Making him interfering with play

Edit: Also remember the goalie had no idea if he was offside.

I agree that it should be offside in these situations. It's not by the current rules, though. There are tons of situations both with goalkeepers and defenders every year where they do something differently because they know a player is behind them (or in the goalkeepers case, in front of them), but it isn't actually offside because rules. It's a terrible rule, simple as.

 

[CoopersDream]

I think he tried to flick the ball. He jumped over it, and then there was a flick towards the ball, he just missed it!

It's a ridiculous rule.

And if VAR thought that he would have been deemed offside.

 

[njred]

Making him interfering with play

Edit: Also remember the goalie had no idea if he was offside.

That’s one of the most blatant offence of some interfering with play I have ever seen. How can they possibly explain their way out of this.

 

[cyberman]

I think he tried to flick the ball. He jumped over it, and then there was a flick towards the ball, he just missed it!

It's a ridiculous rule.

Moving out of the way is deemed interfering with play as well. Everton had a goal disallowed against us a few years ago based on this

 

[SER19]

I cant remember a worse ever season- should this standard continue. Its almost every game. Last season was terrible, this season has somehow fallen even lower.

 

[CoopersDream]

Moving out of the way is deemed interfering with play as well. Everton had a goal disallowed against us a few years ago based on this

I'm not actually sure that would have been the right decision if it was made today. The rules might have changed in regards to this since then, but quite sure that would have been deemed onside today. The Everton player in that instance didn't interfere with play in any actual way (neither actually physcially in the way, nor De Gea's movement).

 

[cyberman]

I'm not actually sure that would have been the right decision if it was made today. The rules might have changed in regards to this since then, but quite sure that would have been deemed onside today. The Everton player in that instance didn't interfere with play in any actual way (neither actually physcially in the way, nor De Gea's movement).

It is correct through. An offside player can’t dummy the ball in or make any kicking motion towards the ball

 

[Name Changed]

And if VAR thought that he would have been deemed offside.

It shouldn't be a matter of opinion. His foot moved towards the ball after it had gone through his legs. Whether or not he actually tried to flick the ball, it's still clear that his movement towards the ball made it look like he did. Surely it's not up to VAR to guess what his intentions were?

 

[Name Changed]

Moving out of the way is deemed interfering with play as well. Everton had a goal disallowed against us a few years ago based on this

I agree with you.

 

[Heinzesight]

Surely you can’t give that goal…looked more like he was trying to flick it in to me. Enough doubt to disallow that. Will we have two weeks of phone-ins on this like after the Fernandes goal in the derby last season?

Not seen the other one where apparently City should have had a red for a last man foul…heard it was a nailed on red?

 

[Freak]

Referees are corrupt.

 

[CoopersDream]

It shouldn't be a matter of opinion. His foot moved towards the ball after it had gone through his legs. Whether or not he actually tried to flick the ball, it's still clear that his movement towards the ball made it look like he did. Surely it's not up to VAR to guess what his intentions were?

To me it looks like he's jumping out of the way. I don't think he had any intentions of trying to hit the ball, nor do I think his movement suggest he does. But even if I thought it did, that would still have been my interpretation of it. So the point still stands that it's up to the people in the VAR room to decide either what his intentions was or what it looked like.

Anyway, I think they need to rethink the rule so that it doesn't come down to the people in the VAR room having to interpret certain aspects of the rule, because if it is interpretation it's going to lead to incosistencies. Offside is also something that doesn't need to be clearly and obviously wrong by the onfield refs to get overrules, it's just supposed to be the correct decision. They should change the rule in such a way that they always can make the correct decisioin given the set of rules that they have at the given time.

 

[Samid]

These refs are such a disgrace.

 

[SilentWitness]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

I didn't see this bit as I was out but is that legit?

 

[Samid]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

I didn't see this bit as I was out but is that legit?

That’s the line for the Everton players. Nothing wrong with that.

 

[Anustart89]

That’s the line for the Everton players. Nothing wrong with that.

He still doesn't move the wall behind the line that he's drawn for them though.

 

[Someone]

The Premier League should sign the best refs in the world, just like clubs sign the best players. There's nothing wrong with the tech itself, it's just pure lack of ability. Nothing is gonna change that.

 

[Anustart89]

I wonder if Akanji, who made a big fuss about the Rashford incident last season, will weigh in on this.

 

[Superunknown]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

I didn't see this bit as I was out but is that legit?

That's legit. A few of us were laughing about it in the game week thread earlier on. Absolutely ridiculous.

Ref/VAR did Fulham dirty today. Goals change games and you can see that Fulham were rocked when that goal went in. Obviously you can't let your head go down when you concede away from home, but still, it was a bad decision that affected the game at a crucial point.

 

[Giggsyking]

I'm not actually sure that would have been the right decision if it was made today. The rules might have changed in regards to this since then, but quite sure that would have been deemed onside today. The Everton player in that instance didn't interfere with play in any actual way (neither actually physcially in the way, nor De Gea's movement).

What are you on about? not only he is in the goalkeeper's line of vision, he also tried to flick the ball.

 

[Freak]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

I didn't see this bit as I was out but is that legit?

I saw that. It was ridiculous and I was laughing thinking wtf is wrong with these refs?

 

[OldSchoolManc]

Are the referee and VAR being stood down next week or does that only happen with United?

 

[C'est Moi Cantona]

Other than the seemless goal line technology VAR just wants burning.

It's exactly the same as it ever was, soem decisions you get some you don't, but it'll probably work out about even by the end of the season.

And this add of minutes at the end of games is a all a bit unneccessary, as is booking the managers for having a bit of a rant and showing emotion, it's all part of the game, and unless it's too extreme a good one aswell.

 

[Jeppers7]

These refs are such a disgrace.

Have Fulham received an apology?

 

[Gio]

Anyway, I think they need to rethink the rule so that it doesn't come down to the people in the VAR room having to interpret certain aspects of the rule, because if it is interpretation it's going to lead to incosistencies. Offside is also something that doesn't need to be clearly and obviously wrong by the onfield refs to get overrules, it's just supposed to be the correct decision. They should change the rule in such a way that they always can make the correct decisioin given the set of rules that they have at the given time.

I’d say there are arguments both ways around how prescriptive the rules should be. On one hand, the rules around interference are clear and don’t leave much room for interpretation. On the other hand, because they have tried to codify every situation - but missed out covering this one - it has given the refs less room to make a common sense decision.

Either way the starting principle should be about advantage gained from the offside position. The benefit with codifying every scenario is that we gain more consistency. The risk is missing the spirit of the rule in the first place. In effect we may see goals ruled out for inconsequential offsides, or refs are tied by prescriptive scenarios that miss the City one yesterday.

On balance offside should be straightforward enough to have clear rules governing the range of scenarios, as long as the advantage-gained principle remains the starting point of any decision.

 

[Garnacho's Shoelaces]

Have Fulham received an apology?

Four match ban for Evra.

 

[Jeppers7]

Four match ban for Evra.

 

[Okey]

Are the referee and VAR being stood down next week or does that only happen with United?

I'm asking too. I actually think United should speak about these things. I know Klopp would. Put the pressure on the incompetent Refs.

 

[Okey]

And of course we have the bald Mancunian today, who will be doing his best to show everyone how unbiased he is.

 

[Pexbo]

And of course we have the bald Mancunian today, who will be doing his best to show everyone how unbiased he is.

I’ll set up camp in the VAR thread then. I’ve never been so certain we are going to get fecked over.

 

[WeePat]

I’ll set up camp in the VAR thread then. I’ve never been so certain we are going to get fecked over.

I can already see it. Saka will get a pen.

 

[RedChisel]

Suddenly VAR will be all fine and dandy after it screws United over today.

 

[cyberman]

I’ll set up camp in the VAR thread then. I’ve never been so certain we are going to get fecked over.

There’s no way any debatable decision goes our way. They don’t want the uproar after a shitty weekend like this

 

[Okey]

There’s no way any debatable decision goes our way. They don’t want the uproar after a shitty weekend like this

When last was there not a shitty weekend? Omnishambles!

 

[DavidDeSchmikes]

No apology yet.

 

[WeePat]

Szoboszlai’s goal should have been chalked off for offside surely?

 

[Samid]

How is Saka not off?!