That's not quite right Doob. I watched this game too.
The kane decision was twofold - 1) was he beyond the last defender when the pass was made 2) did the defender deliberately kick the ball before it got through to kane.
apparently the rule is that if the answer to question 2) is yes - he was not offside.
The officials were not sure whether lovren had kicked the ball which tv showed he had.
The TV debate was about whether the offside rule should say what it does. VAR would have assisted in getting that decision right. Whether it is worth the delay is a separate discussion.
VAR cannot answer every question though. It may not have been able to provide a clear answer on whether LON handled the ball for Carlisle's penalty.
Used in the way rugby uses replay, I feel pretty confident VAR would have helped answer the question of whether O9 handled the ball deliberately. Had it been a rugby match, I could envisage the referee stopping the game (at some appropriate juncture - let's not get into that now) to ask something along the lines of either "is there any clear evidence the ball was handled intentionally?" or "is there any reason not to rule that the ball was handled intentionally?" depending on his initial view. (Clearly the first question would be the correct one here.)
Yep, seen the still. Can't see how that can possibly be offside? I would be against VAR even if it was 100% correct (which as many decisions are subjective is not plausible). What we're seeing however is players being given offside when they're level. The advantage/benefit of the doubt is no longer with the attacking side.
@Wycombe85 said:
Yep, seen the still. Can't see how that can possibly be offside? I would be against VAR even if it was 100% correct (which as many decisions are subjective is not plausible). What we're seeing however is players being given offside when they're level. The advantage/benefit of the doubt is no longer with the attacking side.
They've tinkered with offside to make it fit with VAR, it's utter pish and in no way related to the original infringement. Was the player seeking an advantage, did they get one, none of this is his right toe bigger than the defenders nose bs.
Whatever happened to only correcting a clear and obvious error?
If the line drawn up for each player has any human intervention, as I believe it does, then the system isn't 100% correct because you still have opinion* as a factor.
*Where do I draw this line? To me, in these tight situations, they often quite arbitrary in the placement of the line.
Where do I draw the line?
A player with his back to goal whose heel is slightly ahead of the defender when he gets the ball is not offside for me.
A player pointing where he wants the ball passed is not offside for me.
A nose or elbow in front of the defender is not offside for me.
All been given.
Farcical.
Simple. You get the referees assistant to do their job. At the end of the play feel to review it on VAR and apply a common sense ‘umpires call’-type decision. If it’s borderline and the asst has not flagged it’s not offside. If it’s borderline and the asst has flagged it is offside.
If they want to use technology they might as well go the whole hog and make the players wear a tag on a defined place, and then just use that to judge offside automatically. At least then there would be less ambiguity and decisions could be instantaneous.
You might say that’s creating two different games (where they use the technology and where they don’t) but there’s already a clear distinction between games with and without VAR.
@Wendoverman said:
We have goal line technology and we have officials (however incompetent blind or unfit they are) that is where I would draw the line.
I'd agree with that, goal line technology is enough
@floyd said:
You'd think a slow, stop/start, made for tv sport like American Football would be perfect for VAR, but the way it's been used this year has made the NFL almost unwatchable.
Have to say VAR has been used brilliantly at the Euros (it's barely been noticeable that it's even there). Almost as if we've overcomplicated and made a right meal of it over here.
Personally I still feel that VAR has ruined some of the joy that was there before. Last night it was good that two offside goals for France were identified and disallowed but the delay to get there and the false celebrations are not worth it for me.
Others probably don't mind that in favour of getting the decision spot on. I suppose it depends on tolerance levels for mistakes in the end. Anyway I'm sure it's here to stay but it has chipped away a bit at my love of the beautiful game.
I hate Var but have to agree with @ReturnToSenda it had been distinctly unobtrusive until yesterday. It may be that's because chances have been few and far between so far...and it may get more controversial as the knockouts begin. I notice it cannot spot biting though...
@ReturnToSenda said:
Have to say VAR has been used brilliantly at the Euros (it's barely been noticeable that it's even there). Almost as if we've overcomplicated and made a right meal of it over here.
Probably not seen as much as others but did see the dissallowed France goal last night and the one against Wales at the weekend. Both were quick correct VAR decisions but equally both just looked offside with the naked eye. I think linesmen are told not to flag marginal decisions but maybe someone can correct me if I am wrong.
I do think both goals would have still be disallowed without VAR as the linesman would have flagged and all we are now getting is some justification of VAR based on letting it get some freebie decisions right.
Still got a big problem with letting fans celebrate goals that aren't goals and then seeing the other side celebrate when it gets overturned. That is a manufactured reaction and is not 'great drama'.
Finally in the games I have seen VAR seems very underused on grabbing and shirt pulling at corners. Any idea why as it seemed a big thing at the last World Cup
The linesman's call on the first one was ridiculously late, which itself could feasibly lead to other issues. No excuse for it really since it was a very obvious off-side, unlike the marginal second 'goal'.
Admittedly I got a little scared when Stuart Attwell was on it the other day! It's still not perfect, but the problems we see in the Premier League are mainly of our own making.
@MindlessDrugHoover said:
The linesman's call on the first one was ridiculously late, which itself could feasibly lead to other issues. No excuse for it really since it was a very obvious off-side, unlike the marginal second 'goal'.
It does make sense that they're told to keep it down until the phase is over when there's VAR in use.
Comments
That's not quite right Doob. I watched this game too.
The kane decision was twofold - 1) was he beyond the last defender when the pass was made 2) did the defender deliberately kick the ball before it got through to kane.
apparently the rule is that if the answer to question 2) is yes - he was not offside.
The officials were not sure whether lovren had kicked the ball which tv showed he had.
The TV debate was about whether the offside rule should say what it does. VAR would have assisted in getting that decision right. Whether it is worth the delay is a separate discussion.
VAR cannot answer every question though. It may not have been able to provide a clear answer on whether LON handled the ball for Carlisle's penalty.
Used in the way rugby uses replay, I feel pretty confident VAR would have helped answer the question of whether O9 handled the ball deliberately. Had it been a rugby match, I could envisage the referee stopping the game (at some appropriate juncture - let's not get into that now) to ask something along the lines of either "is there any clear evidence the ball was handled intentionally?" or "is there any reason not to rule that the ball was handled intentionally?" depending on his initial view. (Clearly the first question would be the correct one here.)
@HCblue I think if it had been a rugby match I'm pretty sure the answer would always be that the ball was handled intentionally!
Reminds me of that famous picture of Gazza and Vince Jones
Anyone see the Wolves goal that was disallowed last night?
What a complete joke. Just get rid of this wretched imposition upon our beautiful game and do it now
Yep, seen the still. Can't see how that can possibly be offside? I would be against VAR even if it was 100% correct (which as many decisions are subjective is not plausible). What we're seeing however is players being given offside when they're level. The advantage/benefit of the doubt is no longer with the attacking side.
Under the law he was offside.
FIFA have tinkered with the offside (and the handball) rule for years. Still not at all sure they have it right.
What do you think the offside rule should be?
They've tinkered with offside to make it fit with VAR, it's utter pish and in no way related to the original infringement. Was the player seeking an advantage, did they get one, none of this is his right toe bigger than the defenders nose bs.
Whatever happened to only correcting a clear and obvious error?
If the line drawn up for each player has any human intervention, as I believe it does, then the system isn't 100% correct because you still have opinion* as a factor.
*Where do I draw this line? To me, in these tight situations, they often quite arbitrary in the placement of the line.
Where do I draw the line?
A player with his back to goal whose heel is slightly ahead of the defender when he gets the ball is not offside for me.
A player pointing where he wants the ball passed is not offside for me.
A nose or elbow in front of the defender is not offside for me.
All been given.
Farcical.
And discriminatory against players with big noses!
That’s fine Wendover.
Where exactly do you want to draw the line though? How would you word the offside law?
Simple. You get the referees assistant to do their job. At the end of the play feel to review it on VAR and apply a common sense ‘umpires call’-type decision. If it’s borderline and the asst has not flagged it’s not offside. If it’s borderline and the asst has flagged it is offside.
Matt le Tissier one of the finest players this country has ever produced had a huge conk, it would have ruined his career
If they want to use technology they might as well go the whole hog and make the players wear a tag on a defined place, and then just use that to judge offside automatically. At least then there would be less ambiguity and decisions could be instantaneous.
You might say that’s creating two different games (where they use the technology and where they don’t) but there’s already a clear distinction between games with and without VAR.
They’re already wearing a GPS harness anyway.
We have goal line technology and we have officials (however incompetent blind or unfit they are) that is where I would draw the line.
I'd agree with that, goal line technology is enough
I wonder if Knight’s red card would have stood if we had VAR at our level?
I'd rather have the referee make that call, even if I disagree with it!
'The guys at Stockely Park'. Shudder.
https://offsideornot.com
Have to say VAR has been used brilliantly at the Euros (it's barely been noticeable that it's even there). Almost as if we've overcomplicated and made a right meal of it over here.
Personally I still feel that VAR has ruined some of the joy that was there before. Last night it was good that two offside goals for France were identified and disallowed but the delay to get there and the false celebrations are not worth it for me.
Others probably don't mind that in favour of getting the decision spot on. I suppose it depends on tolerance levels for mistakes in the end. Anyway I'm sure it's here to stay but it has chipped away a bit at my love of the beautiful game.
I hate Var but have to agree with @ReturnToSenda it had been distinctly unobtrusive until yesterday. It may be that's because chances have been few and far between so far...and it may get more controversial as the knockouts begin. I notice it cannot spot biting though...
Probably not seen as much as others but did see the dissallowed France goal last night and the one against Wales at the weekend. Both were quick correct VAR decisions but equally both just looked offside with the naked eye. I think linesmen are told not to flag marginal decisions but maybe someone can correct me if I am wrong.
I do think both goals would have still be disallowed without VAR as the linesman would have flagged and all we are now getting is some justification of VAR based on letting it get some freebie decisions right.
Still got a big problem with letting fans celebrate goals that aren't goals and then seeing the other side celebrate when it gets overturned. That is a manufactured reaction and is not 'great drama'.
Finally in the games I have seen VAR seems very underused on grabbing and shirt pulling at corners. Any idea why as it seemed a big thing at the last World Cup
The linesman's call on the first one was ridiculously late, which itself could feasibly lead to other issues. No excuse for it really since it was a very obvious off-side, unlike the marginal second 'goal'.
Admittedly I got a little scared when Stuart Attwell was on it the other day! It's still not perfect, but the problems we see in the Premier League are mainly of our own making.
It does make sense that they're told to keep it down until the phase is over when there's VAR in use.