Cov v Man Utd

[Severn Beach Pigeon]

52 minutes ago, RoystonFoote'snephew said:

You surely haven't just worked that out. VAR had done nothing to enhance the game, made worse by the fact it's now being used for incidents beyond its remit. It's purpose was to correct CLEAR AND OBVIOUS ERRORS, not to pick up all and sundry. It should be scrapped or at least be limited to clear and obvious errors viewed in real time and decided upon within 2 minutes.  If you can't decide within 2 minutes it ain't clear and obvious. 

The offside rule has to be one of clear air, it shouldn't be determined on the size of someone's footwear. 

Especially when the VAR usage was questionable 

 

They drew the line over AWB's foot, but at the end of the Cov player's foot!

[Markthehorn]

Semi automated offside calls might make a difference in the quality and consistency of the decision making?

[luke_bristol]

Rashford has surely played himself out of the Euros, been rotten all season. 

[LondonBristolian]

30 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Agree with some of what you say, however a line has to be drawn somewhere regards the offside rule. 

You are bringing things like interpretation of intent by the forwards into the equation. You seem to be suggesting that if a forward tried to be onside, but then accidentally finds himself in an offside position, then that would be a reason to not be offside? That's going to create even more uncertainty and suspicion amongst fans. 

For the record, I think the offside rule should go back to there being "clean air" between defender and attacker. 

Maybe even "limbs" being offside should not count as offside. Take the line from feet. 

It's not about "intent" but "ability to learn and avoid".

Generally in any situation where there are rules - be it a sport, the workplace or the legal system - you can only be penalised for infringing a rule if you could have reasonably taken steps to avoid doing so. That might mean you broke it on purpose but it might also mean you were careless or negligent. Either way, you being penalised is a corrective step to discourage the rule-breaking and to encourage you to be careful and follow the rules in the future. 

If you take a foul, for example, a player might not always mean to foul a player but a player who commits a foul will always have made an error in the timing or speed of a challenge, which they can learn from in the future. Historically this has bene the case with offside too. A kid playing as a forward for the first time will regularly find themselves offside until they learn to time their runs and part of the joy of watching a quick forward - such as Michael Owen or Ian Wright - was their ability to time their run to get ahead of the defender without being offside. In training, a player would work on their timing and work out the exact moment to get forward.

However, a player on a training pitch does not have access to VAR. In fact, I'm pretty sure Haji Wright's entire experience of playing with VAR in his career before today has been one start and three sub appearances at the last World Cup and the FA Cup Quarter Final at Wolves. Whilst Wright has undoubtedly - like any other forward - worked on timing his runs in training, I do not see how he could possibly have been able to learn how to avoid being offside to the degree of fractionality that VAR picks up on. Without the ability to learn from an error, or avoid it in the future, I don't see how it is fair to penalise someone for an infringement. 

[Midred]

Recently there appear to be been a number of questionable or clear and obvious errors in the VAR's decision making, can that be challenged. The alternative is the rugby way where the referee asks for specific points to be checked or if dangerous play has been missef.

[Malvern Red]

1 hour ago, LondonBristolian said:

I think the whole "a play is offside if his right testicle is fractionally ahead of the defender" is a nonsensical law, especially once you apply cameras and slow things down to check the testicular configurations.

Yep it’s fractionally incomplete b*ll*cks

[awbb]

VAR should be used for a clear and obvious errors, and that only.
 

I also think VAR should be challenge based. 20 seconds for opposing manager to request a challenge to the 4th official. At next stoppage, VAR takes a look but only for clear and obvious errors.
 

Today, for example, if Ten Haag challenged the 4th goal, VAR takes a look and says for the offside it is close and therefore not clear and obvious. Officials decision stands. No lines needed, 10 seconds is all it would take.
 

We could get in to how many challenges and whatnot, I like 1. Use it and get it wrong you lose it. Get it right you keep it.

[BCFCGav]

Vintage Sunday afternoon entertainment that. Do feel for Coventry - went through the emotional wrangle about 10 times today. 

[Markthehorn]

9 minutes ago, awbb said:

VAR should be used for a clear and obvious errors, and that only.
 

I also think VAR should be challenge based. 20 seconds for opposing manager to request a challenge to the 4th official. At next stoppage, VAR takes a look but only for clear and obvious errors.
 

Today, for example, if Ten Haag challenged the 4th goal, VAR takes a look and says for the offside it is close and therefore not clear and obvious. Officials decision stands. No lines needed, 10 seconds is all it would take.
 

We could get in to how many challenges and whatnot, I like 1. Use it and get it wrong you lose it. Get it right you keep it.

But would teams accept their appeal being rejected if they really thought it a  foul etc ?

Still be relying on the subjective view of the ref and VAR.

 

And what if something is missed that gets brought up after the game that teams might have appealed .

[Kid in the Riot]

19 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

It's not about "intent" but "ability to learn and avoid".

Generally in any situation where there are rules - be it a sport, the workplace or the legal system - you can only be penalised for infringing a rule if you could have reasonably taken steps to avoid doing so. That might mean you broke it on purpose but it might also mean you were careless or negligent. Either way, you being penalised is a corrective step to discourage the rule-breaking and to encourage you to be careful and follow the rules in the future. 

If you take a foul, for example, a player might not always mean to foul a player but a player who commits a foul will always have made an error in the timing or speed of a challenge, which they can learn from in the future. Historically this has bene the case with offside too. A kid playing as a forward for the first time will regularly find themselves offside until they learn to time their runs and part of the joy of watching a quick forward - such as Michael Owen or Ian Wright - was their ability to time their run to get ahead of the defender without being offside. In training, a player would work on their timing and work out the exact moment to get forward.

However, a player on a training pitch does not have access to VAR. In fact, I'm pretty sure Haji Wright's entire experience of playing with VAR in his career before today has been one start and three sub appearances at the last World Cup and the FA Cup Quarter Final at Wolves. Whilst Wright has undoubtedly - like any other forward - worked on timing his runs in training, I do not see how he could possibly have been able to learn how to avoid being offside to the degree of fractionality that VAR picks up on. Without the ability to learn from an error, or avoid it in the future, I don't see how it is fair to penalise someone for an infringement. 

You think that by playing with VAR a player can time their movement so as to avoid being offside by a margin of a matter of centimetres? Come on. 

Again, the line needs to be drawn somewhere, doesn't it? 

I don't think "he hasn't played in games with VAR so he doesn't know if he's going to be off" really cuts the mustard as an excuse. 

This said, I'm still not a big fan of VAR. However it's here to stay so the rules and implementation of it need to improve. 

[redkev]

38 minutes ago, luke_bristol said:

Rashford has surely played himself out of the Euros, been rotten all season. 

Terrible attitude in the last 12-18 months 

[downendcity]

31 minutes ago, Midred said:

Recently there appear to be been a number of questionable or clear and obvious errors in the VAR's decision making, can that be challenged. The alternative is the rugby way where the referee asks for specific points to be checked or if dangerous play has been missef.

Perhaps we need VAR's VAR, to check whether VAR has made a clear and obvious error.

31 minutes ago, Midred said:

Recently there appear to be been a number of questionable or clear and obvious errors in the VAR's decision making, can that be challenged. The alternative is the rugby way where the referee asks for specific points to be checked or if dangerous play has been missef.

Perhaps we need VAR's VAR, to check whether VAR has made a clear and obvious error.

[LondonBristolian]

12 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

You think that by playing with VAR a player can time their movement so as to avoid being offside by a margin of a matter of centimetres? Come on. 

Again, the line needs to be drawn somewhere, doesn't it? 

I don't think "he hasn't played in games with VAR so he doesn't know if he's going to be off" really cuts the mustard as an excuse. 

This said, I'm still not a big fan of VAR. However it's here to stay so the rules and implementation of it need to improve. 

Obviously not. You're making the exact point I made in my original post. But my point in my second post is that it becomes even more ridiculous when it is a player who has never played with VAR before.

The line needs to be drawn somewhere but it needs to be drawn somewhere where players can know they are in the wrong and avoid it in the future. If it was "whole body" or "most of body" in front of a player then a player could reasonably do their best to avoid having their whole body or most of their body in front of an opposition player but it is clearly unreasonable to expect a player to be wholly certain that no single aspect of their body is closer to the goal than the last opposition defender. Hence the current law becomes ridiculous and unfair once VAR is applied to it.

[Mr Hankey]

54 minutes ago, luke_bristol said:

Rashford has surely played himself out of the Euros, been rotten all season. 

Not a chance, he fed kids so Southgate the politician will take him. Be hilarious once he takes over United in the summer after getting us knocked out in the quarters at the Euros. 

Those Ineos lot are going to be a bunch of blaggers, will be funny to watch United fans cry even more with their shitty Norwich scarves in 6 months.

[Kid in the Riot]

1 minute ago, LondonBristolian said:

Obviously not. You're making the exact point I made in my original post. But my point in my second post is that it becomes even more ridiculous when it is a player who has never played with VAR before.

The line needs to be drawn somewhere but it needs to be drawn somewhere where players can know they are in the wrong and avoid it in the future. If it was "whole body" or "most of body" in front of a player then a player could reasonably do their best to avoid having their whole body or most of their body in front of an opposition player but it is clearly unreasonable to expect a player to be wholly certain that no single aspect of their body is closer to the goal than the last opposition defender. Hence the current law becomes ridiculous and unfair once VAR is applied to it.

It's ridiculous to expect a player to know for certain whether they are in an offside position, or not, period.

For clarity, where would you draw the line? 

[cidercity1987]

Excellent baiting of the Bristolian Mancs on WhatsApp tonight, wow they are very touchy 

[exAtyeoMax]

God that's made me really sick and depressed and I didn't even see the game. I'd love to hear the VAR recording…

VAR and all the hype really has ruined the game for me.

[LondonBristolian]

6 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

It's ridiculous to expect a player to know for certain whether they are in an offside position, or not, period.

For clarity, where would you draw the line? 

“Would an assistant referee stood in line with play be able to clearly judge the attacking player to be closer to the goal than the defending player?”

If yes - and the assistant isn’t in line with play or is but somewhat misses it - VAR corrects the decision.

If no, there is no clear and obviously error and the attacker gets the benefit of the doubt. 

For me, it is the benefit of the doubt to the attacker that is the element that is lost. No decision will ever be 100% clear cut. But the role of VAR should be to correct things the ref and assistants should have picked up but did not rather than to try to add a level of precision that isn’t realistically possible to achieve.

[Markthehorn]

8 minutes ago, exAtyeoMax said:

God that's made me really sick and depressed and I didn't even see the game. I'd love to hear the VAR recording…

VAR and all the hype really has ruined the game for me.

Would people say the same had it been a Man U goal ruled out though ?

[formerly known as ivan]

Was the penalty decision for handball more harsh than the offside decision to rule out the goal?

If you look at the Everton vs Forest game, Forest had a clearer handball not given even with VAR.

Still can’t believe they have not made the offside rule as simple as daylight between attacker and defender. Wenger has been pushing this for year I believe.

[exAtyeoMax]

1 hour ago, Markthehorn said:

Would people say the same had it been a Man U goal ruled out though ?

That's not relevant for me, I don't care what other people say. It's another good competitive game ruined.

[Swede]

It's a poor Man Utd team from top to bottom. If only we'd beaten Notts forest. I definitely would've fancied our chances against them.

[Shauntaylor85]

2 hours ago, BCFCGav said:

Vintage Sunday afternoon entertainment that. Do feel for Coventry - went through the emotional wrangle about 10 times today. 

It was the most Bristol City thing to happen wasn’t it. Felt for them, United have big problems, I am surprised the new owners haven’t made the change yet. They need De Zerbi. 

[Tinmans Love Child]

9 hours ago, Markthehorn said:

Would people say the same had it been a Man U goal ruled out though ?

They do every single week, about any crazy decision that's made, regardless of the teams.  
 

VAR was brought in to overturn clear and obvious errors, and pre VAR, if the linesman had not given the Cov goal offside, there would have been nobody claiming that he actually was offside and Man Utd were robbed by a poor decision.

[Chrizzler]

The irony is that if it had been the quarter final it would have been played at Coventry where there would have been no VAR. Another nonsense, either all teams have it or none for cup games in my opinion. 

[bristolmoose]

13 hours ago, Robin101 said:

Meanwhile I see Rangers set up a Scottish cup final with Celtic. Shock. 

Football is increasingly very boring. 

First Celtic - Rangers final since 2002

[Roe]

9 hours ago, exAtyeoMax said:

That's not relevant for me, I don't care what other people say. It's another good competitive game ruined.

Why was the game "ruined"? It was incredible drama and one of the most amazing endings to a game you could ever have

[Oh Louie louie]

Somebody said yesterday Roy Keane should accept none of the Man United players had anything like the professionalism of players of his generation, quite.Managers a dead man walking

[exAtyeoMax]

23 minutes ago, Roe said:

Why was the game "ruined"? It was incredible drama and one of the most amazing endings to a game you could ever have

A penalty shoot out? Never a good ending. 

[David Brent]

Without VAR, nobody questions the decision to award the goal. 

I wonder how many key moments in football history would look very different with lines drawn over them. 

Got no issue with technology assistance for the referee but it’s not in place of the referee and linesmen.

I’ve not watched a great deal of football with VAR so perhaps I don’t understand it. But if it could be used for clear and obvious errors that would be great. 

The best use of VAR imo is for penalty reviews and identifying those who have tried to con the referee. The Coventry goal yesterday isn’t an example of that. 

[Oh Louie louie]

When Coventry were getting on top at 3 1 down most managers would have been off the bench or changing things around, he just looked shell shocked , 

[Markthehorn]

1 hour ago, Tinmans Love Child said:

They do every single week, about any crazy decision that's made, regardless of the teams.  
 

VAR was brought in to overturn clear and obvious errors, and pre VAR, if the linesman had not given the Cov goal offside, there would have been nobody claiming that he actually was offside and Man Utd were robbed by a poor decision.

No probably not not unless they were a Man U fan, player or manager .

And there wasn’t much in it I agree but if that goal had been for Man U would there be the same fuss about it being disallowed ?

More my point really .

Edited April 22 by Markthehorn

[Swede]

VAR is ruining football; not improving it! Every decision is becoming more and more contentious. Its riddled with flaws and with it its affecting the true spirit of the game. In real time, Coventry won that match fair and square. How can a player's size 9's be offside when the rest of him isn't?!? 

[Markthehorn]

8 minutes ago, Swede said:

VAR is ruining football; not improving it! Every decision is becoming more and more contentious. It’s riddled with flaws and with it it’s affecting the true spirit of the game. In real time, Coventry won that match fair and square. How can a player's size 9's be offside when the rest of him isn't?!? 

Main flaw is it’s used for subjective decisions which change from ref to ref and week to week .

Don’t think people thought of that when calling for VAR to come in .

[Roger Red Hat]

10 hours ago, Swede said:

It's a poor Man Utd team from top to bottom

Yep, they are a rabble. Clear out and rebuild needed. Mark Robins in the frame now.........

[AshtonGreat]

15 hours ago, 2015 said:

Man Utd and Man City. Two clubs who have financially made a joke of the English Football in the last 30 years meet in the final for the 2nd year in a row. 

Two detestable football clubs with detestable players and managers. 

I shall not be watching this literal 

Which Man City players would you say are detestable? They all seem very likeable to me

[cidered abroad]

13 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said:

It's ridiculous to expect a player to know for certain whether they are in an offside position, or not, period.

For clarity, where would you draw the line? 

Firstly, I believe that if there is any doubt about the decision, by linesman or VAR, the decision should favour the attacking side. It is, after all, a game that is played to score more goals than the opponents.

Secondly, I would only make a decision, draw the line, with only one part of the body is taken into consideration. The feet! 

VAR seems to me a very negative thing for attacking football and an encouragement for sides to be more negative in approach.

Another suggestion would be that offside, which was introduced in the very early days of football, should be dispensed with now. Defenders would then not be able to move forward to deliberately play an opponent offside. And the entertainment value of a match may be increased with more goals.

[Tinmans Love Child]

3 hours ago, Markthehorn said:

No probably not not unless they were a Man U fan, player or manager .

And there wasn’t much in it I agree but if that goal had been for Man U would there be the same fuss about it being disallowed ?

More my point really .

I think if Man Utd had a last minute winner chalked off there would have been a lot of fuss!

[Roger Red Hat]

2 hours ago, cidered abroad said:

Another suggestion would be that offside, which was introduced in the very early days of football, should be dispensed with now.

I don't agree with that, but, as someone suggested earlier, change the law so that there has to be 'clear daylight' between defender and attacker, and no need for VAR to be involved. No stupid toenail type nonsense decisions.

[Markthehorn]

16 minutes ago, Roger Red Hat said:

I don't agree with that, but, as someone suggested earlier, change the law so that there has to be 'clear daylight' between defender and attacker, and no need for VAR to be involved. No stupid toenail type nonsense decisions.

Think Wenger was going for that suggestion too .

https://www.skysports.com/amp/football/news/11095/11945716/fifa-president-gianni-infantino-backs-arsene-wenger-s-offside-law-proposal
 

Not sure what happened to the idea though!

 

[Davefevs]

22 minutes ago, Roger Red Hat said:

I don't agree with that, but, as someone suggested earlier, change the law so that there has to be 'clear daylight' between defender and attacker, and no need for VAR to be involved. No stupid toenail type nonsense decisions.

You’ll still have the same debates.  You have to draw the lines (even in a Lino’s head) somewhere.  Toenail of defender versus arse cheek / flailing elbow of forward.

I think you’ll get less offsides, but you’ll still get really tight decisions.  I think it will actually be harder to judge.  It think it’s easier to spot an attacker protruding wrong side of a defender than it is to work out clear daylight.  That’s just me though.

Don’t forget we went through similar in the 80s when we moved to / from level being offside.

[The Gasbuster]

3 hours ago, Roger Red Hat said:

Yep, they are a rabble. Clear out and rebuild needed. Mark Robins in the frame now.........

First out the door; rat face Fernandes, ideally. To a non U.K. team, as well.

[Roger Red Hat]

 

[Bazooka Joe]

A well-worked goal and great Coventry comeback and victory, seemingly denied by the length of a toe-nail.

What next?

Denied by the length of a short and curly pubic hair ?

Even with VAR, there is still a certain lack of transparency and some images look like they've been cleverly manipulated or badly edited to appear blurred and unclear. 

Something stinks.

And this time, it's not just Irene.

[1960maaan]

I hadn't seen this Tweet before and I couldn't find footage showing the Lino, but if this is right VAR makes no difference. If there wasn't any, and the Lino flags it would have been offside. 

Doesn't excuse VAR , but just thought that I saw some on Twitter saying it should be left to Refs & Lino's , in which case it looks like it would still have been ruled out. Something else I saw which made sense, use thick lines so it can't be just a toenail .

[Maltshoveller]

4 hours ago, The Gasbuster said:

First out the door; rat face Fernandes, ideally. To a non U.K. team, as well.

Agree with Fernandes 

2nd would be Rashford

The two most spineless players i have ever seen 

[MyBrotherErnie]

I always think about this graphic with VAR. Seems pretty intuitive that the system shouldn't be used for decisions that are closer than the margin of error inherent to the technology. If the call is too close for the system to be certain that the player is offside, then surely it isn't a clear and obvious error by the lino/referee. 

 

My bigger problem with VAR is that it's part of a culture making football more like a science, rather than something entertaining. I guess ultimately the only way to escape that is to reduce the sums of money invested in the game (which I can't see happening any time soon). 

[maxjak]

On 21/04/2024 at 19:07, BrizzleRed said:

I’ve got no love for Man City, but after seeing that today, I hope they totally humiliate United in the final.

Absolutely gutted for Coventry.  They can hold their heads high, but to go out like that is so cruel and another example of technology killing the spirit of football.

100% agree...........Coventry were denied a superb victory by a toenail.  The offside law was never meant to rely upon such miniscule margins, there is no advantage for the forward being a toe in front of the perceived line of defence?.  VAR is ruining football, and I just wish someone would have the good grace to scrap it.   It is NOT the job of the Video Refs in their bunker to constantly interfere in the ongoing game?  It is their job to see,  and intervene when major errors occur that are clearly wrong and have been missed by the referee in charge.  If VAR is to remain, which i DO not want, but if it does..............it needs a massive overhaul, and consultation with ex players and officials, to point out the inconsistencies and contradictions which are slowly strangling our once great game.  In a nutshell.....I phecking hate VAR, and Everything about it.   PS . Man U's Anthony was IMO an embarrassing clown

[maxjak]

23 hours ago, The Gasbuster said:

First out the door; rat face Fernandes, ideally. To a non U.K. team, as well.

That is so,  my perception of Fernandes...........he is a good footballer,   but everytime i see him, I am reminded of a puppet called Roland Rat, he looks like he should be in an alleyway chowing down on some cheese?  Ha!!      Sorry Fernandes, I know it is  wrong, and I am sure your Mother loves you, but you have the face of a Rattus Norvegicus?

Edited April 23 by maxjak

[TonyTonyTony]

17 hours ago, MyBrotherErnie said:

I always think about this graphic with VAR. Seems pretty intuitive that the system shouldn't be used for decisions that are closer than the margin of error inherent to the technology. If the call is too close for the system to be certain that the player is offside, then surely it isn't a clear and obvious error by the lino/referee. 

 

My bigger problem with VAR is that it's part of a culture making football more like a science, rather than something entertaining. I guess ultimately the only way to escape that is to reduce the sums of money invested in the game (which I can't see happening any time soon). 

Great post. Ive always wondered what margin of error there was. This post explains it very well. Cheers

 

[Markthehorn]

16 minutes ago, maxjak said:

100% agree...........Coventry were denied a superb victory by a toenail.  The offside law was never meant to rely upon such miniscule margins, there is no advantage for the forward being a toe in front of the perceived line of defence?.  VAR is ruining football, and I just wish someone would have the good grace to scrap it.   It is NOT the job of the Video Refs in their bunker to constantly interfere in the ongoing game?  It is their job to see,  and intervene when major errors occur that are clearly wrong and have been missed by the referee in charge.  If VAR is to remain, which i DO not want, but if it does..............it needs a massive overhaul, and consultation with ex players and officials, to point out the inconsistencies and contradictions which are slowly strangling our once great game.  In a nutshell.....I phecking hate VAR, and Everything about it.   PS . Man U's Anthony was IMO an embarrassing clown

No one really thought about how subjective everything is in football unlike in others sports where the decisions are more black and white (and generally decisions get accepted as a result )

 

 

 

[ExiledAjax]

52 minutes ago, Markthehorn said:

No one really thought about how subjective everything is in football unlike in others sports where the decisions are more black and white (and generally decisions get accepted as a result)

I've long said that it's the Laws that are the issue. VAR just exposes those issues. 

It's an objective tool that is layered on top of subjective Laws, and it doesn't fit.

The Laws haven't been rewritten to accommodate a game where VAR exists. Until they are there will be a chance of VAR getting the flak when it's just imposing the Law to the letter.

[BrizzleRed]

1 hour ago, maxjak said:

100% agree...........Coventry were denied a superb victory by a toenail.  The offside law was never meant to rely upon such miniscule margins, there is no advantage for the forward being a toe in front of the perceived line of defence?.  VAR is ruining football, and I just wish someone would have the good grace to scrap it.   It is NOT the job of the Video Refs in their bunker to constantly interfere in the ongoing game?  It is their job to see,  and intervene when major errors occur that are clearly wrong and have been missed by the referee in charge.  If VAR is to remain, which i DO not want, but if it does..............it needs a massive overhaul, and consultation with ex players and officials, to point out the inconsistencies and contradictions which are slowly strangling our once great game.  In a nutshell.....I phecking hate VAR, and Everything about it.   PS . Man U's Anthony was IMO an embarrassing clown

Couldn’t agree more Max.  

In theory, if VAR was employed properly, it could possibly be a valuable tool, just like goal-line technology undoubtedly is.  

Sadly, the combination of crap offside rules and the completely flawed employment of VAR above the match officials, has actually made it a blight on the game, rather than a benefit.

Higher end football needs to sort itself out, before it actually destroys itself.

[Markthehorn]

46 minutes ago, BrizzleRed said:

Couldn’t agree more Max.  

In theory, if VAR was employed properly, it could possibly be a valuable tool, just like goal-line technology undoubtedly is.  

Sadly, the combination of crap offside rules and the completely flawed employment of VAR above the match officials, has actually made it a blight on the game, rather than a benefit.

Higher end football needs to sort itself out, before it actually destroys itself.

Suppose offside could just mean offside and maybe the semi automated system will mean we won’t need to see silly human drawn lines which obviously cause confusion and controversy.

What would be the ideal handball rule too ?

We've seen all sorts given and not given.

How can we make it easier  to apply when most of the time it's subjective and a lottery.
 

All this really could have been sorted out by those in charge before VAR came in.

Edited April 23 by Markthehorn

[Lorenzos Only Goal]

18 hours ago, MyBrotherErnie said:

I always think about this graphic with VAR. Seems pretty intuitive that the system shouldn't be used for decisions that are closer than the margin of error inherent to the technology. If the call is too close for the system to be certain that the player is offside, then surely it isn't a clear and obvious error by the lino/referee. 

My bigger problem with VAR is that it's part of a culture making football more like a science, rather than something entertaining. I guess ultimately the only way to escape that is to reduce the sums of money invested in the game (which I can't see happening any time soon). 

There is also this nonsense of drawing a straight line. It's not actually straight. There are so many flaws with it that trying to be overly scientific is absurd; it also matters if the zoom is digital or fixed analogue zoom. They try to take some of this into account, but it's still awfully flawed, and when it's a cat's whisker, it should not overrule the infield decision.

[Bazooka Joe]

2 hours ago, maxjak said:

That is so,  my perception of Fernandes...........he is a good footballer,   but everytime i see him, I am reminded of a puppet called Roland Rat, he looks like he should be in an alleyway chowing down on some cheese?  Ha!!      Sorry Fernandes, I know it is  wrong, and I am sure your Mother loves you, but you have the face of a Rattus Norvegicus?

Fernandes is overRATed.

Like those who denied Coventry that winning goal, the guy is VARmin.

Edited April 23 by Bazooka Joe

[Roger Red Hat]

3 hours ago, maxjak said:

I am sure your Mother loves you, but you have the face of a Rattus Norvegicus?

 

[Davefevs]

4 minutes ago, Roger Red Hat said:

 

What an LP

[Roger Red Hat]

6 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

What an LP

Fkin' brilliant!

[Davefevs]

Just now, Roger Red Hat said:

Fkin' brilliant!

Just put it on.  First proper band I saw….Newport lates 80s

[maxjak]

46 minutes ago, Roger Red Hat said:

 

Sitting on the beaches....looking at the Peaches?    Saw them play live a couple of times.........I really loved their unique sound........those were the days..  Ha!

[Davefevs]

28 minutes ago, maxjak said:

Sitting on the beaches....looking at the Peaches?    Saw them play live a couple of times.........I really loved their unique sound........those were the days..  Ha!

Greenfield’s keyboards and Jean-Jacques bass.

Spotify went into random mode after that album.

Just listened to Reward / Teardrop Explodes, bloody love that tune.

[BrizzleRed]

2 hours ago, Markthehorn said:

Suppose offside could just mean offside and maybe the semi automated system will mean we won’t need to see silly human drawn lines which obviously cause confusion and controversy.

What would be the ideal handball rule too ?

We've seen all sorts given and not given.

How can we make it easier  to apply when most of the time it's subjective and a lottery.
 

All this really could have been sorted out by those in charge before VAR came in.

As you say, it is a lottery and for all the guidelines, the officials often interpret stuff so differently.

The offside situation is getting silly now though, with the matter of millimetres being measured.  It's like those songs about 'Aguerro, your teeth are offside', or 'Ozil, your eyes are offside'!  Joking aside, nobody gains an advantage with a couple of mm, so should it really come down to such small fractions?   One of the  better suggestions I've heard is to say there needs to be clear daylight between the last defender and the attacker, maybe measured at the waist, being the centre of the body.  

Ok, that certainly gives the advantage to the attacking team, but the defending team may be less likely to be constantly playing the offside trap, because if they judge it wrong, that really hands a significant advantage to the attacking team.  We already see advantages given to keepers in any body contact at present, so giving advantages in the game aren't unprecedented.   Don't know how difficult that type of offside decision would be for a lino to judge, but it must already be difficult enough to judge these fractions at present.

The problem with VAR is, it seems to be the first point of reference, rather than leaving it to the officials to make a judgement first and leave it to them to ask for VAR if they aren't certain.   It just feels like VAR is becoming a massive hindrance to football at present and arguably, causes more controversy than before it existed.

[Markthehorn]

Think Wenger has suggested daylight offsides in the past but not sure what happened to that idea.

I think we just have to conclude the game isn’t any less controversial or confusing with VAR than without which I am sure wasn’t the intention.

Infact it’s probably worse for a number of reasons .

 

Edited April 23 by Markthehorn

[arrytheb]

Genuine question to all those criticising VAR on the offside.  

If that was us instead of Man U, and Coventry had the goal (correctly) ruled out for offside, would you be coming on here complaining or would you be saying it's the correct decision ? 

It's an absolute shame for them, and would have been a brilliant ending, but it was offside, and it's pretty irrelevant whether its 5mm or 5m offside. Same as if the ball is or isn't over the line. 1mm or 1m is the same outcome 

I hate VAR, wish it was never brought in. But surely people can't moan when the decision is as factually correct as it can be?? 

[RedorDead BCFC]

11 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Just put it on.  First proper band I saw….Newport lates 80s

You done well to escape the Port alive  in the 80’s. 
I had the pleasure of being born in that shit hole. Only saving grace it’s now a 5 star hotel. So I suppose I’m posh Welsh 

[Oh Louie louie]

I wonder what Wenger thinks to var. Any misconduct by one of his players, his quote was always the same  I did not see this!