VAR

Just an excuse for VAR to involve itself. Offside wasn't previously given for shoulders and arms because A. No one cared and B. Linesmen couldn't see them.

How do you know? They call offside if they think they see offside, you had no idea what they spotted and the body part rules were the same. All that's happened is now it can be programmed in.

Out of all the shite decisions that VAR ruins you're somehow looking at offside and this is the one thing that's been FIXED and is totally fair because those cheats aren't to do with it.

Offside is FIXED and FAIR
 
How do you know? They call offside if they think they see offside, you had no idea what they spotted and the body part rules were the same. All that's happened is now it can be programmed in.

Out of all the shite decisions that VAR ruins you're somehow looking at offside and this is the one thing that's been FIXED and is totally fair because those cheats aren't to do with it.

Offside is FIXED and FAIR
I'm looking at offside because we were discussing offside. Fixed and fair when Mateta was given offside about a foot over the halfway line because his shoulder was leaning forward? It might be fixed but it's not fair.
 
Last edited:
I'm looking at offside because we were discussing offside. Fixed and fair when Mateta was given offside about a foot over the latest line because his shoulder was leaning forward? It might be fixed but it's not fair.

It is fair though. It's in the rules and he was offside, and if it was the other way it would also have been given - this is what makes it fair, that the CPU doesn't give a s*** if it's Palace or Liverpool.
 
It is fair though. It's in the rules and he was offside, and if it was the other way it would also have been given - this is what makes it fair, that the CPU doesn't give a s*** if it's Palace or Liverpool.
OK, no excuses about not interfering with play because the officials wouldn't do that.
 
Well that's entirely different isn't it and nothing to do with the CPU, so in fact reinforces my point about how fair the autooffside actually is - that only people can ruin it.
 
Well that's entirely different isn't it and nothing to do with the CPU, so in fact reinforces my point about how fair the autooffside actually is - that only people can ruin it.
So we're violently agreeing. Nothing intrinsically wrong with the technology but the problems are in the interpretation and so are the perceptions of that interpretation.
 
Add more complex handball and offside laws and referees and VAR interpretation of them from week to week and you have a 'dogs breakfast'.

Handball being deliberate hand/arm to ball and in particular offside to be a clear gap between the body and the last defender would make things much less complicated.
 
Why didn't Henderson get sent off in the fa cup final? 😅
We were in line with it and I still say the still photo shown gave a false impression, that wasn’t when he handled it, he’d actually taken a step back by the time contact was made. But the whole world and his dog is basing it on this still photo.

And I’ll stick with that till the day I die🤣
 
Add more complex handball and offside laws and referees and VAR interpretation of them from week to week and you have a 'dogs breakfast'.

Handball being deliberate hand/arm to ball and in particular offside to be a clear gap between the body and the last defender would make things much less complicated.
The issue is that if this was the ruling, players could keep their arms out wide, the ball could hit their arms from a shot,cross etc and it would not be ruled as a deliberate hand/arm to ball.
Unless of course it is decreed that the extending of arms in certain circumstances introduces the notion of "Unnatural position" !
 
Last edited:
Add more complex handball and offside laws and referees and VAR interpretation of them from week to week and you have a 'dogs breakfast'.

Handball being deliberate hand/arm to ball and in particular offside to be a clear gap between the body and the last defender would make things much less complicated.

As soon as I hear the "clear daylight" argument I cringe because that person hasn't given it much thought and has parroted an idea to stick with. Clear daylight is the most STUPID "answer" to the view that VAR is broken.

Here are some issues for you to ignore.

1. It only moves the line to a new place. There is no change to who decides if it's offside or not, simply that the ref decides using different body points. Except you need an absolute perpendicular line to see if there's daylight or not. So it doesn't solve any of the contraversy in the offside call.
2. What does it even mean? If two players run then their legs will constantly cross each other, flashing glimpses of "clear daylight" on and off between them at pace. If one player leans and there's a bit of clear daylight at his head but the rest of his body is onside? What if he's on the right wing and the other player is on the left wing? What if he's having his shirt tugged and there's no clear daylight anymore? What if his shirt is very loose and flagging behind him? Is he onside then? You would begin to see weird body postures just like the finishing line in athletics.
3. What will happen if you are allowing the attacker to be nearer the opposition goal than the defender as long as there is no gap? If I were a striker I would always try to be very close to the defender but ahead of him. As a defender I would be trying to stay goalside. The outcome of that would just be goalhanging as both players move towards the goal. It was this reason why offside was introduced in the first place, you may as well just not have offside at all.
4. Playing offside traps would be more dangerous than it already is and you'd see more of #3.

You already have a working law and a computer to decide, which is completely impartial. The problem is resolved.

Hopefully in a few years as can get rid of refs and use AI for most of it, although AI does 'learn' so it'll probably have feelings and get hurt about media comments when Liverpool don't get their way then start giving them ridiculous calls.
 
Last edited:
On occasions the KMI panel and the PGMOL are not 'Birds on the same twig'.

Apropos the referee being advised to consult the monitor, when instructed to do so by the VAR it is the model of plausibility that the mindset of he/she is to assume they have erred as the VAR has the advantage of views from different angles and the ability to view slow-motion replays of the incident.
 
On occasions the KMI panel and the PGMOL are not 'Birds on the same twig'.

Apropos the referee being advised to consult the monitor, when instructed to do so by the VAR it is the model of plausibility that the mindset of he/she is to assume they have erred as the VAR has the advantage of views from different angles and the ability to view slow-motion replays of the incident.
Marco Silva lost three points beause of VAR.

Imagine the last game of the season and Fulham needing points to avoid the drop?

😢
 

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top