And, we’re off.......2018/2019

[Deleted member 18121]

Interesting debates to be had, I thought it was a strange angle to analyse the offside from last night and this photo gives a different decision.

 

[Deleted member 1740]

Depends what frame you want to believe I suppose.

I was under the impression var was going to be foolproof ,but is it really going to arguing that the ref was wrong to arguing var decision is wrong.

Something else my son told me tonight is that you can't be offside by any part of your body that can't score a goal , don't know if that's right or not.

Seems like they have made what used to be a simple rule into something far to complicated.

Two different angles gives 2 different results. Whats the point in having technology that isnt conclusive

Initially VAR was only supposed to be used for blatant and obvious decisions. Being "judged" offside by a minute margin isnt blatant nor obvious. VAR imo should only be used for mistaken identity, off the ball issues etc

Yes your son is right. Offside is pretty complicated right now.

 

[pokerjoke]

Doesn't really matter now does it? VAR awarded the pen, Spurs scored it, game finished 1-0, hopefully the Blues will get the result we deserved tonight. Oh for a goalscorer!

Think you have one I think he got 15 mins or so.
I also think if you play like that at home you will turn it around
I like Pedro doesn’t seem to get many starts these days?
My thoughts were onside.
Keeper should have been sent off.

 

[Deleted member 1418]

Depends what frame you want to believe I suppose.

I was under the impression var was going to be foolproof ,but is it really going to arguing that the ref was wrong to arguing var decision is wrong.

Something else my son told me tonight is that you can't be offside by any part of your body that can't score a goal , don't know if that's right or not.

Seems like they have made what used to be a simple rule into something far to complicated.

Yes Joe Cole said last night about offside and parts of the body you can't score with re. Kane's shoulder being offside! But I've seen many a 'header' clearly come off a shoulder and been given so yes it's complicated.

Anyway game over, 1-0 Spuds going into 2nd leg.

 

[Orikoru]

Yeah great, let’s spend millions on software just so no one on the GM forum moans about the ref 😉

Have you just seen the picture of the offside on Chelsea’s anlaysis laptop?

Standing round waiting for decision takes the pace off the game, it happened again tonight.

I think the decision was right. Kane looks level with Azpilicueta, and the benefit of the doubt is supposed to be with the attacker. It did take too long though, they need to ensure it takes no longer than 60 seconds really. I think they probably thought "while we're looking let's look at the penalty call as well as the offside" but there was no need since that was stonewall.

 

[Deleted member 1418]

Think you have one I think he got 15 mins or so.
I also think if you play like that at home you will turn it around
I like Pedro doesn’t seem to get many starts these days?
My thoughts were onside.
Keeper should have been sent off.

Giroud never going to be the 20+ goals a season man we desperately need. Pedro would've been more effective than Willian last night, but Hudson-Odoi showed he deserves to start ahead of them.

Yes a definite penalty and Kepa was lucky to stay on the pitch.

 

[Orikoru]

Keeper should have been sent off.

Yes a definite penalty and Kepa was lucky to stay on the pitch.

In the old rules maybe, but not since they changed it last year or the year before. No double punishment of penalty & red anymore when a player has made a genuine attempt at the ball.

 

[robinthehood]

View attachment 26301

Interesting debates to be had, I thought it was a strange angle to analyse the offside from last night and this photo gives a different decision.

You can clearly see the ball has left the players foot... that's why it looks offside in that picture.

 

[Deleted member 1418]

In the old rules maybe, but not since they changed it last year or the year before. No double punishment of penalty & red anymore when a player has made a genuine attempt at the ball.

Yes but debatable as to whether it was a genuine attempt at the ball.

Also your previous point on the pen being stonewall and the VAR looking at it, if Kepa had got a glove on the ball before his momentum taking him into Kane then again is that actually a penalty as he's made a save? So don't care how long it takes with a decision as long as it gets the right one, so benefit to the attacker with the offside; and confirmation of definite penalty with referee happy Kepa had made a genuine attempt at playing the ball so yellow card rather than red.

 

[Orikoru]

Yes but debatable as to whether it was a genuine attempt at the ball.

Also your previous point on the pen being stonewall and the VAR looking at it, if Kepa had got a glove on the ball before his momentum taking him into Kane then again is that actually a penalty as he's made a save? So don't care how long it takes with a decision as long as it gets the right one, so benefit to the attacker with the offside; and confirmation of definite penalty with referee happy Kepa had made a genuine attempt at playing the ball so yellow card rather than red.

I just wonder if there was no borderline offside call to make, and it was just the penalty decision, would he have gone to VAR or would he have been satisfied that it was a stonewall pen and simply awarded it? What I really DON'T want to happen when VAR comes in full time, is referees checking every single penalty they award on it just because it's there. But that was essentially what we saw at the World Cup - refs using it as a safety net. It should only be when they are genuinely not sure as they haven't seen it clearly.

 

[Deleted member 1740]

I think the decision was right. Kane looks level with Azpilicueta, and the benefit of the doubt is supposed to be with the attacker. It did take too long though, they need to ensure it takes no longer than 60 seconds really. I think they probably thought "while we're looking let's look at the penalty call as well as the offside" but there was no need since that was stonewall.

I'm all for letting the game flow, it keeps the pace of play going etc

In real time i thought he was ON and i agree benefit of doubt should go strikers way but using VAR for offsides isnt the way we need football to go.

Fast forward 12months imagine how many stops we're going to have in games if all offsides are checked?? its pathetic, lets crack on with the game and use technology were its needed.

over 2 minutes was wasted yesterday and imo ruined the last 20mins of that 1st half.

I think the bigger issue is the quality of refs we currently have, throw as much tech at it as you want weve still got Lee Mason, Kevin Friend et al

 

[Orikoru]

I'm all for letting the game flow, it keeps the pace of play going etc

In real time i thought he was ON and i agree benefit of doubt should go strikers way but using VAR for offsides isnt the way we need football to go.

Fast forward 12months imagine how many stops we're going to have in games if all offsides are checked?? its pathetic, lets crack on with the game and use technology were its needed.

over 2 minutes was wasted yesterday and imo ruined the last 20mins of that 1st half.

I think the bigger issue is the quality of refs we currently have, throw as much tech at it as you want weve still got Lee Mason, Kevin Friend et al

Apparently it took 93 seconds, but it felt like longer. As I said above, and in agreement with you, the last thing we need is refs using VAR as a safety net and checking almost every decision they make. They should only be asking for it when neither they or the linesman had a clear view for whatever reason, and using their own judgement as much as possible.

 

[Tashyboy]

View attachment 26301

Interesting debates to be had, I thought it was a strange angle to analyse the offside from last night and this photo gives a different decision.

Looking at it from that angle, the linesman is in a perfect position. So it's hard to try and analyse how he got it wrong.

 

[Liverbirdie]

Depends what frame you want to believe I suppose.

I was under the impression var was going to be foolproof ,but is it really going to arguing that the ref was wrong to arguing var decision is wrong.

Something else my son told me tonight is that you can't be offside by any part of your body that can't score a goal , don't know if that's right or not.

Seems like they have made what used to be a simple rule into something far to complicated.

You must be the only person that thinks that VAR would be foolproof.

In a game were tackling, handball (deliberate or not) and awarding of red and yellow cards are subjective, it can never be foolproof. I'm in favour of it (if done correctly) but it will never be 100% right, although should be able to minimise mistakes.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

VAR is ineviatably going to be used as a safety net, it is in rugby as far as I can make out. If the ref is going to be hammered for his decisions then why isn't he going to check a decision that leads to a goal or a potential sending off. If you don't want that then tell the tv companies to stop analysing games during and after. It's not going to happen so we need to accept that.

I think they need to emphasise and stick to the key phrase of clear and obvious. Also give the decision a time limit. If they can't resolve the issue in 90 seconds, last nights time frame, then it must not be clear and obvious so the original decision by the ref stands.

 

[clubchamp98]

Depends what frame you want to believe I suppose.

I was under the impression var was going to be foolproof ,but is it really going to arguing that the ref was wrong to arguing var decision is wrong.

Something else my son told me tonight is that you can't be offside by any part of your body that can't score a goal , don't know if that's right or not.

Seems like they have made what used to be a simple rule into something far to complicated.

Yes he’s right but you can score with everything except your arm /hand .
Can’t see how Lino can make that decision, if your arm is off but shoulder isn’t.
Stupid rule and they have made it worse by the changes.
Now where have I heard that before?

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Spurs are now saying March for the new stadium at the earliest. Surely the league at this stage say they have to remain at Wembley for the whole season. This is more than a stop gap and to be fair to all teams playing them away they should stay at Wembley. I was more sympathetic at the beginning but we have gone past that now.

This could all be academic of course, March at the earliest may mean June anyway.

 

[USER1999]

If it is March, then the first game could be Arsenal. After the way Spurs fans trashed the Emirates when it opened, the game after this one could be months after. Probably best to leavebit a bit, then West Ham can trash it.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Well looking at the VAR pictures it seems a complete mess tbh - the system is supposed to used when it’s clear and obvious well looking at that there is no way it’s clear and obvious , the angle looked all wrong and it wasn’t in line with the linesman, yet the Chelsea picture was more in line with the play and he looked offside. And good old Kane with the salmon leap , the GK shouldn’t be red carded - double jeopardy

 

[Liverbirdie]

If it is March, then the first game could be Arsenal. After the way Spurs fans trashed the Emirates when it opened, the game after this one could be months after. Probably best to leavebit a bit, then West Ham can trash it.

Never understood why "fans" do this to an opposing stadium.

Ours did at at OT a few times, and I think Celtic did it at Rangers, which is one of the reasons that the allocations started getting reduced, I think.

Knobhead behaviour.