The Footie Thread

pauldj42

Money List Winner
Joined
Nov 13, 2012
Messages
16,017
Location
Seaham
That's offside as well. The only time it wouldn't be offside is if the defender consciously kicks it back to the forward not realising he was there. As Swango said, it will be the ref's interpretation from the VAR replay, but you just cannot allow situations like that Spain/France one. Before long you'll have defenders hesitating to actually clear the ball just in case they only get a toe on it which plays someone offside. Then it will become commonplace like players trying to tackle with their hands behind their backs, which we've all accepted as normal now after some of the farcical handballs of the last five years.
So a defender mis-controls a ball, you say offside and an attacker mis-times his run and that’s offside, that is favouring the defence and only punishing one player for making a mistake.

As it stands it’s only not offside if the defending player makes a deliberate attempt to play the ball, whether he only reaches it with his toe or whatever is irrelevant.

This isn’t new this season, this has been in a couple of years now, the only clarification, change, has been since the Villa/City game.

I take it the Watkins goal in this one you disagree with?
 
Last edited:

Bdill93

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
1,278
At least its a fast decision though. No one liked the tiny tight lines they used to the minutest detail when checking for offsides.. no one likes this. But this is faster :ROFLMAO:
 

Orikoru

Tour Winner
Joined
Nov 1, 2016
Messages
15,941
Location
Watford
So a defender mis-controls a ball, you say offside and an attacker mis-times his run and that’s offside, that is favouring the defence and only punishing one player for making a mistake.

As it stands it’s only not offside if the defending player makes a deliberate attempt to play the ball, whether he only reaches it with his toe or whatever is irrelevant.

This isn’t new this season, this has been in a couple of years now, the only clarification, change, has been since the Villa/City game.
Do you think Mbappe's goal being onside was acceptable then? If he's offside when the ball is played he should be offside. That's all there is it to it. I don't even know what case you're arguing for.
 

Bdill93

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
1,278
lol, what? Just scrap the offside rule altogether then? Loads of goals. Get rid of goalkeepers as well actually. More goals!
Bit OTT. This is someone attempting to play at a ball at least. There is intent there.


That is not a great argument in being in favour of this interpretation. Unless you are in favour of scrapping offside altogether? You could also ignore any accidental handballs by attackers (even with outstretched arms), but give penalties when the defender does the same. More goals after all.

It may sound fantastic, until your team loses an important match because of it. Had England lost the World Cup final on such a goal, I can imagine the reaction over here. Not a good one. Sure, if England won on the same type of goal, there'd be celebrations, but there would be at least a little embarrassment from decent fans that they got away with one based on a dodgy rule.

Refs did need help. They got it in VAR. The reason it was criticised is that its use was appalling. It also resulted in the rules being changed on a weekly basis. Why? Because VAR or not, there will always be inconsistent decisions, subjectivity will always play a role, whether it be by the guy on the field or the guy watching it on the monitor.

You could ignore handballs down to the elbow, not a bad idea!

Quite an overdramatic response to me liking an actual approved EUFA rule tho.
 

Swango1980

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
3,208
At least its a fast decision though. No one liked the tiny tight lines they used to the minutest detail when checking for offsides.. no one likes this. But this is faster :ROFLMAO:
I believe they've improved the "lines" issue this season, as they seem to have a larger margin for error. Certainly not been a major talking point this season as it has in the past.

However, I wonder how fast it will be when the defender may or may not get the slightest of touches on the ball. VAR will be rolling back and forth for minutes to see if the direction / movement of the ball changes.
 

Bdill93

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
1,278
I believe they've improved the "lines" issue this season, as they seem to have a larger margin for error. Certainly not been a major talking point this season as it has in the past.

However, I wonder how fast it will be when the defender may or may not get the slightest of touches on the ball. VAR will be rolling back and forth for minutes to see if the direction / movement of the ball changes.

What margin for error? Its either on or off isnt it? Thats what peoples point of view here seems to be?

Im in favour of a rule that doesnt ruin moments of pure euphoria in the stadium.
 

Swango1980

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
3,208
What margin for error? Its either on or off isnt it? Thats what peoples point of view here seems to be?

Im in favour of a rule that doesnt ruin moments of pure euphoria in the stadium.
The margin of error in the two lines. Yes, you can say it is either onside or offside. But, the technology is not capable of determining this in every incident, as there are not enough frames in the video. Therefore, there should be less debate whether someone's toenail is onside or offside, as you said, no one liked it.

VAR has already ruined the euphoria in the stadium, and at home. I still do not celebrate goals at home, as I await VAR confirmation
 

pauldj42

Money List Winner
Joined
Nov 13, 2012
Messages
16,017
Location
Seaham
Nine changes, as expected for tonight:

Hopefully see us score a boat load against this lot.

Pickford; Walker, Stones, Mings, Shaw; Rice, Foden, Mount; Grealish, Sterling, Kane.
 

Orikoru

Tour Winner
Joined
Nov 1, 2016
Messages
15,941
Location
Watford
What a poor decision. Shaw is clearing the ball comfortably and the lad ducks and sticks his head into a dangerous area. I don't get why that always has to be 'high foot' - don't stick your head on someone's boot! Nonsense decision.
 

Reemul

Head Pro
Joined
Sep 21, 2016
Messages
720
Location
Dorset
What a poor decision. Shaw is clearing the ball comfortably and the lad ducks and sticks his head into a dangerous area. I don't get why that always has to be 'high foot' - don't stick your head on someone's boot! Nonsense decision.
Absolutely stupid clearance by Shaw, like moronic really. England looking pretty crap here and Kane is definitely not all there at the moment
 

Orikoru

Tour Winner
Joined
Nov 1, 2016
Messages
15,941
Location
Watford
How should he clear it?
I even thought the way he flicked at it was intentional in order to bring his foot down quicker and avoid contact.

It has just been pointed out to me as well that the decision for high foot would actually be an indirect free kick inside the box. So to give a penalty the referee must judged it as intentional contact! Mental.
 
Top