The Footie Thread

[Orikoru]

You’re missing it! If one toe is ahead of the other, regardless of when they freeze the frame they ARE NOT level.

What you are asking for is a margin of error and anything within that margin is deemed onside.

But remember, if that margin of error is for example 2cm then 2.01cm would be offside.

I don't agree with you, because by your logic it's impossible to actually be level if you analyse it forensically down to a fraction of a millimetre. It should not be that clinical.

This happened a year ago:


Ok it's not the best angle, but I remember from all the angles he looked absolutely level with that defender. Even while doing this review I felt sure they were going to give the goal, but it was given offside. He is not offside there. I don't care if his shoulder is a fraction in front of the defender's knee, that is absolute nonsense. Pukki there has kept himself level with the defender, which is all he can be expected to do. He's level! Forensic analysis is not required, he is level to the naked eye and that's all the detail you need.

Call it margin for error if you want, but if a forward has done all he can reasonably be expected to do to stay onside by staying level with the defender, we should not punish him by analysing in forensic detail to show one of his leg hairs was actually offside. It's ridiculous, and I'm not sure even you would want that, I suspect you're just arguing the Devil's advocate because that's what you always do. Why would anyone want this? That picture above is not offside, I don't care what you say. Strikers are going to need Matrix binary vision to stay onside if it is. Football is played by humans, not robots.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Not quite. The margin of error means that if the computer / ref etc says offside then they definitely were offside. Not by a hair or a little toe as those margins are too tight to call. It means a little toe and a bit

I get what you are saying, there will always be a border, a line etc but the margin of error makes it a non argument

There is no way the FA/PL is going to allow the margin of error to be different to different Referees, they will have to be very exact in their wording so the Clubs know exactly what is and isn’t offside.

 

[Deleted member 21784]

You’re contradicting yourself, what was the first offence? It was the foul (we may disagree whether it was inside or outside the box) so everything after that is irrelevant.

Just like the VVD/Pickford incident, the first offence was the offside and whether we agree or not on the subsequent action, it was deemed irrelevant.

That is not VAR’s fault, they are incompetent Officials.

Say the ref sees the "foul" plays advantage.. attacker scores .. it's then deemed offside

It can't be brought back for the foul because the advantage lead to a goal.. which was overule

 

[Deleted member 21784]

The foul was before the offside, he threw his arms around Watkins' neck as he was about to run past him. So yes, I think penalty to Villa should have been the outcome. The timeline is foul > offside > goal. Can't be a goal because he was offside, but he was fouled prior to being offside so you'd pull it back to the foul which occurred first, and therefore it's a pen. Regarding the contact being outside, I believe the rule is contact that continues into the box is given as a penalty.

Once you score it's reviewed as a goal

The build up is then irrelevant

 

[Deleted member 16999]

I don't agree with you, because by your logic it's impossible to actually be level if you analyse it forensically down to a fraction of a millimetre. It should not be that clinical.

This happened a year ago:
View attachment 33805

Ok it's not the best angle, but I remember from all the angles he looked absolutely level with that defender. Even while doing this review I felt sure they were going to give the goal, but it was given offside. He is not offside there. I don't care if his shoulder is a fraction in front of the defender's knee, that is absolute nonsense. Pukki there has kept himself level with the defender, which is all he can be expected to do. He's level! Forensic analysis is not required, he is level to the naked eye and that's all the detail you need.

Call it margin for error if you want, but if a forward has done all he can reasonably be expected to do to stay onside by staying level with the defender, we should not punish him by analysing in forensic detail to show one of his leg hairs was actually offside. It's ridiculous, and I'm not sure even you would want that, I suspect you're just arguing the Devil's advocate because that's what you always do. Why would anyone want this? That picture above is not offside, I don't care what you say. Strikers are going to need Matrix binary vision to stay onside if it is. Football is played by humans, not robots.

I agree with you how rubbish VAR is, but even the decision above is down to the current rules and the idiot drawing the lines. There is no method that will be controversey free.

 

[Liverbirdie]

Pray tell us what action was taken by the Referee after VVD was given offside?

Sits and waits quietly while the tumbleweed blows by...........

After the weekend we just had and the inconsistencies shown, even by the same VAR refs, your seriously saying that the actions taken by refs are always correct?

Sheesh.

 

[Orikoru]

Once you score it's reviewed as a goal

The build up is then irrelevant

lol what? Penalties are reviewed, there was no goal here because the scorer was offside (after being fouled). I think you need to get the rose tints off as it's fairly clear a penalty was the correct outcome here. Even Carragher and Neville agreed on that almost instantly, and they never agree on anything. I think Rice even suggested in his interview that Ogbonna new he had fouled him!

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Say the ref sees the "foul" plays advantage.. attacker scores .. it's then deemed offside

It can't be brought back for the foul because the advantage lead to a goal.. which was overule

Yes he can, they do it all the time let the game continue to see if the “fouled” team gain an advantage and in the 2 seconds last night he’d award the goal, then be overturned for offside and then give the foul.

 

[Orikoru]

I agree with you how rubbish VAR is, but even the decision above is down to the current rules and the idiot drawing the lines. There is no method that will be controversey free.

Ok, we've reach some agreement at least. ? Because that's effectively what I'm saying, drawing the lines on it causes more problems than it solves. You just need to watch the replay and make a simple judgement call, then we wouldn't be talking about margin for error and whatnot, it would go back to the official's judgement - they'd just get a bit of help in seeing it again.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

After the weekend we just had and the inconsistencies shown, even by the same VAR refs, your seriously saying that the actions taken by refs are always correct?

Sheesh.

Are you saying they are always wrong?

Double Sheesh

 

[Orikoru]

Say the ref sees the "foul" plays advantage.. attacker scores .. it's then deemed offside

It can't be brought back for the foul because the advantage lead to a goal.. which was overule

I think you've confused yourself.. if he gave advantage and the player was then offside then there was no advantage was there. The fact he put it in the net was totally irrelevant here.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Ok, we've reach some agreement at least. ? Because that's effectively what I'm saying, drawing the lines on it causes more problems than it solves. You just need to watch the replay and make a simple judgement call, then we wouldn't be talking about margin for error and whatnot, it would go back to the official's judgement - they'd just get a bit of help in seeing it again.

Until a Ref gives a decision against LPool that he gave for Man Utd the week before.....and all hell breaks loose.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

There is no way the FA/PL is going to allow the margin of error to be different to different Referees, they will have to be very exact in their wording so the Clubs know exactly what is and isn’t offside.

The margin of error for offside would be built built into the VAR system. The point is it can not guarantee perfect angles, perfect lines. Cricket has built this in, I believe tennis has as well. The margin would be a matter of mm, maybe cm's, but other sports have managed it already so why not football?

 

[Deleted member 16999]

The margin of error for offside would be built built into the VAR system. The point is it can not guarantee perfect angles, perfect lines. Cricket has built this in, I believe tennis has as well. The margin would be a matter of mm, maybe cm's, but other sports have managed it already so why not football?

Great, specify a margin in and tell everyone, no issue with that.

 

[Deleted member 21784]

I think you've confused yourself.. if he gave advantage and the player was then offside then there was no advantage was there. The fact he put it in the net was totally irrelevant here.

There was though. Think about it for a second. The on field officials gave a goal so was advantage.

Say u got advantage then smashed the ball through to kane but he is offside

That's your fault for wasting advantage not no advantage

 

[Papas1982]

There was though. Think about it for a second. The on field officials gave a goal so was advantage.

Say u got advantage then smashed the ball through to kane but he is offside

That's your fault for wasting advantage not no advantage

There have been examples of goals being checked for offside and penalties too.

For man Utd at least once at least I'm sure of it.

In your example of the first ball is played whilst Kane is offside then they haven't had an advantage imo. It it was the second past after play on then I'd agree.

 

[Deleted member 21784]

There have been examples of goals being checked for offside and penalties too.

For man Utd at least once at least I'm sure of it.

In your example of the first ball is played whilst Kane is offside then they haven't had an advantage imo. It it was the second past after play on then I'd agree.

I believe if he had missed the chance it would have been reviewed for a pen ... But because he scored it that ended that chance of review as he scored the chance

Would be double jeopardy

Ie he has benefited for play carrying on but then it's offside in end

But doesn't matter .. villa should be in champ anyways ... Dodgy hawk eye decisions keeping them up so think they can keep the complaints to a minimum

 

[Orikoru]

I believe if he had missed the chance it would have been reviewed for a pen ... But because he scored it that ended that chance of review as he scored the chance

Would be double jeopardy

Ie he has benefited for play carrying on but then it's offside in end

But doesn't matter .. villa should be in champ anyways ... Dodgy hawk eye decisions keeping them up so think they can keep the complaints to a minimum

There wasn't even a chance because he was offside. There was nothing - no advantage.

Strange for you to call them a championship side when they totally outplayed you yesterday!

 

[Deleted member 21784]

There wasn't even a chance because he was offside. There was nothing - no advantage.

Strange for you to call them a championship side when they totally outplayed you yesterday!

Nothing to do with being outplayed . I'm saying that they should be in championship because they benefited from a dodgy Hawkeye call to stay up by 1 point that they shouldn't have got. Hawkeye even admitted the mistake and that it should have been a goal to Sheffield United which would have kept Bournemouth up.

So they can't really complain about decisions not going their way when they benefited from a massive one to stay in the division.

 

[Orikoru]

Nothing to do with being outplayed . I'm saying that they should be in championship because they benefited from a dodgy Hawkeye call to stay up by 1 point that they shouldn't have got. Hawkeye even admitted the mistake and that it should have been a goal to Sheffield United which would have kept Bournemouth up.

So they can't really complain about decisions not going their way when they benefited from a massive one to stay in the division.

I don't really subscribe to that theory. If the goal is awarded everything that happens after that point is potentially different. They could have equalised after it, they could have had different results afterwards - you change one thing in history and infinite knock-on effects are possible. It's like when you say so-and-so should have had a hat-trick when he's missed three chances - if you score the first one you don't get the other two chances.