[Football] Wenger proposes changes to the offside rule due to VAR

[Guinness Boy]

I've been saying a long time that one of the worst things about VAR is that it has effectively removed the post Italia '90 ruling that being level was ONSIDE.

Now Arsene Wenger is looking to tweak the law so that the attacker once again gets the advantage.

Can't come soon enough in my opinion.

Arsene Wenger: Former Arsenal boss proposes change to offside rule after VAR effect

Arsene Wenger proposes a change to the offside rule that would mean attackers are onside if any part of their body is in line with the last outfield defender.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Mellotron]

I do feel VAR is currently too based on trying to DISALLOW rather than allow goals.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I've been saying a long time that one of the worst things about VAR is that it has effectively removed the post Italia '90 ruling that being level was ONSIDE.

Now Arsene Wenger is looking to tweak the law so that the attacker once again gets the advantage.

Can't come soon enough in my opinion.

Arsene Wenger: Former Arsenal boss proposes change to offside rule after VAR effect

Arsene Wenger proposes a change to the offside rule that would mean attackers are onside if any part of their body is in line with the last outfield defender.

www.bbc.co.uk

This was the first thing I said the first time I saw VAR in action. Clear blue daylight (or something closer to that).
I know you hate VAR but I'm pleased you approve.
You know how things work in serious businesses - idea, beta test if you can, roll out, review, revise.

The other thing I and others advocate is a time limit. If VAR can't decide in 20 seconds then let the on field ref's decision stand.
(The time spent checking doesn't bother me but I know it bothers people like you, and I prefer to see a greater number of people happy )

 

[Chicken Run]

I do feel VAR is currently too based on trying to DISALLOW rather than allow goals.

I agree unless it’s against us!!!

 

[Freddo]

I don't think it's a good idea. It will just move the line back when checking VAR, and defences will compensate by dropping deeper.

 

[Guinness Boy]

This was the first thing I said the first time I saw VAR in action. Clear blue daylight (or something closer to that).
I know you hate VAR but I'm pleased you approve.
You know how things work in serious businesses - idea, beta test if you can, roll out, review, revise.

The other thing I and others advocate is a time limit. If VAR can't decide in 20 seconds then let the on field ref's decision stand.
(The time spent checking doesn't bother me but I know it bothers people like you, and I prefer to see a greater number of people happy )

I accept (grudgingly) that it's here to stay, at least at the highest levels of the game. So making it the best it can be makes sense.

We've seen VAR used well and badly again recently. VAR was as good as Pawson was bad on Sunday, correcting two awful errors, not overturning their third "penalty" and not re-refereeing our shout with O'Riley (to which I'll return). It also got a factual (outside the box) decision correct in the Inter / Barca game.

However, it also gave a goal (or at least did not disallow it) for Bournemouth where it looked like the handball shout was almost identical to one Mitoma had disallowed earlier in the season. And Inter got a penalty for a tackle that me, the commentators and Mark Clattenburg all thought was fine at real speed - effectively re-refereed in slo-mo, the OPPOSITE to the case with O'Riley where, like it or not, sticking with the umpires call was the right thing.

Keeping the good bits of that and getting rid of the bad bits would make life under VAR a bit better. But I have to say one of the most enjoyable games I watched last season was Worthing v Torquay, safe in the knowledge that both the goals and the two red cards could be celebrated or booed without fear of it changing a minute later.

 

[beorhthelm]

i'm afraid any change will just move where the millimeter precision lines will be drawn, with the same determental affects on play as the video is played back and forth for 2 minutes. VAR shouldn't be used for offside unless the "clear and obvious" rule is applied with and a tight time limit and if you need to draw lines, it's not clear error.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

i'm afraid any change will just move where the millimeter precision lines will be drawn, with the same determental affects on play as the video is played back and forth for 2 minutes. VAR shouldn't be used for offside unless the "clear and obvious" rule is applied with and a tight time limit and if you need to draw lines, it's not clear error.

Yes but clear blue daylight would 'feel' much better.
Why not add 'err on the side of the striker when it is not instantly clear?
And if you add in my 20 second rule, there would be no pontification.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

It always strikes me with offside, that people forget why it exists in the first place, which is to prevent teams crowding out or interfering with the keeper, while other teams mates tried speculative launched balls into the penalty area.

Possibly there is a side benefit which occurred which is that it disincentivises long ball football

But since VAR, It seems to have morphed into a technical exercise in examining minute differences in where players have different body parts at the moment during the passing player's contact with the ball in which the VAR official decides the action should be paused.

It's a complete farce

So yes, Wenger's suggestion would make the game better. If we have to persist with VAR then a "daylight" rule where the attacker is onside if level and level if any part of their body which can play the ball is in line with any part of the defender would be better than what we have now.

Wenger i'm generally suspicious of, but this would improve the game. The side benefit would be more space in midfield, as defenders pressing up to the pitch towards the half way line would become increasingly hazardous

 

[CHAPPERS]

Just bin it entirely for a season and see if we all enjoy the game better. If so, get rid permanently.

 

[Ⓩ-Ⓐ-Ⓜ-Ⓞ-Ⓡ-Ⓐ]

Max 1 VAR challenge per half, captains call

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

Max 1 VAR challenge per half, captains call

Do you get to keep your challenge if proved right?

 

[studio150]

About time, but looks like 2026/7 at the earliest.

 

[JBizzle]

Yes but clear blue daylight would 'feel' much better.
Why not add 'err on the side of the striker when it is not instantly clear?
And if you add in my 20 second rule, there would be no pontification.

Although I like the sentiment in the 20 second rule, I think it defeats the point of VAR, which (in theory) is to get the correct decision. I don't actually think that the offside delays are even that long anymore, it's more the subjective decisions that take the time

 

[Gabbiano]

The problem is that "in line" doesn't really exist, eventually you will zoom in and find one is on or offside.

The idea of having "clear daylight" between is subjective and would just cause the same arguments over whether X case is "clear" or not.

I think that now the technology exists, it has to be a simple yes/no based on exactly where the defender is. It's the only way to remove subjectivity. Maybe have a buffer which covers the technology's margin of error, but no more.

The only issue is knowing that the freeze frame is from the exact moment that the ball was kicked. But now there is technology in the ball right? Hence the Alvarez penalty being disallowed in the Champions League earlier this season.

 

[pb21]

Makes sense.

No way should this be offside IMO, which it technically is at the moment.

 

[Arthur]

The other thing I and others advocate is a time limit. If VAR can't decide in 20 seconds then let the on field ref's decision stand.
(The time spent checking doesn't bother me but I know it bothers people like you, and I prefer to see a greater number of people happy )

I like the idea of a time limit as the time some decisions take does bother me. However given the scrutiny of every decision by the media I'm not sure how practical it would be. I guess they could do similar to ball tracking in cricket when the ball pitches outside the line the check stops there and then.

I also think it could only be used for the new semi automated ones as you'll get conspiracy theorists claiming that certain officials were purposely taking longer than others.

The only solution in my eyes is to get rid of VAR all together and give the power back to the officials to make a decision. They'll be good ones and bad ones but at least everyone would know where they stood.

 

[OzMike]

I am surprised he saw it.

 

[dejavuatbtn]

I just get fed up with people changing the rules every five minutes. Once upon a time a rule change was a special event, almost a once in generation experience. Everyone knew where we were and fans could easily follow the play, knew how to apply the rules and know what’s going on. Today it’s a shambles.

 

[Hotchilidog]

Whilst I accept that the line does indeed have to be drawn somewhere, I would rather the attacker gets the benefit of the doubt than the defender. These marginal mm offsides nearly always come in regulation movement not deliberate attempts to gain a large advantage. The current implementation of the rules whilst technically correct for me goes against the spirit in which the law was written.

For me there is no way a toe (or just having larger feet) or an elbow should result in a goal being chalked off. The game is about goals and entertainment, not scrutinising a video for three minutes to find an excuse to disallow them.

There will still be controversy (VAR itself has proven that) but we'd have more goals and who doesn't want that.