Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Albion] Gross goal offside?



eastterracemike

Active member
Jan 31, 2008
247
Not entirely sure it was offside. Yes his foot is beyond the villa defender BUT what is not clear and is not shown on VAR is the position of the ball when it was passed across. If it is ahead or level with Gross's foot then he is not offside.
 




Kalimantan Gull

Well-known member
Aug 13, 2003
13,173
Central Borneo / the Lizard
I think they got the lines right with the ball and his foot, and was just offside the way they interpret the rules these days.

That's the bigger issue in my eyes, the law / rules / whatever says that if the attacker is level with the last defender, he is onside. Under any reasonable definition Gross is level with the defender. As was Dunk at Everton, as was McGinn yesterday, as was the case in so many stupidly disallowed goals.
 










Seagull58

In the Algarve
Jan 31, 2012
7,712
Vilamoura, Portugal
Not entirely sure it was offside. Yes his foot is beyond the villa defender BUT what is not clear and is not shown on VAR is the position of the ball when it was passed across. If it is ahead or level with Gross's foot then he is not offside.
His knee was ahead of his foot. It was close but the mower lines on the pitch indicated his was slightly ahead of the ball, as did the VAR lines
 


Thunder Bolt

Silly old bat
I just don’t understand why that took so long for VAR to figure out. Once the lines were drawn it seemed pretty clear. But must have been 4-5 minutes between ball hitting the net and decision being made.
I think if a decision cannot be made within 60 second, it is not a clear and obvious error, and stick to the onfield decision.
Keeping fans waiting for 4 mins is ridiculous.
 






Seagull58

In the Algarve
Jan 31, 2012
7,712
Vilamoura, Portugal
I just don’t understand why that took so long for VAR to figure out. Once the lines were drawn it seemed pretty clear. But must have been 4-5 minutes between ball hitting the net and decision being made.
It took a long time but I expect that was because they had to check the defender on the far side as well as the ball position, and they have to get the best frame to represent time of ball contact. Some mistakes have been made with offside decisions so they probably want to be extra careful.
 












Cheggers

Active member
Jul 28, 2011
228
Bang! And the dirt is gone.
I think if a decision cannot be made within 60 second, it is not a clear and obvious error, and stick to the onfield decision.
Keeping fans waiting for 4 mins is ridiculous.
I agree that four mins is ridiculous, but a problem with a time limit is that those using VAR are not all (if any of them) competent or efficient. Although I'm not sure whether 60 seconds or 60 minutes would be enough time for some of them.
 




Herr Tubthumper

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
60,941
The Fatherland
Have to admit. Never knew the offside rule included ball & second last opponent. Every day a school day.
If Gross was level or behind the ball then he cannot be offside. I presume they checked for this first, saw he was ahead of the ball and then checked for offside.
 


Peacehaven Wild Kids

Well-known member
Jan 16, 2022
2,763
The Avenue then Maloncho
Personally I’m surprised to see this is even a discussion point

(However I am often wrong about things, that’s probably why I drink so much. Or possibly it’s the drink that causes me to be wrong. Who knows?)
 


Guy Fawkes

The voice of treason
Sep 29, 2007
8,267
Clear and obvious error doesn't apply to offside decisions. They are matters of fact, supposedly.
Not sure why clear and obvious doesn't apply though. Either they were clearly and obviously off-side or not and that is all it needs to be (bringing back the advantage to the attacking player once again) however the people behind how it's implemented have taken clear and obvious to apply purely to either they were on or off side, and clear and obvious means that the wrong signal by the assistant referee is when a clear and obvious mistake has been made (yet many times there hasn't been a single person even appealing for offside) so it's being used to strictly

VAR wasn't meant to be a forensic examination to determine if there was a toe nail in an offside position or not but that is how it's being used. It should have been more for things like Thierry Henry's handball in the lead up to France's goal which help beat Ireland in a World Cup qualifying play-off match

The old rules used to give an advantage to the attacking player, surely if it is not obvious that they are offside when the ball is struck and they need those lines, then it shouldn't be overturned and the on-field ruling should stand.
 
Last edited:


Herr Tubthumper

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
60,941
The Fatherland
I think if a decision cannot be made within 60 second
Harsh, if you were out driving and saw a visually impaired person crossing the road would you pressurise them to hurry up?
 








Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here